Death of the Republican party

[IndySteel]

You know how Helen Keller burnt the side of her face? She answered the iron.

You know how she burnt the other side? They called back.

Do you know why Helen Keller's dog was pissed ? You'd be pissed off too if your name was Myxlphlartmmfffthh.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Do you know why Helen Keller's dog was pissed ? You'd be pissed off too if your name was Myxlphlartmmfffthh.

Did you ever see her husband..

 

[DBS1970]

I am sick to death of hearing a Moderate can't win. It all depends on your definition of a moderate. I do not want an ultra right social conservative. I want an Ultra Fiscal Conservative, Pro military, Speak softly but carry a big stick foreign policy, but stay the **** out of my religion and bedroom candidate. That person would win hands down if he or she was passionate, articulate and able to debate. Frankly I am not sure anyone with those qualities exists.

You just described Ron Paul. The MSM and the GOP establishment torpedoed his campaign.

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

You just described Ron Paul. The MSM and the GOP establishment torpedoed his campaign.

No Paul does not have the Foreign Policy View I want. He is also not the charismatic leader we need to run against the Dems.
He is close but I just do not like either of them for some reason.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

No Paul does not have the Foreign Policy View I want. He is also not the charismatic leader we need to run against the Dems.
He is close but I just do not like either of them for some reason.

Rand Paul could do it though. He's just the smart-*** that we need. Chris Christie is a smart-*** too but hopefully they've figured out that another northeastern moderate can't win.

 

[ark steel]

I am sick to death of hearing a Moderate can't win. It all depends on your definition of a moderate. I do not want an ultra right social conservative. I want an Ultra Fiscal Conservative, Pro military, Speak softly but carry a big stick foreign policy, but stay the **** out of my religion and bedroom candidate. That person would win hands down if he or she was passionate, articulate and able to debate. Frankly I am not sure anyone with those qualities exists.

First, when you say "stay out of my bedroom", do you mean that, really, or "stay out of my bedroom, but force others to pay for contraception".. Cause, well, if you want me to "stay out of your bedroom", why would I have to pay for a woman's contraception so she can stick anything in her vagina she wants?

Second, if our government didn't overreach, there would never have been any reason to worry about whether the government recognizes same-sex marriage, different-sex marriage, polygamy or anything.

 

[EdReed4Prez]

The shovel has a chance to get elected. You go ahead and throw your vote away on that feather pillow.

Who cares whether the shovel is electable if the end result either way is being beaten to death? Why not try to choose NOT being beaten to death? Or at least do something different in the hopes that maybe the end result isn't being beaten to death?

...........

 

[MT~Forged]

No Paul does not have the Foreign Policy View I want. He is also not the charismatic leader we need to run against the Dems.
He is close but I just do not like either of them for some reason.

Cutting off Foreign aide would be a step in the right direction, put that money towards the National debt. We also need to step back from the World Police effort. We do not need to abandon it, just quit paying for and leading the effort. Let the rest of the countries take a turn, we can re-vist this when we get OUR HOUSE in order.

Cut Military spending by 50%, bring our troops back from countries that are not willing to pay for our help. Redeploy troops to maintain complete border security. Require mandatory military service for 2 years at the age of 18, Male & Female.

Eliminate the IRS, implement the Fair Tax
Eliminate the Dept of Education, States can control the education of their own kids
Set term limits, Change Senate term to 4 years, 8 years max total between House & Senate. Can serve an additional 8 years if elected POTUS.

Just a few ideas off the top of my head. Wig can supply a few more common sense ideas.

 

[MT~Forged]

No Paul does not have the Foreign Policy View I want. He is also not the charismatic leader we need to run against the Dems.
He is close but I just do not like either of them for some reason.

Cutting off Foreign aide would be a step in the right direction, put that money towards the National debt. We also need to step back from the World Police effort. We do not need to abandon it, just quit paying for and leading the effort. Let the rest of the countries take a turn, we can re-vist this when we get OUR HOUSE in order.

