• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Carville to GOP: You have a disaster on your hands

I

iguanaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
74,269
Reaction score
32,518
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I mean, most people thought it was kind of a watermark when your Tea Party gang booed the golden rule. You know, I've spent some time in Philly and they have always thought they were pretty radical because they actually booed Santa Claus and Willie Mays. Philly, I've got news for you -- you ain't got nothing on South Carolina Republicans. They just aren't buying any of that do-unto-others garbage.
Your new front-runner is one of your old front runners, Newt Gingrich. I would like to take a moment to revel: I cannot personally tell you how pleased I am to see old Newt rise to the top after listening to all of your nauseating, sickening lectures on the evils of government and the importance of family values.
Now, you guys have to deal with a $1.6 million Freddie Mac consultant (who says he wasn't a lobbyist) who has been married three times. Hope you, at least, enjoy the Super Bowl. It could be your last hurrah for a while.

PS -- As my former boss once said, I feel your pain. That's why I didn't mention Rick Perry.


Carville to GOP: You have a disaster on your hands - CNN.com

I couldn't agree more, or be happier to see the GOP self-destruct. They deserve nothing less after the disasterous state the last administration left us in. I hope they never win the Presidency again and the Dems take the House back from those obstructionist T's.
 
iguanaman said:
I mean, most people thought it was kind of a watermark when your Tea Party gang booed the golden rule. You know, I've spent some time in Philly and they have always thought they were pretty radical because they actually booed Santa Claus and Willie Mays. Philly, I've got news for you -- you ain't got nothing on South Carolina Republicans. They just aren't buying any of that do-unto-others garbage.
Your new front-runner is one of your old front runners, Newt Gingrich. I would like to take a moment to revel: I cannot personally tell you how pleased I am to see old Newt rise to the top after listening to all of your nauseating, sickening lectures on the evils of government and the importance of family values.
Now, you guys have to deal with a $1.6 million Freddie Mac consultant (who says he wasn't a lobbyist) who has been married three times. Hope you, at least, enjoy the Super Bowl. It could be your last hurrah for a while.

PS -- As my former boss once said, I feel your pain. That's why I didn't mention Rick Perry.


Carville to GOP: You have a disaster on your hands - CNN.com

I couldn't agree more, or be happier to see the GOP self-destruct. They deserve nothing less after the disasterous state the last administration left us in. I hope they never win the Presidency again and the Dems take the House back from those obstructionist T's.
Click to expand...

what causes you to be liberal (I should note carville sort of looks like an Iquanaman so maybe that causes the affinity). I always love why people are this or that.
 
Yeah the GOP collapse is pretty much complete at this point. They have more or less had to admit that out of their entire party there isn't one intelligent, capable, sane, moral leader that they can put forward. Not one. The very best the GOP has to offer are mostly straight up joke candidates and even they are recognizing that now.

The GOP really needs to just disband and form a new party from the ground up. No more pandering to the super rich, no more anti-intellectualism, no more anti-science stuff, no more conspiracy theories and no more bigotry. They need to start over and build a serious, respectable, party again. Unfortunately it looks like the GOP can't be restored to the respectable party it was say 30 years ago without radically starting over. It's become too infested with the worst kinds of people.
 
Carville???

Carville became irrelevant when Obama got elected.
 
teamosil said:
Yeah the GOP collapse is pretty much complete at this point. They have more or less had to admit that out of their entire party there isn't one intelligent, capable, sane, moral leader that they can put forward. Not one. The very best the GOP has to offer are mostly straight up joke candidates and even they are recognizing that now.

The GOP really needs to just disband and form a new party from the ground up. No more pandering to the super rich, no more anti-intellectualism, no more anti-science stuff, no more conspiracy theories and no more bigotry. They need to start over and build a serious, respectable, party again. Unfortunately it looks like the GOP can't be restored to the respectable party it was say 30 years ago without radically starting over. It's become too infested with the worst kinds of people.
Click to expand...

So what's the problem?

The Democrats don't have an intelligent, capable, sane, moral leader either.
 
He didn't say a thing which wasn't said in 2010.
 
teamosil said:
Yeah the GOP collapse is pretty much complete at this point. They have more or less had to admit that out of their entire party there isn't one intelligent, capable, sane, moral leader that they can put forward. Not one. The very best the GOP has to offer are mostly straight up joke candidates and even they are recognizing that now.

