Hypocrisy of Republicans/Conservatives

[pattygreen 5]

Extend bush's tax cuts? That is the answer to everything from the republicans. That's what contributed to the deficit under bush. And to one of the messes Pres. Obama has had to clean up.

This thread is about republican hypocrisy. You said you were not going to participate anymore. Great! But stop hijacking this thread with your cut and paste articles from conservative websites.

Another hypocritical liberal talking again. Quite a few of these political threads intertwine with political talk and don't always stick to the subject. You do it all the time. You also cut and paste articles all the time. WOW! It's okay when you do it, but I can't? Your websites are all liberal,so mine are all conservative, of course. Did you even read the articles? They were very imformative and truthful. They explained that the CBO isn't always factual, and that the reps. have some great ideas, and that the stimulus was a bust.

[pattygreen 5]

patty: "liberal doctors are now stating that the death penalty via a hypodermic needle is cruel and unusual punishment. The doctors say assisting in these legal actions is against their Hippocratic Oath. So, a Doctor can suck the brain out of a baby whose head is sticking out of the birth canal, but they have a problem inserting a needle into a murderer’s vein? LOL

You post something that represents a visual of a baby's head sticking out of a birth canal gettin its' brains sucked out and a murderer on a gurney getting a lethal dose of drugs and watching him die by the punishment you've described as being cruel and unusual and you finish up this little scenario with "LOL"?

Do you know what LOL stands for? Good grief woman.

I didn't write that. I cut and pasted it. Even so, the "LOL" is not about laughing at the procedure, it's laughing at the hypocrisy of liberals. They don't have a problem with the 'way' that babies are murdered, (inhumanely with excrutiating pain), yet they have a problem with the "way" a murderer is executed.(painlessly and humanely) How hypocritical!

[LeighaMason 19]

Once more the Republicans are out with their deregulation theory. We are still haven't recovered from the last deregulation and now they are proposing more.

Ayn Rand wrote several books proposing a free market ideology where the interests of the corporations will protect the shareholders therefore regulation is not needed. (Lets keep in mind these books are all in the fiction section at the library.) Alan Greenspan was one of Rand's inner circle and he was converted to Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. So during his term as as chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve the financial markets were lightly regulated or not regulated at all. And of course, greed took over, and the markets were raped by wall street executives who had no loyalty to their corporations.

Afterward, during Congressional testimony on October 23, 2008, Greenspan had this to say about his long held Objectivism beliefs:

"Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder's equity — myself especially — are in a state of shocked disbelief." Referring to his free-market ideology, Greenspan said: “I have found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I have been very distressed by that fact.” Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) then pressed him to clarify his words. “In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working,” Waxman said. “Absolutely, precisely,” Greenspan replied. “You know, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.” Greenspan admitted fault in opposing regulation of derivatives and acknowledged that financial institutions didn't protect shareholders and investments as well as he expected.

So our current economic crisis can be traced directly back to deregulation of the markets. Greed has to be held in check by regulations.

[phil1336 0]

Sarah Palin will be our modern day Moses that will lead the Teabaggers out of the Wilderness into the Promised Land! Praise the Lord!

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Another hypocritical liberal talking again. Quite a few of these political threads intertwine with political talk and don't always stick to the subject. You do it all the time. You also cut and paste articles all the time. WOW! It's okay when you do it, but I can't? Your websites are all liberal,so mine are all conservative, of course. Did you even read the articles? They were very imformative and truthful. They explained that the CBO isn't always factual, and that the reps. have some great ideas, and that the stimulus was a bust.

You said you weren't going to particpate anymore and then you did. Another conservative lie.

And yes, I cut and paste, but AFTER a thread has gone off in a different direction. I started this thread and don't want to see you take it in another direction.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

By LeighaMason: So our current economic crisis can be traced directly back to deregulation of the markets. Greed has to be held in check by regulations.

You are so right. And that is my other mantra (the first being that without hypocrisy the republicans would have nothing) and that is: Regulate, baby, regulate.

As if we need to take any advice or opinions from the conservatives or the economists they quote - their policies are what got us in this mess. So they should just sit on the sidelines, be appropriately contrite and shut up.

Edited February 14, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[BJean 16]

I'm chagrined that at least one ultra conservative posting here has seen fit to adopt the word "hyprocrite" when referring to Democrats.

[BJean 16]

When all this financial mess began to emerge as the disaster it was, everybody agreed that it was due to little or no regulation. The Republicans are primarily responsible for that and it dates back to even before either Bush was elected. They embraced the Ayn Rand theory that Greenspan and others adopted and the phrase for it, the "trickle down theory of economics" was seen as a reasonable way to handle economics in a capitalist society.

It has now been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that not only does it not work, it can lead to corruption and greed and all the things we have been having to deal with that is making our financial lives miserable. At least those of us who are middle class or poor.

The rich, including Greenspan, just kept getting richer.

To hear someone seriously discuss deregulation as any kind of remedy to our financial woes in the U.S. is actually kind of frightening. Stupidity like that is scary.

Edited February 15, 2010 by BJean

[BJean 16]

Leigha, I loved your post.