Cut Military spending by 50%, bring our troops back from countries that are not willing to pay for our help. Redeploy troops to maintain complete border security. Require mandatory military service for 2 years at the age of 18, Male & Female.

Eliminate the IRS, implement the Fair Tax
Eliminate the Dept of Education, States can control the education of their own kids
Set term limits, Change Senate term to 4 years, 8 years max total between House & Senate. Can serve an additional 8 years if elected POTUS.

Just a few ideas off the top of my head. Wig can supply a few more common sense ideas.

 

[Hineswardkickedurpanzyass]

Wig would have black helicopters hovering over all of our homes.

 

[JupiterBnG]

I am sick to death of hearing a Moderate can't win. It all depends on your definition of a moderate. I do not want an ultra right social conservative. I want an Ultra Fiscal Conservative, Pro military, Speak softly but carry a big stick foreign policy, but stay the **** out of my religion and bedroom candidate. That person would win hands down if he or she was passionate, articulate and able to debate. Frankly I am not sure anyone with those qualities exists.

A moderate can't win if the moderate in question is a Republican trying to look like a Democrat which is what the last few Republican candidates have been. Nor do I think that a staunch conservative can win, because of the spectre of the religious right and the legislation of morality. To have a chance to win, a moderate has to be a clear third option, able to distinguish his/her platform from both Democrats and Republicans, and appeal to both sides. Perot is an example of what I'm talking about - it was clear that he was neither Republican nor Democrat, he was a compelling third option with a different message. He had some conservative views and some liberal views. His biggest problem was that he was a bit of a crackpot who also waffled a bit about whether he was in the race or not and lost momentum at the wrong points in the race as a result. I'm not saying we have to have a Ross Perot, just that there needs to be a strong personality there to champion that moderate position and make it a distinct platform, not just a soft Republican pretending to be liberal.

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

Cutting off Foreign aide would be a step in the right direction, put that money towards the National debt. We also need to step back from the World Police effort. We do not need to abandon it, just quit paying for and leading the effort. Let the rest of the countries take a turn, we can re-vist this when we get OUR HOUSE in order.

Cut Military spending by 50%, bring our troops back from countries that are not willing to pay for our help. Redeploy troops to maintain complete border security. Require mandatory military service for 2 years at the age of 18, Male & Female.

Eliminate the IRS, implement the Fair Tax
Eliminate the Dept of Education, States can control the education of their own kids
Set term limits, Change Senate term to 4 years, 8 years max total between House & Senate. Can serve an additional 8 years if elected POTUS.

Just a few ideas off the top of my head. Wig can supply a few more common sense ideas.

I disagree on the military spending. I unfortunately disagree on some extent to the foreign aid. We must support those countries that truly need our help and are not just funneling the back to terrorists working against us. We have to contain the threat from Muslim extremists and not helping the world just opens the door for their expansion. We certainly do not dole out foreign aid correctly.

We do need to become better at spending our military budget by getting rid of the red tape and bureaucracy that wastes so many of the dollars spent. We could Streamline the military's operations and build it up more with the money we are spending but I would not want to cut it. I am a big believer in peace through strength. The military is one of the things the government is supposed to be doing. I don't totally agree on cutting the Dept of Education but I do think they need to be relegated to just an oversight department not a major national infrastructure same with Energy.

 

[MT~Forged]

I disagree on the military spending. I unfortunately disagree on some extent to the foreign aid. We must support those countries that truly need our help and are not just funneling the back to terrorists working against us. We have to contain the threat from Muslim extremists and not helping the world just opens the door for their expansion. We certainly do not dole out foreign aid correctly.

We do need to become better at spending our military budget by getting rid of the red tape and bureaucracy that wastes so many of the dollars spent. We could Streamline the military's operations and build it up more with the money we are spending but I would not want to cut it. I am a big believer in peace through strength. The military is one of the things the government is supposed to be doing. I don't totally agree on cutting the Dept of Education but I do think they need to be relegated to just an oversight department not a major national infrastructure same with Energy.