The GOP really needs to just disband and form a new party from the ground up. No more pandering to the super rich, no more anti-intellectualism, no more anti-science stuff, no more conspiracy theories and no more bigotry. They need to start over and build a serious, respectable, party again. Unfortunately it looks like the GOP can't be restored to the respectable party it was say 30 years ago without radically starting over. It's become too infested with the worst kinds of people.
Click to expand...

its fun seeing a hard core left wing extremist from the most nutty leftwing city in the nation trying to give the GOP advice.
 
Mycroft said:
So what's the problem?

The Democrats don't have an intelligent, capable, sane, moral leader either.
Click to expand...

Regardless of your political leanings, you can see the difference between the sorts of candidates that were in the Democratic primary, or in any previous Republican primary in modern times, and the sorts of candidates in the current Republican primary. Everybody, right and left, is lamenting how terrible they are this round. Why do you think that is and what do you think should be done about it going forward?
 
TurtleDude said:
its fun seeing a hard core left wing extremist from the most nutty leftwing city in the nation trying to give the GOP advice.
Click to expand...

Dismiss him if you want, but he has been in the politics business a long time but he is not connected with the 2012 race at all. I'm afraid he is just calling it as he sees it.

BTW I am liberal because I THINK and am not easily swayed by lies and half-truths. I see no reason to be a Republican anymore except GREED if you are wealthy and even that it is a false hope. The musical chairs they want to play with the economy is not good for most of the wealthy either.
 
Ya gotta love Carville's style :)
 
iguanaman said:
Dismiss him if you want
Click to expand...

He's a rabid partisan, so that's a good idea.

I'm afraid he is just calling it as he sees it.
Click to expand...

And he always "sees" at as Democrats winning. Even in late October, 2010:

Can Democrats Still Win? - NYTimes.com

BTW I am liberal because I THINK and am not easily swayed by lies and half-truths. I see no reason to be a Republican anymore except GREED if you are wealthy and even that it is a false hope.
Click to expand...

Color-coding the self-ownage.
 
iguanaman said:
BTW I am liberal because I THINK and am not easily swayed by lies and half-truths. I see no reason to be a Republican anymore except GREED if you are wealthy and even that it is a false hope. The musical chairs they want to play with the economy is not good for most of the wealthy either.
Click to expand...

When people aren't smart enough to run their own lives, so for their own good, the elite, the thinkers, need to make more and more rules to control behavior....thats a liberal, dude

You can label it however you want, but the left wants more control, less freedom. On the other hand... conservatism seeks to increase individual freedom and limit control and interference by the state.
 
iguanaman said:
Dismiss him if you want, but he has been in the politics business a long time but he is not connected with the 2012 race at all. I'm afraid he is just calling it as he sees it.

BTW I am liberal because I THINK and am not easily swayed by lies and half-truths. I see no reason to be a Republican anymore except GREED if you are wealthy and even that it is a false hope. The musical chairs they want to play with the economy is not good for most of the wealthy either.
Click to expand...

greed? GOP Greed apparently is not wanting others to take what you earned so they can buy the votes of people like you

Dem greed-taking stuff you didn't earn and giving it to others so they will vote for you

I am a conservative because I think.
 
teamosil said:
Regardless of your political leanings, you can see the difference between the sorts of candidates that were in the Democratic primary, or in any previous Republican primary in modern times, and the sorts of candidates in the current Republican primary. Everybody, right and left, is lamenting how terrible they are this round. Why do you think that is and what do you think should be done about it going forward?
Click to expand...

While I agree that the left are lamenting (as they would about ANY Republican candidate), I don't see the right lamenting anything. I see them going through the process of choosing their candidate.

As to what I think should be done about it...I think the Republicans should apply all of their faculties, gather as much info as they can, look into their own hearts and minds and make their choice. I think the liberals should butt out.
 
ric27 said:
the left wants more control, less freedom. On the other hand... conservatism seeks to increase individual freedom and limit control and interference by the state.
Click to expand...

No, liberal means placing more priority on individual liberty and being more accepting of economic intervention by government. Conservative means placing more priority on economic liberty and being more accepting of government intervention in people's personal lives.
 
teamosil said:
No, liberal means placing more priority on individual liberty and being more accepting of economic intervention by government. Conservative means placing more priority on economic liberty and being more accepting of government intervention in people's personal lives.
Click to expand...

