FSTDT Forums
Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: Vypernight on June 23, 2014, 09:45:02 am
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/22/louisiana-gov-jindal-claims-rebellion-brewing-against-washington/?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D491707 (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/22/louisiana-gov-jindal-claims-rebellion-brewing-against-washington/?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D491707)
Basically, a bunch of R's feel their religious, etc. rights are being infringed upon because they're not allowed to infringe upon the rights of other people. Funny how the Rep doing all the b*tching mentions a bunch of B.S. that has nothing to do with religion (Bengazi, Iraq, etc.).
The comments are lovely as well, but then I noticed the article came from Fox News (It just appeared as a headline when I logged on), so that explains a lot.
-
Keep dreaming.
-
I quote Rush's "Enemy Within" (one of my all-time favorite songs by one of my all-time favorite bands):
"To you, is it movement or is it action?
Is it contact or just reaction?
And you...revolution or just resistance?
Is it living, or just existence?"
My money's on resistance. They're just making themselves look like fools.
-
accused President Barack Obama and other Democrats of waging wars against religious liberty
Is it a requirement to be brain dead when running for office as a Republican?
-
What they're trying to say is, "We intend to remain revolting."
-
... okay, seriously, what's it take to indict these fuckers for treason?
-
... okay, seriously, what's it take to indict these fuckers for treason?
[racist conservative] they're clearly not terrorists! Look at how much they don't look like Muslims or black people! [/racist conservative]
-
Aren't the Republicans in America sort of the opposite of oppressed?
Their districts are protected by ironclad gerrymanders, they have a sympathetic supreme court. The American political system also neatly prevents anyone who doesn't have serious money from running anywhere which means they'll never have to go up against an actual socialist opposition. The war on drugs has allowed them to declare war on minorities and immigrants without calling it that and most of the wealth in their country goes straight to their corporate backers.
It's high summer for the Repubs, what are they so pissy about?
-
They don't have the White House. That's illegitimate.
-
It's high summer for the Repubs, what are they so pissy about?
The nights are growing longer and the leaves on the oldest and weakest trees are starting to turn. Winter is inexorably coming and they know it.
-
... okay, seriously, what's it take to indict these fuckers for treason?
Actual treason?
-
... okay, seriously, what's it take to indict these fuckers for treason?
Actual treason?
And nearly outright stating "yes, we're advocating armed insurrection against the democratically elected president and cabinet and tactitly support anyone that has the wherewithal to do so" isn't enough?
-
Nope. They can say anything they want. As long as they're not actually planning, can't do shit.
-
With the wide-spread availability of the internet, lots of people are watching these morons flail about like a bunch of children throwing a tantrum because they can't just nick cookies out of the jar, anymore. Hopefully, their prospective constituents see this and laugh. Laugh at them for their pathetic failings and kick them right in the collective, political dick.
-
It's high summer for the Repubs, what are they so pissy about?
The nights are growing longer and the leaves on the oldest and weakest trees are starting to turn. Winter is inexorably coming and they know it.
That's true. Think about it. Each generation is less wingnutty that the last. Most of the the far-right voters are up there in years. Over time, there will be less old reactionaries voting. The gerrymanders would be meaningless over time.
Besides, who's to say that progressive folks could decide to move into those gerrymandered districts en masse?
Y'know? I think the reason there's so many reactionaries popping up all over the planet is because Progressiveness is WORKING. If things were hunky-dory for Regressives, they wouldn't be making such a noise.
It is my view of things that, while the villains may win much of the battles, the heroes usually win the war.
-
It's high summer for the Repubs, what are they so pissy about?
The nights are growing longer and the leaves on the oldest and weakest trees are starting to turn. Winter is inexorably coming and they know it.
Each generation is less wingnutty that the last. Most of the the far-right voters are up there in years.
The millennial generation in the U.S. may be more socially libertarian than its predecessors, but it also appears to be more economically neoliberal. The pro-capitalist propaganda has been successful in not only crushing unions, but forcing today's progressives to hem and haw and couch all of our pro-labor messages in "Well, we're not talking about those big bad unions but..."
Progressives in this country lack a backbone (and I can't say I blame them after COINTELPRO and the continuing tendency to throw protesters in prison), so I can see why young people generally won't associate with them.
-
Unfortunately, as long as they keep pushing for "religious liberty," they can keep
indoctrinating gaining new followers.
-
One can only do so much to stem the tide of progress. We, as a species, want to progress. We want easier, more convenient lives. We're the only species on this planet that's anywhere close to moving out of the "survival" phase entirely. Its not good all over, granted, but where its good, its really good, especially when compared to how our grandparents had it.
-
Thing is, the Republicans and others like them really, really do not like the idea of things being good for everyone, rather than just for the "nobility".
For them Rights are a Zero Sum Game, if you give rights to someone, you're taking the rights of Fundamentalists to be horrible people to them. And Republicans cannot fathom a world where morality is not derived from their God and / or Ayn Rand, in the case of the Randroids.
