When Did Republicanism Go Bad?

But he was always a conservative!

MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

The Reagan Era. Even though he was charismatic and even though his administration tackled several issues that had been neglected, his administration marked the beginning of fiscal irresponsibility by Republicans. the growth of crony capitalism and the start of the rising wealth gap (especially between the 1% and the overwhelming remainder of America's citizens). It also marked the exaltation of the Armed Forces, which allowed an increasingly imperial foreign policy which seemed primarily concerned with oil supplies.

 

Unresponsive, nothing in your LOL internet definition mentions political parties, theories, philosophies, ideologies etc., of which "conservative" is -not one-, but is, rather, a general definition not in political context. Do keep spouting the "conservative through the ages" and "conservative = bad because conservative is bad" fallacies here for all to see and gauge your level of actual political awareness.

 

Unresponsive

Keep up the dodge for all to see Bubs

 

The real issue is masked by the extremes. There have always been those who hold one extreme viewpoint or another, but what has really changed is in the way we debate. I certainly don't recall at any other time in history where a conflict of ideologies resulted in so many people becoming downright nasty. Sure, there would be one congressman or senator who would go off the deep end every now and then, but never as a whole party, nor did the public engage in such petty verbal venom.

This began in the mid-80's with the rise of Limbaugh and has progressed as the template by which all conservatives now engage in debate. I have noticed this among my friends who are conservative, who have a difficult time in keeping their blood pressure in check without resorting to the same tactics of Limbaugh, which is to shout down your opposition. Of course Limbaugh wasn't the only one to create this style. Remember Morton Downey Jr. in the late 80's, early 90's? And locally here in So. California, there was Wally George who hosted a local TV show named Hot Seat. He called his television style "combat TV". No wonder his daughter, Rebecca De Mornay, dropped his name and any association with him.

All these guys followed the same MO...they wrapped themselves in the American Flag, promoted half-baked explosive topics, and threw it to the crowd like raw meat to be devoured. Now we have a significant majority of conservatives following this ingrained script, to the horror of long established conservatives who believed in the educated principals of conservatism as espoused by William F. Buckley.

This draws eery parallels to the Roman Empire who fed slaves to the lions for the public's amusement. America is following in kind.

 

It went wrong when the government was allowed to become this big and given itself so much power over us to make laws that they don't have to follow.

 

Sad thing is they are still in the dark..The Dark Ages

 

OR, with each new conflict we DO address.

 

Conservatives always claim that conservatives are on the wrong side of history too?

- - - Updated - - -

You'll need to show me even one.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I do. In fact I already did.

 

Yeah, BECAUSE net worth will or will not give me credibility?


The Republican Party hasn't had a single idea that benefited the majority of Americans since before Reagan.





In 1980 the top 1% earned 8.5% of total income. In 2007 they earned 23%.

In 1980 the bottom 90% earned 68% of total income. In 2007 they earned 53%.

http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2012#table3

GOV'T POLICY MATTERS !!!



BUT IF IT MATTERS ON WEALTH:

Warren Buffet said it perfectly when he said "There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning."

And when he said "there’s been class warfare going on for the last 20 years, and my class has won."

And when he said "if this is a war – I wouldn’t call it a war, I’d call it a struggle – but, if this is a war, my side has had the nuclear bomb. We’ve got K-Street, we’ve got lobbyists, we’ve got money on our side".

Warren Buffet is very smart and observant.

 

WITHOUT FALSE PREMISES distortions and LIES, what would right wingers EVER have???


Please tell me when I've stated that? While YOU are at it, ONE POLICY conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on in the US???

 

Sorry Bubs, NOT a Faux watcher who doesn't have 2 nickles to rub together as they support the GOP's fight against ANYTHING that might help themselves. I live in Montery, Ca. Not rich, but I'm OK.

Your ad hominem without furthering the conversation is noted however Bubs, as well as your inability to refute Mr Buffett


Blue States are from Scandinavia, Red States are from Guatemala A theory of a divided nation

In the red states, government is cheaper, which means the people who live there pay lower taxes. But they also get a lot less in return. The unemployment checks run out more quickly and the schools generally aren’t as good. Assistance with health care, child care, and housing is skimpier, if it exists at all. The result of this divergence is that one half of the country looks more and more like Scandinavia, while the other increasingly resembles a social Darwinist’s paradise.


http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...ates-are-scandinavia-red-states-are-guatemala

 

For dad2three

 

What a statement of complete idiocy, illiteracy and outright complete bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

The more money you make the more likely you are to vote Republican........that is a FACT backed up by years of polling and statistics. Stop posting in this thread until you take at least one statistics class and can come back and back up your claims...........which you can't because one of our assignments was specifically to find voting patterns based on income, religiosity and other factors and EVERYONE came to the same conclusion about income. Over $50,000 a year means you are substantially more likely to vote Republican.

If you are poor and especially if you are on assistance you are far more likely to vote Democrat. So who were you claiming was poor again?

Posters like you are embarrassing to forums like this.

 

So your father liked Krups, probably one of the best drummers of all times and because Krups had a big hardon for Mary Jane your father also wanted to do Mary Jane. Mary Jane was a slut, she would do anyone

There's a record store in Pasadena, Ca. that been around since Mary Jane and rock n roll back in the mid 50's, Canterbury Records. It's where musicians, the connoisseur of music and record collectors go. They got it all including old pre oil embargo vinyl.

