• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republican: Many in GOP don’t live in political reality

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
A House Republican lawmaker says many of his fellow GOP colleagues in Congress, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), don’t live in “political reality.” [WATCH VIDEO]Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.) said that shutting down the government “over a deep matter of principle” didn’t add up. He defected on a key vote during the shutdown, and called for a “clean” government-funding bill.


“Revenues have to come up a bit because it’s a conservative principle that one generation pays for the goods or services that it benefits from,” Rigell said as he marked up a white board to explain his extensive calculation leading to the politically unpopular conclusion.
But politics factors into that equation, Rigell noted, as he tied the idea together with the word “r-e-a-l-i-t-y.”
Asked if Cruz recognizes political reality, Rigell calmly responded, “No.”


Read more @: Republican: Many in GOP don

Glad to see at least one (im sure there is more) are actually connected with reality. Hope a lot more will follow Representative Rigell's example.
 
While one's definition of political reality is principally different, I would agree about the latest adventure.
 
Meh, I think its way too soon to claim that the shut-down had zero results. If the ACA continues to perform and do whats been doing for the last month (as far as huge increases in premiums...its very likely) the GOP gets to go into mid-terms saying "we did everything in our power to stop it....even something really unpopular." Latest polling has 70% of the country wanting what the last GOP continuing resolution would have done which is delay the individual mandate. But who knows, time will tell.
 
Read more @: Republican: Many in GOP don

Glad to see at least one (im sure there is more) are actually connected with reality. Hope a lot more will follow Representative Rigell's example. [/FONT][/COLOR]

I'm sure many RINO's and progressives enjoy "musical chairs" I'm sure the "geeks" or kids who would rather do their homework and tired of being bullied and given the time period have no desire to play the game because they're busy working on 3rd grade ideas that could potentially give them an insight into mister "I always have a chair" 20-30 years later....
 
Oh Gnoes! I RINO who thinks that the key to success is to play nice and do what the dem's wants is critical of other Republicans! Whatever shall we do? Wherever shall we go??
 
Oh Gnoes! I RINO who thinks that the key to success is to play nice and do what the dem's wants is critical of other Republicans! Whatever shall we do? Wherever shall we go??

Republican strategy to win elections: if some one does not toe some imaginary moving line, call them names. That will make them vote for us!
 
Oh Gnoes! I RINO who thinks that the key to success is to play nice and do what the dem's wants is critical of other Republicans! Whatever shall we do? Wherever shall we go??

You know... it's nonsensical to call someone a RINO when most of the party actually agrees with him. The Tea Party Savages are a minority - :shrug: a vocal minority, but a minority none the less.
 
Savages? Pray tell how are the tea party savage?
 
Republican strategy to win elections: if some one does not toe some imaginary moving line, call them names. That will make them vote for us!

That moving line is owned by the Socialists. It's like Obama's Red Line... here today, gone tomorrow... all on a whim. And when their actions crap the place full, like Obama and his Red Line, they try to blame others for their messes. Exhibit A that everyone can relate to is ObamaKare. Now Obama is blaming the insurance companies too! Idjut.

What is that line the Socialists like to move around or eliminate?

The Constitution.

For the Socialists, they don't care much for it, ignore it to the best of their ability.

As for the OP... whoever was "talking" is a moron. Hopefully the right can replace morons with people willing to put up a fight to roll back the Socialist created ills that plague our society.
 
Last edited:
Oh Gnoes! I RINO who thinks that the key to success is to play nice and do what the dem's wants is critical of other Republicans! Whatever shall we do? Wherever shall we go??

I think it's telling that many conservatives on one hand will call anyone who doesn't immediately throw Obama under the bus a blinders-wearing Obot, but on the other will designate anyone who questions the antics of the far right wing of the Republican party as a RINO that is not to be paid heed to. The cognitive dissonance, it burns.
 
So bizarre that a party which wants to emphasize personal freedom as one of its key platforms will at the drop of a pin toss a label on someone and attempt to throw them out for so much as daring to question the more hardline factions.
 
That moving line is owned by the Socialists. It's like Obama's Red Line... here today, gone tomorrow... all on a whim. And when their actions crap the place full, like Obama and his Red Line, they try to blame others for their messes. Exhibit A that everyone can relate to is ObamaKare. Now Obama is blaming the insurance companies too! Idjut.

What is that line the Socialists like to move around or eliminate?

The Constitution.

For the Socialists, they don't care much for it, ignore it to the best of their ability.

As for the OP... whoever was "talking" is a moron. Hopefully the right can replace morons with people willing to put up a fight to roll back the Socialist created ills that plague our society.

Oh please. The problem is that you fascists(see what I did there?) us the word socialist to mean any one you disagree with, and the moving line klearly is in with you all. In an era where almost every other modern republkan president would be considered at best a RINO, if not an all out socialist by your standards is a good example of why you guys are marganilizing the republikan party. Nixon, socialist. Ford, RINO. Reagan, all out kommie who raised spending in ways unheard of. Bush the elder, RINO. Bush the younger, socialist.
 
Oh please. The problem is that you fascists(see what I did there?)
Yes, you ascribed a term that doesn't apply. You see, fascists are not ardent defenders of Freedom, Liberty or Limited Government. (But it tells us what you think of those that do).