My first question to you would be "Have you served in any branch of the Military?" I was in the US Navy for almost 9 years, the amount of waste was astounding, doubt it has gotten any better. We wasted so much, I believe a 50% reduction would not be too much to handle. Would it reduce the active members and equipment? Sure it would, but with technology today we can do much more with less. With my mandatory service requirement, we would still provide for a very strong DEFENSE. Defense does not mean that we can not go on the offense, most of the surgical strikes are handled by Special Forces anyway. We can still take the fight to them while having an overwhelming defense if it is brought to us.

We need to also have a "**** you" attitude when it comes to "Containing" the problems. Civilians caught in the middle is bad, but not at the expense of OUR TROOPS. If we have to go over there and take care of things, we do it, and leave the resulting mess to them. Sooner or later those civilians will clean up things themselves. We do not have to arm anyone, just beat up the problems untill they are no better armed than the civilians.

Dept of Education should be ELIMINATED, that is a State issue. If State "A" schools suck, move to a State that has better opportunities. Same thing goes for business, etc. Bad states will get worse as people flee, too bad. Everything would eventually work out, look at what has happened in parts of Detroit.

BTW - I think more people are watching Wig than he would ever want to watch someone else. When you have the right ides that tends to happen, people get ascared of free thinkers.

 

[Vader]

The government is vastly over bloated. Not only that but these dept. are totally useless. The entire reason they exist is to give people jobs. The Dept. of Education was setup to make education better. Has it worked? NOPE... so they are failing at the ONLY job they have. **** them. They should be gone today. Same for the dept. of energy. WTF do they do? They were setup to get the U.S. off of foreign oil and help with the domestic energy issues. Has it worked? NOPE.. Oil is a world commodity and the Dept. of Energy has as much to do with lowering energy prices as a I have. They are bloated vestiges of a long passed age. Them, along with many other depts., are dinosaurs and need to be gone.

 

[Rod Farva]

Unfortunatley MT Forged, the cuts would be at the expense of the "lowly" soldier, airman, sailor, etc. The ******** that award government contracts for 300.00 dollar hammers would still award those contracts. Your theory would be a sound one under a new government though.

Also, why do so many seem to think that a true or staunch "conservative" must be someone who is going to attempt to thrust their religious beliefs on everyone else? I consider myself to be pretty close to truly conservative and don't believe that that is a part of being conservative at all.

 

[JupiterBnG]

Unfortunatley MT Forged, the cuts would be at the expense of the "lowly" soldier, airman, sailor, etc. The ******** that award government contracts for 300.00 dollar hammers would still award those contracts. Your theory would be a sound one under a new government though.

Also, why do so many seem to think that a true or staunch "conservative" must be someone who is going to attempt to thrust their religious beliefs on everyone else? I consider myself to be pretty close to truly conservative and don't believe that that is a part of being conservative at all.

There's a difference between a fiscal conservative, and a conservative in the general sense. Conservatives in that general sense tend to be closely aligned with the religious right on issues like abortion, gay marriage and so forth. The reason I say I don't think a true conservative in that sense can win is because I think their key issues tend to be more motivating to the opposition to get out and vote against, rather than motivating their own base to vote FOR.

I consider myself to be fiscally conservative, and conservative in some other areas as well, like Second Amendment rights. On social issues, though, I tend to be more liberal, and take a laissez-faire, "live and let live" attitude. The problem with Republican candidates like Romney is that they try to appear soft on some of the social issues to attract Dems that are on the fence, but they aren't really fiscally conservative, hence the moniker of "Dem Lite."

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Don't kid yourself though, there is a Religious Left in this country too and they are taking over the boards and leadership positions at the top levels of many religions.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

My first question to you would be "Have you served in any branch of the Military?" I was in the US Navy for almost 9 years, the amount of waste was astounding, doubt it has gotten any better. We wasted so much, I believe a 50% reduction would not be too much to handle.

Who gives two-***** if you served in the military? What the hell does that actually mean? Your organization used too much toilet paper and think it can be scaled back? Need a bigger sight-picture at an acquisition/manpower/entitlement and contracted support levels. A 50 percent cut would be devastating to the military infrastructure...hell almost a quarter of the military budget is spent on retiree benefits alone. What's left? How are you going to pay the troops, how are you going to train, how are you going to sustain their equipment and refresh the out of life material, how are you going to deploy? That's not even touching research and development and new technology. Cyber is now huge in DoD and they are creating cyber weapon systems...do we just drop that now? 50 percent....jebus cripes.