They had a young adult working behind the counter who didn't know who Gene Krupa was.

http://canterburyrecords.com/index.html

 

An entire argument based on a fallacy. Shocking


Going to address ANY of my posit or just go with the ad hominem? Care to explain Warren Buffett the poor guy supporting the Dems?? lol

If it weren't for false premises, distortions and LIES what would the right wingers EVER have???

BTW, I own my own house and have some rentals (2 duplexes) in Salinas, bought after my divorce when I had a home in Carmel Valley. Not wealthy by any stretch, but not the dirt poor rednecks in red states voting for the GOP\ers...lol

 

..and basically, people that attempt to degrade others that they do not even know via personal attacks while hidden behind a computer screen, do so to make up for their own inadequacies.

 

MOD EDIT - Rule 3

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_12.html

http://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-republicans/

MOD EDIT - Rule 3 Republicans are also more charitable which has been shown in study after study. People like you constantly blather about helping the poor but when it comes to opening your own wallet you disappear entirely.

Even your own superhero says that Republicans earn more: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/income-raceand-voting/

MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

lol ok bubs

 

Weird, you mean as the people get better off they vote more GOP? PLEASE tell me something relevant to that Bubs? You know since the bottom 50% of US make less than $34,000 per family (avg $15,000)???

What the PROPORTIONAL increase in voting between say, $50,00-,$120 000, you know $120,000 is the top 10%? lol


http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data



" Republicans are also more charitable which has been shown in study after study"


LOL, SURE BUBS, SURE THEY ARE...

Debunking the "Conservatives Give More to Charity" Myth

A recent MIT study countered it finding:

In this paper, we first show that conservatives and liberals are equally generous in their donation habits. This pattern holds at both the individual and state level, and contradicts the conventional wisdom that partisans differ in their generosity. Second, we show that while levels of giving are roughly equivalent, liberals are much more likely to donate to secular organizations, and conservatives are more likely to donate to religious causes, especially their own congregation.




However, there is another issue to address which is: what to count as charity? All of these studies use the IRS definition of "charity" rather than the biblical definition. In the bible, God defines charity as giving to the needy without receiving, or expecting to receive, anything in return. Most "charity" conservatives give is in the form of tithes to their church. The vast majority of that money goes to salaries and building expenses -- for people and buildings that provide the giver with services. A tiny, miniscule fraction goes to the poor and needy.

So, in actuality, it seems that liberals give quite a bit more to biblical charity than conservatives.

http://www.gospelpolitics.com/debunking-the-conservatives-give-more-to-charity-myth.html



NOW WITHOUT THE STRAWMAN YOU CREATED, WHAT DO YOU HAVE BUBS? It sure as f*** isn't history to back up your ideology!!!

The envy meme??? lol

 

I guess I should have just stuck with, conservatives creating false premises, distortions or lies, what do YOU have? My superhero huh? lol

BTW, AS SHOWN LIBS ARE AS GENEROUS AS CONS, WE ALSO THINK GOV'T HAS A ROLE TO HELP, UNLIKE THE RIGHT WING TROLLS!

 

So there are far-right extremists in the GOP, whoopty (*)(*)(*)(*). Doesn't mean Republicans like your parents don't still exist. Defining a whole party by it's radicals and extremists is just dishonest.

 

You link to an article that tries to debunk the claim that Republicans give more to charity by claiming that church donations don't count. Literally claiming that one form of charity doesn't count doesn't make it disappear. More lies and deceipt from the likes of you.

Your own link:

So literally to even out the score you have to move the goal post and disqualify an entire segment of charity. The best part is that this same "study", and I use that term loosely, didn't bother to take into account operating costs and salaries of the non-religious nonprofits like it did with the churches. But then again I don't expect someone like you to be able to pick up on that out since your entire life has been spent swallowing one load* after another.

My favorite claim I have heard is that Republican don't give as much to charity because they don't support government programs. Last time ANYONE checked there is no separate tax rate for Republicans and Democrats. It is an undeniable fact that Republicans give far higher percantages of their incomes to charity than you greedy, narcissistic, envious, jealous liberals.

Then we have the undeniable fact that Republicans donate more TIME to charity volunteering for programs like soup kitchens and even blood drives.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html

MOD EDIT - Rule 3

Still waiting for sources backing up your claim that Democrats make more money..........

*load -- referring to talking points, friends opinions, blogs, MSNBC shows etc.

 

Got it, YOU can't be honest. I'm shocked. No really I am

Didn't notice the link huh?

Since the publication of Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism it has become common for conservatives to say they give more to charity than liberals. Many, many conservatives have cited the book I just linked to for support.

However, that book is just wrong. A recent MIT study countered it finding:

THE LINK:

Abstract:
Voluntary contributions from individuals are the lifeblood of nonprofit organizations, which in turn fund a large portion of social services in the United States. Given this reliance donor generosity, it is important to understand who contributes, and to where. In this paper, we argue against the conventional wisdom that political conservatives are inherently more generous toward private charities than liberals. At the individual level, the large bivariate relationship between giving and conservatism vanishes after adjusting for differences in income and religiosity. At the state level, we find no evidence of a relationship between charitable giving and Republican presidential voteshare. Finally, we show that any remaining differences in giving are an artifact of Republicans' greater propensity to give to religious causes, particularly their own church. Taken together, our results counter the notion that political conservatives compensate for their opposition to governmental intervention by supporting private charities



http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2148033


LOL

You are welcome Bubs

 

A key point:

Do you understand what they are saying?