[BJean 16]

phil, when Palin comes out of the wilderness with the right wing extremist commandments to present to her followers, they will be engraved on her hand.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Rein in spending with "Pay as you go":

Well, you'd think with all the yapping the republicans and teabaggers are doing about spending that this bill would be supported by them. Not so fast:

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Published: February 6, 2010

I am curious to know why Sen. Richard Burr, an avowed fiscal conservative, a man who is always telling us that he wants a balanced budget and despite voting for almost every deficit increase that the Bush administration requested, voted against the pay-as-you-go budget rule ("Roll call," Jan. 31)? This is the plan that was in place during the Clinton years, when we balanced the budget. That pay-as-you-go legislation was eliminated in 2002 in order to allow President Bush to run his tax cuts for the wealthy through and subsequently allowed the Republican legislature to pass the incredibly expensive Medicare drug act with absolutely no way to pay for it — plus start and conduct two wars — again, with no way to pay for them other than to borrow from future generations of Americans.

Now, after all the crying and teeth-gnashing from conservatives about spending increases, Burr, instead of showing approval for a return to the pay-as-you-go system, voted, along with all 39 other Republican senators, against that plan. Could it be that Burr is more interested in playing politics than he is in a balanced budget?

So we had pay as you go under Clinton and enjoyed a budget SURPLUS, then pay as you go was eliminated by REPUBLICAN bush so he could give more money to the rich and start two wars he couldn't pay for.

That created a deficit that Obama inherited. Now Pres. Obama signed a bill Friday reinstating these pay as you go budget rules.

So, it's the democratic presidents who reigned in spending, as will Pres. Obama, and the republicans who spend like crazy (to help the rich and start wars, among other things).

And not a single "I'm so concerned about spending" republican senators voted for this bill.

WHAT HYPOCRITES.

Edited February 15, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[ariscus99 1]

I have a question for all the Obama lovers on here, and maybe it's been asked an answered already somewhere on these forums, but I haven't seen it yet, so feel free to copy and paste. When does everything stop being GWB's fault and when does Obama stars to take responsibility for everything? Other than of course, the fact that Iraq is a great success of the Obama administration. Because we all now how happy he was about the troop surge and how well he thought it would work. So it only makes sense now, that that would become HIS success, and not the Bush administration's success, because Bush had nothing to do with it. YAY OBAMA!

[pattygreen 5]

I have a question for all the Obama lovers on here, and maybe it's been asked an answered already somewhere on these forums, but I haven't seen it yet, so feel free to copy and paste. When does everything stop being GWB's fault and when does Obama stars to take responsibility for everything? Other than of course, the fact that Iraq is a great success of the Obama administration. Because we all now how happy he was about the troop surge and how well he thought it would work. So it only makes sense now, that that would become HIS success, and not the Bush administration's success, because Bush had nothing to do with it. YAY OBAMA!

As far as they are concerned, when it's something good that's getting done, Obama gets the credit. When it's not good, it's because of the last 8 years of Bush's doings.

[ariscus99 1]

I won't tell you to shut up, you do have freedom of speech. However, if you noticed the name of the sub-forum that you entered it is called the, "LBT Rants and Raves Off-Topic DEBATE AREA". Which implies, that while yes the main site is for weight loss support, which is the #1 reason we are all here, this is a little corner to come and discuss things, not LB related or WL related. Hence the name. So I say this with the utmost respect; if you are really bothered by these postings, why not just refrain from coming into this sub-forum? You are the only one that can click that link, you have the control, you make the choice. So choose not too.:biggrin:

[Cleo's Mom 257]

I have a question for all the Obama lovers on here, and maybe it's been asked an answered already somewhere on these forums, but I haven't seen it yet, so feel free to copy and paste. When does everything stop being GWB's fault and when does Obama stars to take responsibility for everything? Other than of course, the fact that Iraq is a great success of the Obama administration. Because we all now how happy he was about the troop surge and how well he thought it would work. So it only makes sense now, that that would become HIS success, and not the Bush administration's success, because Bush had nothing to do with it. YAY OBAMA!

George Bush turned a surplus into a deficit by doing the following:

1) giving two tax cuts to the rich

2) starting an unnecessary war in Iraq

3) passing a huge medicare drug plan (pharma benefited)

He did NOT have any way to pay for any of this. No one asked him, either. But we taxpayers pay for it.

Because of the failed economic policies of the bush administration and alan greenspan, which included de-regulation for wall street - we now have the worst economy since the great depression. George bush is responsible for that.

President Obama had to infuse money into the economy to keep it from completely collapsing. Most economist agree that the stimulus did this.

The unemployment rate would be closer to 15% now if it weren't for the stimulus. The unemployment rate was increasing for the last year of the bush administration.

For the last 18 months of the bush administration, the american people collectively lost $12 TRILLION dollars (lost wages, devalued homes and devalued investments) amounting to about $40,000 for each man, woman and child and no one in his administration has been held responsible for this.

It took 8 years for bush to screw up america, and Pres. Obama can't fix it in one.

The Iraq war will never be a success. Because it was an unnecessary war resulting in over 4300 deaths. There was no connection to 9/11, no WMD's. And the end does not justify the means. So there should not be any credit for this war by anyone. It should have never happened.

Pres. Obama owns the Afghanistan war now. Even though he didn't start it, he has made the decision to escalate it and he will be judged on this.

Since bush didn't address many of the problems facing American and just kicked the can down the road, Pres. Obama will be judged on those too: healthcare, clean energy, energy independence, global warming, wall street regulations, and job creation, among others.

Though the conservatives are trying to rewrite history we cannot escape the profound and prolonged effect the failed bush policies has had on this country.