I guess you probably don't understand the massive contradiction between this

MORE PRIORITY ON INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY

and this

ACCEPTING MORE ECONOMIC INTERVENTION BY THE GOVERNMENT.

and half of us conservatives oppose government intervention in personal lives-be that gays being able to sleep with whom they want or NRA members being able to own the same handgun our tax dollars supply IRS agents
 
Mycroft said:
While I agree that the left are lamenting (as they would about ANY Republican candidate), I don't see the right lamenting anything. I see them going through the process of choosing their candidate.
Click to expand...

Er, really? That isn't what I'm seeing. Seems to me most of the Republicans are downright furious over the candidates they picked. Some of them are blaming the "liberal media" for their choices and whatnot, but I'm not aware of very many that are actually happy with how things turned out...
 
teamosil said:
Er, really? That isn't what I'm seeing. Seems to me most of the Republicans are downright furious over the candidates they picked. Some of them are blaming the "liberal media" for their choices and whatnot, but I'm not aware of very many that are actually happy with how things turned out...
Click to expand...

How many conservatives do you interact with daily in San Francisco?
 
teamosil said:
No, liberal means placing more priority on individual liberty and being more accepting of economic intervention by government. Conservative means placing more priority on economic liberty and being more accepting of government intervention in people's personal lives.
Click to expand...

A contradiction in terms.

A complete fabrication caused by your ideology.
 
teamosil said:
Er, really? That isn't what I'm seeing. Seems to me most of the Republicans are downright furious over the candidates they picked. Some of them are blaming the "liberal media" for their choices and whatnot, but I'm not aware of very many that are actually happy with how things turned out...
Click to expand...

Such ideologically slanted impressions that bear no connection to reality is astounding.

I don't see ANY republicans "furious over the candidates they picked". They are in the process of choosing their nominee...that's all. And I don't see them blaming the "liberal media for their choices"...rather they are blaming the liberal media for the attacks and slanted news stories about their choices.

Do you discern the differences?
 
TurtleDude said:
I guess you probably don't understand the massive contradiction between this

MORE PRIORITY ON INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY

and this

ACCEPTING MORE ECONOMIC INTERVENTION BY THE GOVERNMENT.
Click to expand...

There is no contradiction. Liberals feel that government has no place interfering in people's personal lives, since people's personal lives don't really affect other people, where economic dealings always involve society as a whole. Makes a lot more sense than the conservative position.

TurtleDude said:
and half of us conservatives oppose government intervention in personal lives-be that gays being able to sleep with whom they want or NRA members being able to own the same handgun our tax dollars supply IRS agents
Click to expand...

No kiddo, conservatives favor higher intervention in people's personal lives. Libertarians favor low government involvement in both personal lives and economic matters, not conservatives.
 
Mycroft said:
A contradiction in terms.

A complete fabrication caused by your ideology.
Click to expand...

I guess that instead of "individual liberty" I should say "personal liberty", but no it's not a contradiction or anything. That's how liberal and conservative have always been defined. That's why we always find Republicans fighting for less economic regulation and more social regulation and vice versa for the Democrats.

Mycroft said:
I don't see ANY republicans "furious over the candidates they picked". They are in the process of choosing their nominee...that's all. And I don't see them blaming the "liberal media for their choices"...
Click to expand...

Wow, you aren't paying a ton of attention then. Read around this forum for a starter.
 
jacking up taxes on someone steals personal freedom since it essentially makes me work more hours for the good of the state (and I use good loosely) parasitic reactionary statists ("liberals") have no problem interfering with personal freedom in many areas. land use, firearms ownership, and the right of association are three areas of liberty that "liberals" rape constantly
 
TurtleDude said:
jacking up taxes on someone steals personal freedom since it essentially makes me work more hours for the good of the state
Click to expand...

If your theory was true, why did the number of hours worked go up during the massive tax cuts of the last 30 years?

How the resources are distributed affects everybody, so that is a type of decision we need to make together- what economic rules we all will live by.

TurtleDude said:
parasitic reactionary statists ("liberals") have no problem interfering with personal freedom in many areas. land use, firearms ownership, and the right of association are three areas of liberty that "liberals" rape constantly
Click to expand...

Land use is economic freedom, not personal freedom.

Firearms is a weird one. In some ways it is personal freedom, but the same argument as for why liberals consider economic regulation- because it affects other people- applies to guns.

Right of association? You mean like OWS or what?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom