• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Where are the responsible Republicans?

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
A line from a Paul Krugman piece leaped out at me:
And where, in all of this, are the responsible Republicans, leaders who will stand up and say that some partisans are going too far?
middle of op ed:
Paul Krugman: For Obama, a nonstop witch hunt | Viewpoints, Outlook | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

As usual, Krugman sees only what the Kool-Aid lets him see.
There's a paucity of responsible politicians on both sides of the aisle.
I bet he checks under his bed every nite before going to sleep, lest the Repuboogie Man lurk in wait.
 

Engyo

Prince of Dorkness!
As usual, Krugman sees only what the Kool-Aid lets him see.
There's a paucity of responsible politicians on both sides of the aisle.
I bet he checks under his bed every nite before going to sleep, lest the Repuboogie Man lurk in wait.
I can't argue with this statement.

I guess it will take something extreme happening before somebody the crazies might pay attention to wakes up and says, enough already.
 

Darkness

Psychoanalyst/Marxist
As usual, Krugman sees only what the Kool-Aid lets him see.
There's a paucity of responsible politicians on both sides of the aisle.
I bet he checks under his bed every nite before going to sleep, lest the Repuboogie Man lurk in wait.

I adore Paul Krugman, but I do not like his style when addressing political issues. He is a damn fine economist, not the most clever political commentator. That being said, I think the current Republican party is disgrace to this nation. They ***** and moan about spending 30 billion USD on unemployment insurance, and yet they have no problem extending the EGTRRA and JGTRRA (Bush Tax Cuts) for the well-off. There is no doubt left in my mind that the Republican party has become just an edifice for the protection of the wealthy, who throw bread (e.g. Medicare Part D) once and a while to the masses, so that the Bastille is not stormed.

The post-Johnson Democrats are not much better. Jimmy Carter started an in-party war with Edward Kennedy and the Left. President Clinton allowed corporations to buy up unprecedented levels of television and radio stock and destroyed welfare, by delineating power to the states. President Obama is a sissy (grown-ups insert p-word here) who is so afraid of criticising big business and standing up for what he believes in. They handed money to corporations, no-questions asked, but the Democrats are reluctant to even pass job-stimulating bills. At this point, I am only a Democrat because they are the only chance we have to balance the long-term budget.

I am reminded of a passage from the Communist Manifesto:

[t]he bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representative State, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
Where...are the responsible Republicans...?

There aren't any.

And I'm not very convinced that there are any responsible Democrats, either. They just tend, on average, to be ever so slightly less evil than the Republicans.

Sometimes not so much, though.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
So what's the cause of the irresponsibility shown by Republicans (and to a slightly lesser extent, by Democrats)?
 

Scarlett Wampus

psychonaut
I adore Paul Krugman, but I do not like his style when addressing political issues. He is a damn fine economist, not the most clever political commentator.
A damn fine economist...*sigh*

I feel the opposite. His political writing is at least well written enough for me to read despite its predicable regurgitation of responses to mainstream talking points but on his supposedly specialist subject, the US economy, he manages to avoid addressing the most salient issues. I just can't be bothered with fools like Krugman. As Gerald Celente, an apolitical forecaster who appears very simplistic & pessimistic by the standards of Krugman, stated on the Max Keiser show, "If I had a track record as bad as he does I would have been laughed out of the business thirty years ago."
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
A damn fine economist...*sigh*

I feel the opposite. His political writing is at least well written enough for me to read despite its predicable regurgitation of responses to mainstream talking points but on his supposedly specialist subject, the US economy, he manages to avoid addressing the most salient issues. I just can't be bothered with fools like Krugman. As Gerald Celente, an apolitical forecaster who appears very simplistic & pessimistic by the standards of Krugman, stated on the Max Keiser show, "If I had a track record as bad as he does I would have been laughed out of the business thirty years ago."

I don't know. I think Krugman is right that if the Republicans take the House, they will seek to tie up the President much like they did in the 1990s. That's the essential point of his column and I don't disagree with him there, nor with another of his points: That Obama will play things too safe to be effective in preventing the Republicans from achieving their goal of tying up his presidency.
 

