Thread: The GOP in Meltdown

Methinks people will soon discover that obama's pretty face and charm, and a love of spending other people's money, are not what they need for a leader.

Sooo.. you think they need an ugly, charmless, tightwad..
and everything will be ok. Any suggestions Jet?

Originally Posted by raycarey

Originally Posted by attaboy

I see my post was deleted. ray, I don't know whether to take the time to respond to your post or to only refer you to Milky's post.

Originally Posted by Milkman

And yes, it's a coincidence. To suggest otherwise, is stupidity.

I do need to ask what you mean by saying I stole a joke? It needs clarification.

so let me get this straight....... attaboy's post from over a week ago was deleted and now he wants me to remember what i was referring to? jesus, get over yourself, i don't have the slightest recollection of the joke you posted...but by what i posted, i'd wager it was far from 'original'.



so attaboy if you're still not going to respond the questions posed directly to you in post #61 and #62 why not go to the games room to enjoy a thrilling game of yahtzee!

The GOP in Meltdown 22-02-2009 09:01 AM raycarey gee, why'd you run away from this thread? but it's probably for the best considering how you embarrassed yourself....anyway, how about some yahtzee!



ray indicated I should check back into this topic.

Originally Posted by ray

jesus, get over yourself,

I should get over myself? You're the one with three posts demanding I answer your questions 'directed' at me. Who are you a self-appointed TD hall monitor?

Originally Posted by ray

it's probably just a coincidence that the RNC selected a black chairman in the same year that obama became president.

You post a cause and effect fallacy and you cast aspersions about the Republican Party. You try to make it sound like the nomination of Steele is a reflexive action, that the Repub Party has no history of nominating blacks to positions of power, that the Republican Party is trying to catch up to the Democrat Party. I pointed out that Repubs do indeed have a history of nominating blacks and I poked fun at your fallacy by posting in the form of a fallacy similar to yours.

You try to diminish the Repub Party's actions and give the credit for Steele's nomination to the Democrats. Worst of all you try to diminish Steele's achievements by alluding he is a stooge or worse yet a token black. Your attack on the Repub Party is outdated, ray. There are blacks of significant achievement in the party. Attempting to diminish the Repub Party's nomination makes you look like a bigoted lefty hypocrite. Yours is what they call 'the subtle prejudice of the Left'. Sneaky or chickenshit is more like. Here it is:

Originally Posted by ray

it's probably just a coincidence that the RNC selected a black chairman in the same year that obama became president.

i don't have the slightest recollection of the joke you posted...but by what i posted, i'd wager it was far from 'original'

Another disparaging remark indicative of your style. My post is deleted so you're confident enough to "wager". What a nice safe bet.

There's a certain dissonance to your posts. They don't ring. As far as stolen jokes go the only one I can think of is you taking my repo point joke and turning it into the now famous ray 'turd-repo' fiasco. We really should have a 'best of ray' sub forum. Perhaps you could draw a forum flag.

raycarey, Teakdoor hall monitor, has spoken.

ray why do you say I have a theory when I explained I posted a fallacy poking fun at your fallacy? Why do I have to explain anything further. That was the purpose of my original post. If you want to tilt at windmills with my face on them well go ahead. Be as busy as you want.

i'll be happy to provide more details on how the two finalists for the RNC position were a black man and another guy who had to recently quit his country club because it didn't admit blacks......in a year when the overwhelming majority of blacks registered to vote as democrats.

ray, you don't need my permission to post. If your chomping at the bit with something you feel is important, well then go for it.

I've said it before I don't mind setting up a fellow poster's jokes. I don't mind teamwork and timing but you've been a weenie. You're don't appreciate the effort.

OK attaboy, i'll give you one more chance to address these issues which you've been ducking for over two weeks now......

Originally Posted by raycarey

please feel free to expound on your theory that 'the democrats ran a black man' for president in 2008 because clarence thomas was nominated to the supreme court nearly 20 years ago.

and then you can further explain how you can compare one the highest voter turnouts in the nations history to the 91 votes Steele got from a group of republican insiders

ray's original post:

Originally Posted by ray

it's probably just a coincidence that the RNC selected a black chairman in the same year that obama became president.

btw, in the end it came down to two people....a black guy (steele) and a white guy who because of this election, had to quit his country club because it didn't allow blacks..

my responding post:

Originally Posted by attaboy

It's probably just a coincidence that the Democrats ran a black man for President after a Republican President nominated a black man to the Supreme Court and after another Republican President nominated a black woman as Sec. of State.

ray, the repetitive nature of your posts, the myopic vision ignoring my response, it could be signs of mercury poisoning. Are you eating allot of canned tuna fish? Daily?

OK, it seems clear that attaboy is going to duck the questions posed, so let's bet back on topic.


the GOP in meltdown.

and what could be more indicative of the meltdown of a political party than a sitting senator telling lobbyists that he is essentially going to extort campaign funds from his party?

Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) told a room full of lobbyists this week that he'd resign his Senate seat early if he doesn't get campaign money from national Republicans, according to three sources with knowledge of the situation.

But Bunning insists he's going to run for reelection and says that the sources are "lying."

"It's not true," Bunning said in a statement. "I intend to fulfill my obligation to the people of Kentucky. If you are going to write something like this, you'd better make your sources known because they are lying."

According to the sources, Bunning suggested at a campaign fundraiser in Washington that his resignation would be politically damaging for the GOP, since the Kentucky's governor, Steve Beshear, is a Democrat and would presumably select a Democrat to fill the seat — potentially giving the Democrats the 60 votes they need to overcome Republican filibusters.