You and most here that support Obama, support Socialist legislation vehemently. That makes you Socialists. I know you don't like it, but... tough darts honey.

See what I did there?
I took your lame attempt trying to negate my accurate positioning of your political philosophy with your inaccurate one, and smacked your deceitful effort out of the park in the process.

us the word socialist to mean any one you disagree with, and the moving line klearly is in with you all. In an era where almost every other modern republkan president would be considered at best a RINO, if not an all out socialist by your standards is a good example of why you guys are marganilizing the republikan party. Nixon, socialist. Ford, RINO. Reagan, all out kommie who raised spending in ways unheard of. Bush the elder, RINO. Bush the younger, socialist.
Nixon, Ford, Bush's were Country Club republicans, and had a weakness for getting along with the Socialists and introduced Socialist legislation of their own. The first three were forced to negotiate with the 40-year reign of a Demokrat controlled Kongress.

Reagan was able to outmaneuver the Socialists by going to the American people directly. He did spend money on the military (that helped bring about the end of the Commi's), he cut taxes, his tax reduction raised masses of revenue due to increased economic activity, and the Socialists just didn't cut spending as promised. But 3 of four goals was pretty good. Unless you thought Carter's Stagflation and Misery Index and Oil Crisis were great things.

You see, once upon a time, long before Nixon, there was a president named Kennedy. Read his speech to the Economic Club of NY on how to get the economy moving and create long term prosperity and raising "all boats". You see... there are no Democrats like that anymore. And when one, like Joe Lieberman bucked the party, they did everything in their power to kick his ass out.

You see Redress... the D-Party is the Socialist Party. There isn't a bit of Socialist Legislation they don't like, and they don't seem to be able to cut anything either. As the halfwit Pelosi stated... "the cupboards are bare."

You support Socialist legislation through and through... you're a Socialist.

Here... for your reading pleasure; educate thyself:
zimmer-albums-obvious-collection-picture67153468-helping-socialists-understand-definition-socialist-and-socialism-known-since-1800s.jpg


zimmer-albums-obvious-collection-picture67153469-helping-socialists-understand-definition-socialist-and-socialism-known-since-1800s.jpg
 
Last edited:
Savages? Pray tell how are the tea party savage?

Don't get what they want? Throw a tantrum and attempt to shut down the government until they do. Political savagery. Savages can't be reasoned with - just like Tea Party have shown in Washington. They must be resisted until they simply admit defeat - like the Tea Party darlings have shown in Washington. It worked with the savages in the Americas, Africa and Europe. It will work with the Tea Party Savages too. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Using a for dummies to define socialism is funny. Still getting it wrong...priceless!!!
 
Using a for dummies to define socialism is funny. Still getting it wrong...priceless!!!

It's fitting considering who has been on the receiving end of those images ... I agree 100%... and of course these folks also find it's wrong because they do not want to admit they are Socialists, and support Socialist legislation.

But hey! Socialists are experts at... deceiving themselves.
 
Last edited:
Don't get what they want? Throw a tantrum and attempt to shut down the government until they do. Political savagery. Savages can't be reasoned with - just like Tea Party have shown in Washington. They must be resisted until they simply admit defeat - like the Tea Party darlings have shown in Washington. It worked with the savages in the Americas, Africa and Europe. It will work with the Tea Party Savages too. :shrug:

Uhm, who.said they were not going to negotiate?
 
Uhm, who.said they were not going to negotiate?

Oh no, I didn't say they weren't going to negotiate. I said they can't be reasoned with. Savages can negotiate, at their own unreasonable terms. Are you a member of the Tea Party btw?
 
Oh no, I didn't say they weren't going to negotiate. I said they can't be reasoned with. Savages can negotiate, at their own unreasonable terms. Are you a member of the Tea Party btw?
I will not negotiate. -Barack Obama
Yet you call the teaparty to task. The administration wanted the shutdown. Had the "closed" signs for all the parks ready to go. You ant a tantrum, obama threw the tantrum, not the tea party.
 
You know... it's nonsensical to call someone a RINO when most of the party actually agrees with him. The Tea Party Savages are a minority - :shrug: a vocal minority, but a minority none the less.

Classy......while discussing namecalling.
 
I will not negotiate. -Barack Obama

Sorry, I rather a president that doesn't negotiate on what is a perfectly reasonable idea than a bunch of savages with no reasonable idea other than nuclear options. :shrug:
 
Sorry, I rather a president that doesn't negotiate on what is a perfectly reasonable idea than a bunch of savages with no reasonable idea other than nuclear options. :shrug:
so you applaud the president for standing on principle, and deride the tea party for doing ghe same. You agree with the president, even though constitutionally the House has the purse strings, not the senate, not the WH. Got it.
 
so you applaud the president for standing on principle, and deride the tea party for doing ghe same.

Because the president's idea is actually a reasonable start to fixing the massive issue of health problem in this country. You seem to have a problem with the word "reasonable". Are you a Tea Party member? If so, I will refrain from speaking to you any further as you are incapable - by your political nature - of understanding the ramifications such a word has.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom