Well Said Bill!
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Hot4azintop via PoliticalForum < [email protected]> wrote: > It's not a wake..... it's a great celebration! Looking forward to Trump > taking office in January and again we will be celebrating the end of an > error! > > In a message dated 7/19/2016 5:25:11 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: > > > > ROTFLMAO! > > Regard$, > --MJ > > The Republican National Convention is a fucking joke. The speakers > resemble a poorly-written satire show. The speeches are so clichéd, so > predictable, so canned, and so poorly delivered. Making America Stupid > Again. > Right now, a "4-star sheriff," Sheriff Clarke, is standing up there with > his joke-ified sheriff-military uniform full of stars and badges and bars > and flags. A clown proselytizing on the Republican version of the Rule of > Law. I am watching Saturday Night Live ... live from Cleveland. > These clowns are handing the next 8 years to Killary. -- Karen DeCoster > Campbell > > > > > At 09:41 PM 7/18/2016, you wrote: > > Obviously you Michael, (for posting this) and literally clueless Nick > Gillespie aren't watching the Republican National Convention! > > Anyone who watched the two surviving Benghazi soldiers tonight in > Cleveland could not support Hil Clinton unless they are a traitor..... > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 7:55 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > A party whose rhetoric (if never its actual policies) is all about > shrinking the size, scope, and spending of government cannot even pretend > anymore to stand for any of those things. > > Jul. 18, 2016 > The RNC Isn't a Convention, It's a Wake > Cleveland is where the GOP as we know it is going to die. > Nick Gillespie > > Reason TV, Todd KraininThe Republican Party, conservatives, and certainly > Donald Trump may not fully understand it yet, but they are meeting in > Cleveland not to chart the future of the GOP but to host its funeral. > > The Republican Party and the larger conservative movement for which it has > stood since the days of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan is dead but not > yet buried. A party whose rhetoric (if never its actual policies) is all > about shrinking the size, scope, and spending of government cannot even > pretend anymore to stand for any of those things. As important, it hasn't > been serious about governing for a very long time. Remember just how > terrible and world-ending they said Obamacare was back in 2009 and 2010? > They weren't wrong and yet it took the Republicans, despite holding > congressional power for most of the 21st century, until June of this year > to roll out an actual alternative that certainly wasn't worth the wait > <http://reason.com/blog/2016/06/28/the-gops-new-health-care-plan-shows-that> > . > > Before whatever Trumpian display of narcissism, delusion, and disdain for > actual knowledge of policy and process clicks into high gear in Cleveland > over the next few days, it's worth taking stock of what the Republican > Party has become. Trump is not the cause of its collapse but an effect of > utter failure of Republicans to deliver even partly on their promises over > the past several decades. Republicans and conservatives have officially > elevated atavistic tribal allegiances to the most important place possible > in their causes. While Trump famously and disturbingly called out Mexicans > at the start of his speech announcing his candidacy last year, his > dyed-in-the-wool conserative critics actually attacked him for not being > tough enough on immigration. National Review, in its house editorial laying > out the case against Trump, didn't conjure the ghosts of Ronald Reagan and > George HW Bush in 1980 arguing over who would do more to legalize and help > illegals gain a legitimate place in our country > <http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/20/the-gops-35-year-devolution-on-immigrati>, > they said the Trump's plan to remove 11 or 12 million people from the > country was a "poorly designed amnesty" plan > <http://reason.com/blog/2016/01/25/pity-national-review-conservatives-for-d> > . > > Let's leave aside for the moment that by all accounts illegal immigration > into the United States by Mexicans country peaked in 2007 > <http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/11/18/unauthorized-immigrant-totals-rise-in-7-states-fall-in-14/ph_2014-11-18_unauthorized-immigration-05/>. > Should a political party be taken seriously when fears about people > choosing to come here to work and live is among its top concerns > (especially since immigrants, legal and otherwise, commit less crime > <http://reason.com/reasontv/2015/01/06/more-immigration> than natives)? > Immigration isn't simply part of America, it is America, which explains why > fully two-thirds of us > <http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/12/two-thirds-of-americans-favor-citizenshi> > (including at least 50 percent of Republicans) want to create some pathway > to legal status for illegals. Since then, of course, Trump and Republicans > have burnished their credentials as xenophobes by conflating religion and > race, and declaring that refugees from the same Middle East that > conservative and Republican policymakers have done so much to destroy and > wreak havoc on should not be allowed to enter the United States. Here too > the Republican brain trust (such as it is) is divided against itself, as > it's chided Trump for not being harsh enough or war-like enough or > personally dedicated to a Weekly Standard-style foreign policy of military > aggression. > > When it comes to social issues, the Republican Party has spent the past > several decades warring against abortion (even as its incidence has > declined, along with declines in rates of youth sex and unwanted > pregnancies > <http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-abortion-rate-is-falling-because-fewer-women-are-getting-pregnant/> > too) and "homosexual agenda" and pimping for the drug war that has managed > to turn the United States into the world's largest jailer nation. Even as > Americans of all stripes are rethinking the stupidity of putting more and > more people in jail, the party's vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence > told Indiana residents this year in his State of the State Address that he > was " leaning into the drug war > <http://reason.com/blog/2016/07/12/meet-mike-pence-possible-donald-trump-vi>" > and increasing mandatory minimums for various drug-related activity. Being > anti-abortion and scared of gays and in favor of the drug war are central > to the conservative movement. These are not the concerns of a party with a > future. They are the issues of a party that is terrified of a present that > has escaped its understanding. Forget about thinking about the future. The > Republican Party with its ritual incantation of the traditional family and > normalcy or whatever, isn't even living in the present any more. > > When it comes to economic policy, Trump (like Hillary Clinton, to be sure) > stands adamantly against the free-er trade that is articulated in trade > deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the North American Free > Trade Agreement. Neither of these things is perfect but we can say with > certainty that NAFTA, which created 25 million net jobs in the 15 years > after it passed, was better than the status quo it replaced. What are > non-Trump conservatives positing in the place of TPP? Nothing really, other > than shifting the conversation to how China must be hemmed in a rising > global economic and military power. > > The greatest failure of the Republican Party in recent memory was the > Bush presidency <http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123275512887811775> which > was perpetrated with virtually total support of a Republican Congress and > the conservative commentariat at the time. Bush presided over a 50 percent > increase in federal spending, mired the country in two wars that were > failures both in conception and prosecution, increased major regulatory > structures and thenÂas the door was hitting his ass on the way outÂbailed > out the financial industry and the auto industry, claiming nonsensically > that the only way to save capitalism was to embrace socialism. Channeling > the "destroy the village in order to save it" logic of the war he worked so > hard to avoid fighting in, Bush actually said, " I've abandoned > free-market principles to save the free-market system > <http://reason.com/blog/2008/12/16/ive-abandoned-free-market-prin>." The > 2008 GOP presidential nominee, John McCain, signed TARP and all the other > related legislation, as did his Democratic rival, Barack Obama. Those of us > who opposed bank bailoutsÂlibertarians mostly, and some lefties tooÂwere > called nihilistic for wanting to business to rise and fall on their > performance in the market. The conservative-Republican position was in > favor of bailouts, with pundits such as National Review editor Rich Lowry > and the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal defending Bush's > incoherent position. In The New York Times, David Brooks said the > congressmen who initially voted down TARP were staging a "revolt of the > nihilists." <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/opinion/30brooks.html?_r=0> > > But after eight years of a supposedly conservative Republican government > that increased spending on everything by 50 percent in real dollars, > creating whole new entitlements such as free or cheap drugs even for > wealthy seniors, consolidated federal control of education funding via No > Child Left Behind, pushed a full-employment act for accountants known as > Sarbanes-Oxley, an energy bill that lead to the phase-out of incandescent > lightbulbs <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pNKz7iOaLE>, created a new > cabinet agency and, perhaps most devastatingly, entered willingly not just > into failed military interventions but secretly built a surveillance state > anathema to the history and ethos of our country. > > So forget Trump burning the mother down this week. The GOP has been in > ashes for most of the 21st century because it has never faced up to just > how awful it behaved when it had power. It was the failure and the fraud of > the Bush years that destroyed the GOP and the broader conservative movement > by making it impossible to reconcile the vast difference between their > generic rhetoric about smaller government and individual freedom on the one > hand and the actual actions of a GOP majority on the other. > > In the years since Bush retreated from public life and started painting > David Hockney-style bathroom art > <http://www.chron.com/life/article/Which-of-George-W-Bush-s-paintings-is-your-5885691.php#photo-4364385>, > conservatives have not seriously grappled with what the GOP did the last > time it controlled the federal government. Rather than look inward, confess > their sins, and work for atonement with the American people, they instead > sounded the alarms about Barack Obama and the creeping socialism that > ultimately was not so different from what they themselves had recently > signed off on. Rather than face up to the party's complete abdication of > serious reflection and engagement with an increasingly libertarian > sensibility growing in America that they might contribute to, it was more > than enough to say that Obamacare would gut Medicare instead of, you know, > actually pushing through any sort of health care reform that would actually > allow markets to develop and flourish. It was more important to claim the > Obama and the Democrats weren't war-like enough, even as they continued the > ruinous foreign policy created under Bush. It was enough to stamp their > feet about the rise of post-gender and post-sexual-orinetation America and > instead have moral lepers like Newt Gingrich talk about the sanctity of > traditional marriage. > > The lack of focus and seriousness in the Republican Party is what created > the conditions for Donald Trump to riseÂin a crowd of 17 candidates, > including more than a few who were serious people and might have made > excellent presidents. To be sure, the clown show that is now upon usÂthe > Republican Party has nominated a man to be president who has absolutely > zero experience in public office!Âwill accelerate the demise of today's > Republican Party. So will his plan to increase spending as a percentage of > GDP from a historically high 22.1 percent to 22.5 percent over the next > decade (for contrast, Hillary Clinton wants to raise it only a little more > than Trump, to 22.7 percent). Here we are, nearly 20 years into a century > in which fewer Americans have confidence in major institutions than ever > and want the government to do less and spend less > <http://reason.com/blog/2015/05/22/the-libertarian-moment-is-everywhere-aro>. > And the Republican nomineeÂchanneling the most recent Republican president > and his own partyÂwants to jack up spending even more and plainly use the > government to bully any individuals and groups that bug him. This, in a > country where according to Gallup > <http://reason.com/blog/2016/03/08/the-libertarian-moment-is-so-over-that-l>, > socially tolerant and fiscally responsible libertarians comprise the > single-largest ideological group in the country, bigger than conservatives, > liberals, and populists. Good luck with all that, GOP. > > There are good reasons to believe that whatever ultimately replaces this > version of the Republican Party may well be better, especially if the GOP > channels the energy and appeal and future orientation of its > libertarian-leaning members such as Rand Paul, Jeff Flake, Mike Lee, Thomas > Massie, Justin Amash, and a few others. But until conservatives and > Republicans admit that they have brought this on themselves through their > unwillingness to propose policies that match the libertarian rhetoric they > mumble like bored altar boys saying the RosaryÂnothing will stir in the > ashes, either here in Cleveland or beyond. > > http://reason.com/blog/2016/07/18/the-rnc-isnt-a-convention-its-a-wake > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >  > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > <http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > <http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > <http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