-
Unfortunately, as long as they keep pushing for "religious liberty," they can keep indoctrinating gaining new followers.
The ironic thing is, the religious liberty we need isn't "protection from non-religious" but "protection from the religious."
There are still towns where you can get chased out or shunned for not being Christian.
Not that this is unique - any time religion and politics become synonymous (Middle East, for example) then you're gonna have any other religion (or lack thereof) be oppressed. I've yet to see it happen with paganism, but the potential is most definitely there.
Personally, I don't care what percentage of the populace is religious or not, I just want the freedom to practice my own personal delusions at home or with like-minded people without being harassed, so long as no one's civil liberties are violated by anyone's practice.
So please, let's keep improving education, even at the "cost" of religion declining.
-
There's also the fact that if you love and tolerate more people, you're not gonna get them on board when it comes to vote when your platform is running on hatred.
Ironbite-that also scares them.
-
Thing is, the Republicans and others like them really, really do not like the idea of things being good for everyone, rather than just for the "nobility".
Problem with your idea: most Republicans are not, in fact, the nobility. So you're more or less saying that about half of America hates having things be good for themselves.
Counter-hypothesis: Republicans genuinely believe that policies that help the rich help everyone, or at least everyone they care about. Certainly not just the nobility.
Are they wrong? Yes, probably. But it's a worthy distinction to make.
-
Again, there are people in USA who want things to be better for the rich simply because they think that either they or their children might one day be rich.
There was a story about an american politician who took a cad ride and asked the cabbie wether he voted for or against something (can't remember what. Can't even remember what politician it was) and he said he voted against it. The politician was shocked and demanded to know why because the "thing" would have helped people like the cabbie and the only ones troubled would have been some big companies and billionaires. (might have been tax related.) The cabbie's response was basically "Well, I'm not a billionaire yet, but one day I might be."
-
Quick query, as I'm not an American if you are referring to a Republican do you mean someone with Republican sympathies or a card carrying member of the party?
I often hear Americans say so and so is a Democrat and so and so is a Republican, are they just talking about their sympathies or actual party membership?
-
Conservatives calling for revolution? Burke would be turning in his grave.
-
Again, there are people in USA who want things to be better for the rich simply because they think that either they or their children might one day be rich.
There was a story about an american politician who took a cad ride and asked the cabbie wether he voted for or against something (can't remember what. Can't even remember what politician it was) and he said he voted against it. The politician was shocked and demanded to know why because the "thing" would have helped people like the cabbie and the only ones troubled would have been some big companies and billionaires. (might have been tax related.) The cabbie's response was basically "Well, I'm not a billionaire yet, but one day I might be."
Yeah, there's a quote going around that says something to the effect of "there are poor people in America who don't think they're poor, they think they're 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires'".
Something that I've been thinking about is how there seems to be a lot of contradiction in the morals we hold in regards to wealth. You're told about the American Dream where anyone can make it big and that's what makes this country great, but then you're fed lessons like "money can't buy happiness" and "wealth is the people in your life, not money". It's like we should be happy to just have the possibility to obtain wealth, but we shouldn't actually try or make it our goal because we're better people when we're not rich and ambition makes us lose sight of what's important. Of course, we're also at fault if we don't have money, because that means we didn't work hard enough to make success our goal; people are successful because of honest, hard work, you know.
-
It's high summer for the Repubs, what are they so pissy about?
The nights are growing longer and the leaves on the oldest and weakest trees are starting to turn. Winter is inexorably coming and they know it.
Each generation is less wingnutty that the last. Most of the the far-right voters are up there in years.
The millennial generation in the U.S. may be more socially libertarian than its predecessors, but it also appears to be more economically neoliberal. The pro-capitalist propaganda has been successful in not only crushing unions, but forcing today's progressives to hem and haw and couch all of our pro-labor messages in "Well, we're not talking about those big bad unions but..."
Progressives in this country lack a backbone (and I can't say I blame them after COINTELPRO and the continuing tendency to throw protesters in prison), so I can see why young people generally won't associate with them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/05/millennials-save-the-world_n_4174079.html
Nice try, Ironchew. I still stand by my assertion....Irontroll.
-
I think you missed the "new commentary" part of your post, Spuki.
-
Quick query, as I'm not an American if you are referring to a Republican do you mean someone with Republican sympathies or a card carrying member of the party?
I often hear Americans say so and so is a Democrat and so and so is a Republican, are they just talking about their sympathies or actual party membership?
It looks like in this case it's just republican leader Bobby Jindal saying this. So yes a Republican is calling for "Revolution" in our country. But this may not mean that all people who vote Republican will agree with him.
-
-snip-
I wasn't trolling there, honest. Would this face lie to you?
I can only assume you aren't responding to my post in good faith because you don't have an answer to that inconvenient truth.
-
Yeah, there's a quote going around that says something to the effect of "there are poor people in America who don't think they're poor, they think they're 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires'".
It's John Steinbeck who said that.
-
I think you missed the "new commentary" part of your post, Spuki.
Well, I corrected it.