 

[EdReed4Prez]

I think a 25% military spending cut wouldn't be too bad. Close many overseas bases that we pay to maintain. Sell our left over supplies to allies rather than leaving them for ISIS or gifting them to increasingly militarized police departments.

 

[ark steel]

Who gives two-***** if you served in the military?

I think his point about this was nothing more than, if you have served, you would have seen the huge amount of waste in the military.

I will give two examples from my reservist days:

Our drill site had built a building used for training. One of the good things about this building is that they had included the "sound powered phones" like what was on a Navy ship. This allowed us to actually use a system that was used on the ships It was used for other training, too.

Normally, you would expect this to be a good thing. However, after several years of using the building, the base administration realized that the modular building had never been authorize. Rather than authorizing the building, they tore the building down.

One of the rooms in our training building was designed to look like a bunkroom on a Navy ship. The use of this room was for damage control training. They could pump water in to simulate a hull breach, they could pump smoke in to simulate a fire. We had full day training sessions on what to do in various situations, how to communicate from on-site at the damaged area with whoever was in charge, how to enter a room where unknown damage was going on, etc. Important training for reservists to get since they are not getting it shipboard, After many years of using this room, the Navy decided the risk of injury to personnel was too great and shut down it's use. After that, instead of actual useful training, our damage control training consisted of watching videos. Yay!

 

[Turd Ferguson]

One of the rooms in our training building was designed to look like a bunkroom on a Navy ship. The use of this room was for damage control training. They could pump water in to simulate a hull breach, they could pump smoke in to simulate a fire. We had full day training sessions on what to do in various situations, how to communicate from on-site at the damaged area with whoever was in charge, how to enter a room where unknown damage was going on, etc. Important training for reservists to get since they are not getting it shipboard, After many years of using this room, the Navy decided the risk of injury to personnel was too great and shut down it's use. After that, instead of actual useful training, our damage control training consisted of watching videos. Yay!

Sounds like a hell of a cost-savings to me...lol. I get what you're saying but let's get on the reality train. Those dollars in the Dod budget are POM'd and appropriated years in advance in the FYDP....any cut in the military will be reallocated in another area of Gov't.

 

[21STEELERS21]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...t-ravaged-surplus-hinder-re-election-bid.html

Why don't you nominate a true fiscal conservative like Sam Brownback who is using Reaganomics to destroy Kansas?
He will be available because he will likely lose the governors race.

 

[ark steel]

Sounds like a hell of a cost-savings to me...lol. I get what you're saying but let's get on the reality train. Those dollars in the Dod budget are POM'd and appropriated years in advance in the FYDP....any cut in the military will be reallocated in another area of Gov't.

The bolded part is, certainly, true.

I would agree more with Ed's 25% than MT's 50%, although 10%-15% is probably more reasonable. The cuts would be from the top down rather than the way they are normally done.

 

[ark steel]

LOL, the KS counties are pissed because they had to raise their own taxes in order to meet their own needs. THAT IS THE WAY IT SHOULD WORK!!

Why the **** would you pay a tax to a bloated state government, then have to apply to get some of it back? Now you get to get it directly paid to you without some strings-attached state grant. Congratulations, it worked!!

 

[oneforthebus]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...t-ravaged-surplus-hinder-re-election-bid.html

Why don't you nominate a true fiscal conservative like Sam Brownback who is using Reaganomics to destroy Kansas?
He will be available because he will likely lose the governors race.

This story is incredible to me. People bitching because a 700 million surplus has shrunk to a 27 million surplus? And that's a disaster? Hello, that means the government gave back the extra 675 million dollars it DIDN'T NEED to the people who earned it. How is that a bad thing?

By the way, revenue always drops initially when there's a tax cut. It takes time for the full effects on the economy to emerge.