
No we're fully aware of the glibertarian bent of your average Republican. Aside from unlimited gun rights, your freedom agenda consists of lowering the marginal tax rate for upper-income earners. If Republican "libertarians" actually have some philosophical integrity, their elected officials certainly never demonstrate it. Hence the utter surprise at a handful of Rand Paul types actually running for office. Too bad only a single one of them was actually elected by all the "libertarian" Republicans throughout our land. |
"About at much as I trust other countries and crazies to spend billions of dollars on weapons. The world is what it is. Confilct, the race to dominate finite resources, and survival instinct will always be. "
As will bad spelling and poor grammar. |
The only thing that makes the GOP coalition "work" is that it's main components don't step on one another's toes: the "glibertarian" wing will basically stand aside and let the social conservative wing do whatever the Hell they want in exchange for deferred promises to "shrink the size of government"--which essentially means increasing the debt.
Social conservatives get deferred promises to enact their social agenda ("We're *really* gonna outlaw abortion this time!") in exchange for their bottomless stores of gullibility. |
I find that most republican friends of mine don't say things like ..so and so makes an obsene amount of money..it's not fair. We also don't get mad if someone has a large house and say ..oh those mcmansions are gross. We actually believe that however you live..good for you. Most of us agree that if so and so has figured out a way to make money..good for her/him and don't begrudge and don't have visions of why that person owes it to the rest of the country to give back their hard earned money since it's not fair that they make so much when someone else makes little. We realize that those who make little either do so because they went into a field they knew didn't make a lot and so should ask the rest of us to subsidize their dream job, or they just don't work hard..not our problem. We realize that many dems like to get fixated on curing social ills but curiously seem to not like to open their own wallets..notice this even when I am out to dinner with dems who are not great tippers..or I have experienced them not being great tippers.
As for the SAHM mom comment--typical rude DCUM thing but let me answer. If you are under the assumption that SAHM is not a great thing and is a mark of a lazy woman..fine but you are not paying for it the way I have to pay for the many losers who won't work--don't tell me about how you can't find a job. You can find a job, you just might not think it's good enough for you. |
Are you serious? What about those that simply could not afford the skyrocketing tuition in order to get the kind of education that leads to the six-figure jobs? Or those that worked their tails off only to end up in debt because they could not afford to pay their medical bills due to lack of health insurance. Or those that may not be rocket scientists or financial prodigies - you know, just the average people who work hard. The guy who builds your mcmansion, your luxury SUV, who cleans your kids' schools, the nurse that helped deliver your kids and wiped your xss when you couldn't make it to the bathroom. The person that changes your parents' diapers when they are too old to do it themselves. Yes. Real dream jobs. How do you think our society would function if everyone was sitting behing a desk and shuffling papers from one side to the other without actually producing anything? Who would grow, pick, package, transport and sell the organic friggin' pomagranates that go into your martini glass? Right, not your problem. Whast IS your problem? |
Or what about public school teachers, policemen and firemen??? They most certainly work hard and are highly underpaid-ESPECIALLY teachers. . . |
teachers and policemen and firemen know going in they won't get rich, but that they will get a very satisfactory income with good job security. so I don't see your point.
I don't self-identify as a Republican but I normally vote Republican, because I think affirmative action is inherently unfair and outdated; because I think abortion is the murder of babies; because while I like the idea of a larger social net, I think large governments are way too incompetent to deliver; because I think we live in a very dangerous world and the first role of a society is to protect its members; and I think lower taxes tends to promote more growth (to a point). what I don't like about Republicans, and why I don't self-identify, is the recent dumbing down of the party - the perceived anti-science bent, and the anti-immigration. immigrants are the main reason for our incredible prosperity. But I have much larger issues with Democrats so I'd never vote for a liberal dem. I'm dying for a viable third party candidate .... |
Do those members that society should protect include people whose families could not provide them with an Ivy League education, those who have illnesses or other conditioons that make jobs difficult, those who are just not smart enough to get and/or hold a job, those who just happened to work for a company that went under, or look too Muslim or Chicano, etc, etc? |
Teachers are completely overpaid. They work nine months of the year plus liberal leave and sick leave. They can retire after thirty years to 80% of their wage so someone who started at 22 can retire at 52 and thank us by living another 30 years and embarking on another career.. That is huge and on top of it they get tuition reimbursement, healthcare, and job security even if they stink. I shed no tears for teachers and blame the unions for perpetuating this. Fireman and policeman I have no problem with getting a cushy retirement because if you could die anyday at work..you should get something for that.
Let me answer about those couldn't afford an expensive school. boo hoo hoo. If you wanted to go into an area that supported you taking out a ton of loans (corporate lawyer, banker, surgeon), you should have done it and if you were that poor you would have had a good chance of getting said school to write off a lot of your tution. If you wanted to major in education you are stupid if you took out hundreds of thousands of loans and not my problem. By the way.. I see this all the time..someone who decided to be a social worker..a nice job that doesn't pay a lot but decided they wanted to take out a ton of loans and are now sad that they can't pay. Really?? How did you think you were going to pay it back? Oh..you didn't think and now it's my problem.. yep..kind of like the idiots who took out mortages they knew they couldn't pay and now cry about it..ahh I am getting mad all over again. But a republican believes if you stepped in it..you fix it and don't come to the government with your tin cup. It's not the government's role to cure your stupididy. As for healtchare..I am over that. I had healthcare when I was making 8 an hour at my first job. I could a high deductable policy so I wouldn't lose my future if I got sick. Why this seems so dificult is beyond me. |
14:53 - maybe your disgust with teacher pay has to do with your atrocious spelling and pathetic critical thinking skills.
As for the social worker comment, I guess you don't think you'll ever need the services of one - for your elderly parents perhaps to help with organizing Medicare services should they have a sudden stroke and need long-term rehab?! With your logic, no one should "waste" their time getting a degree in social work if they have to take loans out. WTF? |
I think what 14:53 was saying is if you are paying for your own college education, then choose your school in part based on what you plan on studying. i.e., if you know you are going into a high paying field, then sure, go to an expensive private school and borrow the funds. But if you know you are going to be a social worker, then go to community college and then public school because its going to be hard to pay back expensive loans. I went to public schools, lived at home and worked each summer - so my student loans were very manageable. |
To the poster who is Republican so that s/he can give his/her property and assets who whomever s/he wants at death-
I'd like to do that too, however I'm in a same sex relationship. Were I able to marry my partner of 10 years, I'd be able to list her as the beneficiary of my retirement account- thus covering both her and our two children. However, as I cannot marry her (nor am I able to adopt the children I have raised since birth) both she and our children would, at my death receive only the funds I have contributed toward my pension, rather than the full pension amount that opposite sex couples and their families can get. And of course they will get taxed like hell on the transfer. So, are you saying that if I become a Republican, your team is going to help me with this? |
i think that only applies if you were to die while your children were minors? besides, those kinds of pensions are pretty rare these days. Most everyone else has a 401K plan. Doesn't really affect enough people to make me want to mess with changing the definition of marriage, sorry. But does seem to be a crummy rule. |
To me, republicans have become too self righteous, too I know I am right, too conservative and even extreme.
US is behind other European industrialized countries. We have problems that are an embarrasment for a nation this size and this wealthy. Too many homeless, too many women dying in childbirth, too many unvaccinated children, too many poor children land up with second class education, medical care does not need to as expensive as it has been made out to be. The inner city slums are atrocious, and yet nothing is going happen that will improve it etc etc And some creepy wealthy middle class person is so so right in his own mind and knows everything and does not know the reality of life for the poor in his own land. US foreign policy sucks |
14:53 is an idiot
Life happens |