Scarlett Wampus

psychonaut
I don't know. I think Krugman is right that if the Republicans take the House, they will seek to tie up the President much like they did in the 1990s. That's the essential point of his column and I don't disagree with him there, nor with another of his points: That Obama will play things too safe to be effective in preventing the Republicans from achieving their goal of tying up his presidency.
Sunstone, that's not news to me or you. Anyone with half a brain and a familiarity with Republican tactics would expect as much, and anyone to the left of the political US middle-ground feels the Democrats play it far too safe to accomplish as much as they could. This is what I mean by his responses to mainstream talking points. Krugman rarely says anything political that doesn't fit snugly inside the box of typical Democrat-leaning thinkers. Meanwhile the economy faces the most remarkable changes in a century and Krugman is still talking like growth-based economics could return to business as usual as soon as we're over what he thinks will be the "third depression". The theory and language that makes up his world is quickly losing relevance and I bet beneath his professional veneer he probably knows it too.
 

LittlePinky82

Well-Known Member

LittlePinky82

Well-Known Member
As usual, Krugman sees only what the Kool-Aid lets him see.
There's a paucity of responsible politicians on both sides of the aisle.
I bet he checks under his bed every nite before going to sleep, lest the Repuboogie Man lurk in wait.

Funny how you didn't name a single one.
 

LittlePinky82

Well-Known Member
I adore Paul Krugman, but I do not like his style when addressing political issues. He is a damn fine economist, not the most clever political commentator. That being said, I think the current Republican party is disgrace to this nation. They ***** and moan about spending 30 billion USD on unemployment insurance, and yet they have no problem extending the EGTRRA and JGTRRA (Bush Tax Cuts) for the well-off. There is no doubt left in my mind that the Republican party has become just an edifice for the protection of the wealthy, who throw bread (e.g. Medicare Part D) once and a while to the masses, so that the Bastille is not stormed.

Why? Because he tells people what they need to hear instead of what they want to hear? People are always going to have enemies like that. What was that famous quote by Harry Truman about the truth and hell? Medicare Part D wasn't even bread.

The post-Johnson Democrats are not much better. Jimmy Carter started an in-party war with Edward Kennedy and the Left. President Clinton allowed corporations to buy up unprecedented levels of television and radio stock and destroyed welfare, by delineating power to the states. President Obama is a sissy (grown-ups insert p-word here) who is so afraid of criticising big business and standing up for what he believes in. They handed money to corporations, no-questions asked, but the Democrats are reluctant to even pass job-stimulating bills. At this point, I am only a Democrat because they are the only chance we have to balance the long-term budget.
Clinton wasn't a democrat. He was a liberal republican at best. Obama isn't even that honestly.

I am reminded of a passage from the Communist Manifesto:

[t]he bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representative State, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.
Omg you're quoting from the evil manifesto? (sarcasm) The sooner people realize there's more truth in the manifesto than anywhere else the sooner we can clean up the b.s. that's in this country. Anyone who is for anything with the republicans and supported them in the last eight years needs to be rolled over and let the people who want to clean up their mess. Anyone who was a part of or supported the last eight years has no room to speak or anything. They've *** things up so badly for everyone they need to be told to shut up and get lost. No more of this "let's work together" nonsense with the people who will slit your throat.
 

LittlePinky82

Well-Known Member
A damn fine economist...*sigh*

I feel the opposite. His political writing is at least well written enough for me to read despite its predicable regurgitation of responses to mainstream talking points but on his supposedly specialist subject, the US economy, he manages to avoid addressing the most salient issues. I just can't be bothered with fools like Krugman. As Gerald Celente, an apolitical forecaster who appears very simplistic & pessimistic by the standards of Krugman, stated on the Max Keiser show, "If I had a track record as bad as he does I would have been laughed out of the business thirty years ago."

Funny how you didn't criticize anything he said. You just called him some childish name.
 

LittlePinky82

Well-Known Member
That's always the problem when there's a "paucity".
But if you want a responsible one, I'll name one......
....but you won't like him........Ron Paul.
See. I told you you won't like him.

Hahahahaha! He's the only one? LOL!! The "Mr Constitution" who never once tried to get rid of the Patriot Act? Who never brought impeachment charges against George Bush while claiming to rail about him and his Constitutional crimes? LOL!!! And the same Ron Paul who claims to be a libertarian while being against choice for the woman and establishments making the choice? The same one who screams about "pork" but is the biggest pork spender in Congress? That Ron Paul? Hahahahaha!
 
Top