Story Comments
Posted by: mesodude 10 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
85%
mesodude10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Glad you enjoyed it, Shixa. I think Cheney and Bush may have been asked (begged, maybe?) to keep a low profile this week because CPAC is in full swing here in DC and no one wants them around reminding America how *not* conservative the GOP has been with the neocons in control of the party.
Reply-
43%
Hhussk10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey mesodude, I was just curious. Do you follow conservatism?
Reply
such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage)
~from "Merriam Webster Online"
And if you do not, what parts do you disagree with.-
-
-
93%
ProudBlueTexan10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JOE NEOCON:
Reply
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and safe because some tree-hugging liberal fought for maximum water-quality standards.
With his first swallow of coffee, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - and now Joe gets it, too.
He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girlie-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat-packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby granola liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body.
Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our atmosphere.
He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with good pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some commie leftist union members fought and died for these working standards.
cont. -
91%
ProudBlueTexan10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some ridiculous liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
Reply
It's noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who gamed the banking system just before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some liberal whiner decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal traitor fought for car safety standards.
He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal (FDR) stuck his nose where it didn't belong and created the rural electrification act.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, quiche-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved conservative Republicans fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day.
Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man! All Americans should take care of themselves, just as I have. -
86%
ProudBlueTexan10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
lower taxes, FOR THE RICH
Reply
limited (read ZERO) government regulation of business and investing,
a strong national MILITARY/INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX defense,
and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage) SUV'S AND EVERY OTHER EXCESS IMAGINABLE.
THIS IS THE CONSERVATIVE WAY....
but not the new American way-
30%
Hhussk10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
THIS IS THE CONSERVATIVE WAY....
Reply
Not according to the dictionary.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conserva...-
100%
Charlson10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The dictionary doesn't dictate, it only defines words and their usage, pronunciation, etc. If you don't match the definition then you're probably not a conservative. Pseudo conservatives pretend to be conservative but are elite pigs at the trough.
Reply -
100%
ProudBlueTexan10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
From your profile:
Reply
"I do support the President of the United States, but I cannot support socialist policies which I feel will hurt the country. I support conservative policies. And I DO support a free market over socialism."
We are all Socialists now, thanks to the unbridled greed and corruption of 'conservative' economic policy over the past twenty years that repuglicans had control of government. Oh, for the Clinton days. Your idea of free market is what got us here, and your time is OVER.
"According to the Constitution, my job is to use my freedom of speech to voice my disapproval and help find a solution."
The solution is not in the 'conservative' way, and I don't see any job description in the Constitution. However, 'Dissent Is the Highest Form of Patriotism', so where were you during the bush years?
-
-
-
100%
mesodude10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Hey mesodude, I was just curious. Do you follow conservatism?"
Reply
--Actually, I agree with a great deal of it in theory. As currently practiced by Republicans, I don't agree with much of it at all. For instance, does wanting a strong military mean that you give the military a blank check and you give them a free pass when it comes to instances of waste, fraud and abuse? Just because the Constitution says we're supposed to fund our national defense, does this mean that our overall approach to national defense has to center on weaponry and aggression? Isn't diplomacy part of national defense? What about elliminating things like disease and poverty and addressing issues related to scare resources? Strong defense, yes. Unchecked militarism, no.
I'm for individual responsibility--sure. But I'm also for making allowances for people who didn't start out in life with the advantages that I did. I'm also for conservatives questioning and criticizing corporate welfare as enthusiastically as they do welfare towards their fellow Americans. Again, the devil is in the details.-
63%
Hhussk10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
--Actually, I agree with a great deal of it in theory. As currently practiced by Republicans, I don't agree with much of it at all.
Reply
I agree with you. I believe in the philosophy, but did not see a lot of Republicans follow it when they promised. The military should not be given a blank check: I agree. I'm also for allowances for the disadvantaged, I think the difference between you and I is that I would like to see charity, instead of government, control those things. My biggest problem with a big government is that it never does anything efficienctly.
I'm against corporate welfare, and social welfare.
Either way, good points, Thanks for addressing them.-
100%
mesodude10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I think the difference between you and I is that I would like to see charity, instead of government, control those things."
Reply
--I don't have a problem with that either. But, as our current economic crisis proves, sometimes charities are ill-equipped to meet the demands of the populace. Here where I live (as with many major cities) charitable donations are way down. Then what?
Also, if by charity, you include the church, I have a problem when some institutions won't help (or will only offer certain forms of assistance) based on their judgment of the recipients morals.
"My biggest problem with a big government is that it never does anything efficienctly."
--Well, my biggest problem with blanket statements like this is that they aren't true and people who say these things should know better. Ask your elected officialis how they like their government salaries and health insurance. Social Security is one of the most successful government programs in history.
Also, I think those who are anti-government in a knee-jerk way need to realize that underfunding, and hiring people to destroy government agencies from within (as has long been the practice of Republicans) does nothing to advance your agenda. It's one thing to claim that government fails and quite another to make this claim after doing everything in your power to sabotage it. Americans aren't fooled by such tactics anymore.-
67%
Hhussk10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
--Well, my biggest problem with blanket statements like this is that they aren't true and people who say these things should know better. Ask your elected officialis how they like their government salaries and health insurance. Social Security is one of the most successful government programs in history.
Reply
We'll have to disagree here. When I was a student long ago, I was told back then there wouldn't be any money for Social Security. To this day, every president tries to work on a fix for it. Al Gore even made it part of his "Lock Box" campaign.
As far as the salaries for elected officials...I don't believe that supports a statement of efficiency. They basically get to determine their own salary and how much pay increase they receive in the next term.
I've served the government, been hired by the government, worked in the private sector, and started my own business. Trust me, I'm not exaggerating.
I would ask you to name a program running efficiently. If you say Social Security, then I need to understand why President Obama believes we need to fix it..-
100%
mesodude10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"We'll have to disagree here. When I was a student long ago, I was told back then there wouldn't be any money for Social Security. To this day, every president tries to work on a fix for it. Al Gore even made it part of his "Lock Box" campaign."
Reply
--But you're only talking about the way Social Security funding and accounting has been abused across administrations and across parties. That doesn't prove that the program itself is poorly run.
"As far as the salaries for elected officials...I don't believe that supports a statement of efficiency. They basically get to determine their own salary and how much pay increase they receive in the next term."
--The issue isn't about salary. My point was that if Republicans don't think government can work, staying in Congress for decades and collecting their taxpayer funded salaries, insurance, pensions and other benefits is a very strange way of supporting their argument.
"I've served the government, been hired by the government, worked in the private sector, and started my own business. Trust me, I'm not exaggerating."
-About...? And I don't trust you because you're only one person and you're not objective.
"I would ask you to name a program running efficiently. If you say Social Security, then I need to understand why President Obama believes we need to fix it."
--Why are you asking me questions like this as if he's not your President, you haven't been listening to him, and you don't know how to visit his website to get details on his agenda? How the program is *run* wasn't really the issue. Obama is talking about fixing the way it's funded. Bush wanted to "fix" it too and thank heaven he failed to privatize it. And why did he fail? Because those on SS were content with the program for the most part and because most Americans thought Bush's proposal was too risky. Crazy, huh? ;-P
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
loading ...
Ratskii
Charlson
Will1313
ProudBlueTexan
scott4261
DenCuddy
bluetexasvalley
Sageparadox
Jeboba
FrauBlucher
Shixa
Klarissa
Wolfie2007
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.