Republicans have grown increasingly concerned that Bunning will lose reelection in 2010, given his streak of erratic behavior and his poor fundraising.

And people with knowledge of the meeting say it's Bunning who is not being forthright about his comments.

"He may not resign and automatically give the seat to the Democrats, but his behavior and actions are going to have the results of handing the seat to the Democrats," said one leading Kentucky GOP operative.

Bunning denies resignation scheme - Manu Raju and Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

this is what happens when a party is bereft of ideas, leaders and an its own vision for the future of the country.

enjoy the wilderness.

first of all, learn how to use the quote function.

secondly, either answer address the points or move on.

Originally Posted by attaboy

Justify your racism.

laughable.

Americans identifying themselves as Democrats outnumber those who say they are Republicans by 10 percentage points, the largest gap in party identification in 24 years.

The gap has widened significantly since President George bush’s re-election in 2004, when it was a mere 3 percentage points. But by the time Mr. Bush left office in January, less than a quarter of Americans approved of his performance.
These days, 38 percent of Americans say they are Democrats, 28 percent call themselves Republicans, and another 29 percent identify as independents, according to an average of national polls conducted last year by The New York Times and CBS News.

Whether Barack Obama is able expand that gap to favor his party will probably depend mostly on Americans under the age of 30 who have yet to form strong partisan ties.

Ronald Reagan's presidency underscores the power of a popular incumbent to win over young voters. When he was elected in 1980, only 20 percent of young Americans identified as Republicans. By 1989, the number had grown to 37 percent, a significant factor in the expansion of the Republican Party during those years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/we...1connelly.html

As far as I can see, the only way the GOP is going to get back into political relevancy is to conclusively turn it's back on the Rightist neo-con Republicanism of the Bush years. That means getting back to the small 'c' conservative principles of small government and fiscal responsibility, a non- interventionist foreign policy, and turning it's back on the Religious Right.

Either that or remain the 'white, southern male' party, with a dwindling, aging support base. I think it is clear now that the fairly radical swing to the Right that occurred during the Bush years has caused enormous damage to the GOP, and I cannot see a sceptical US public letting them back in until it is clear that the neo-con elements have been thoroughly purged.

That means goodbye to Limbaugh, Hannity, Cheney, Bolton, Perle and so on. As far as I'm concerned, these people were usurpers anyway, not traditional conservatives. They hijacked the Republican movement, now their failed policies are in tatters and the venerable party that they hijacked is in a mess. Their supporters are either bitter and rancorous, or have jumped ship.

I think it's safe to say that Bush finally destroyed the political legacy left by Reagan,

and that's a good thing,

Originally Posted by sabang

Americans identifying themselves as Democrats outnumber those who say they are Republicans by 10 percentage points, the largest gap in party identification in 24 years.

Uh, huh. Where was that poll taken? Chicago south side, Watts and BedSty? The conservative folks who worked hard, had a brilliant biz plan, built a great company, employes lots of folks at good wages, made lots of money and donated tons to charity are likely all moving to tax haven countries.

^ These people do exist, and have traditionally been mainly Republican. There are still a number that are staunchly Republican thru' thick and thin- but also many that were lost in the last elections, imo because they saw the GOP turn it's back on many of it's own principles.

When you've got self made men like Gates, Buffet and so on openly supporting Obama (also self made) over the GOP, surely it is sending a message that your traditional support base is being alienated.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Uh, huh. Where was that poll taken?

From a CBS news Poll.



You are hardly going to contribute to the rejuvenation or rehabilitation of your beloved GOP if you adopt a policy of denial Jet. But that is exactly what many Republicans are doing.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Where was that poll taken? Chicago south side, Watts and BedSty?

yeah jet, they only polled people in traditionally black neighborhoods.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

The conservative folks who worked hard, had a brilliant biz plan, built a great company, employes lots of folks at good wages, made lots of money and donated tons to charity are likely all moving to tax haven countries.

for example?

Originally Posted by sabang

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Uh, huh. Where was that poll taken?

From a CBS news Poll.



You are hardly going to contribute to the rejuvenation or rehabilitation of your beloved GOP if you adopt a policy of denial Jet. But that is exactly what many Republicans are doing.

Alright, alright. How come the Dems still outnumbered the Reps in the Reagan and Bush years?

^ I don't know- maybe because the Dem's traditionally attracted the young, starry eyed Idealists who thought they could change the world. Most of them subsequently grow up and become Pragmatists, or cynics.

The concern is of course the Trend- which is decidedly pro-Democrat. The Pragmatists these days seem to mostly swing Democrat.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

How come the Dems still outnumbered the Reps in the Reagan and Bush years?

because they believed in their fairy tales, and now they don't. They have been following a cult based on lies and abuses, and now they have been saved from those leaders, they realized they were all talk, no action and just in for the money.

Originally Posted by sabang

^ I don't know- maybe because the Dem's traditionally attracted the young, starry eyed Idealists who thought they could change the world. Most of them subsequently grow up and become Pragmatists, or cynics.

Well, WTF didn't they vote?

alleged GOP leader michael (mikey mike) steele has an 'off the hook' plan for the future of his party...

Newly elected Republican National Committee Chairman Michael S. Steele plans an “off the hook” public relations offensive to attract younger voters, especially blacks and Hispanics, by applying the party's principles to “urban-suburban hip-hop settings.”

Washington Times - Steele: GOP needs 'hip-hop' makeover

word!

Originally Posted by sabang

. The Pragmatists these days seem to mostly swing Democrat.

Man, are you off-base here or what?

Pragmatism by definition is no wasteful spending and what has the party of Big Government just gone & done?!!