How to render one's party obsolete:

[Krom]

Interesting. I just have to jump in and ask: So you feel that the First Amendment should not extend to this guy's tasteless display?

It is protected speech, he is within his rights to do it. However, it is also within our rights to call him a moron and an ★■◆●.

[Top Gun]

Interesting. I just have to jump in and ask: So you feel that the First Amendment should not extend to this guy's tasteless display?

I'm not sure that banning the flag would have been a good decision in terms of First Amendment protections, but that doesn't lessen my surprise that the Reconstruction-era government didn't do so regardless. That flag (and the other various Confederacy flags; I'm aware it wasn't the only one) was the symbol of armed insurrection against the United States, treasonous behavior in a very real sense. Particularly in the absence of Lincoln, I've often wondered why any movement to ban its display didn't stick at the time. It probably would have made for a fascinating Supreme Court case down the line, too.

Either way, as Krom put it, anyone still using it today is a total ★■◆●.

[woodchip]

Honestly I'll never understand why the federal government didn't ban that flag right after the Civil War concluded.

Because marines didn't exist yet.

Ummm wrong Isaac. Marines were officially born on Nov. 10, 1775

[woodchip]

Interesting. I just have to jump in and ask: So you feel that the First Amendment should not extend to this guy's tasteless display?

I'm not sure that banning the flag would have been a good decision in terms of First Amendment protections, but that doesn't lessen my surprise that the Reconstruction-era government didn't do so regardless. That flag (and the other various Confederacy flags; I'm aware it wasn't the only one) was the symbol of armed insurrection against the United States, treasonous behavior in a very real sense. Particularly in the absence of Lincoln, I've often wondered why any movement to ban its display didn't stick at the time. It probably would have made for a fascinating Supreme Court case down the line, too.

Either way, as Krom put it, anyone still using it today is a total ★■◆●.

Don't think SCOTUS would of banned it. After all they didn't ban burning of the American flag. Both cases are considered a form of free speech.

[CUDA]

Interesting. I just have to jump in and ask: So you feel that the First Amendment should not extend to this guy's tasteless display?

It is protected speech, he is within his rights to do it. However, it is also within our rights to call him a moron and an ★■◆●.

agreed HIM,
without branding a whole movement as some here and in the media like to do

[Isaac]

I have friends that put that flag on their stuff. It's a heritage thing, as far as I'm concerned. Watching you guys freakout over him is like an indicator of how far away you all live from me. Get out of your cold gray east coast hate filled cities and go south for a change...

[Top Gun]

No, I'd rather not descend into the land of rampant anti-intellectualism and reddened necks, thank you very much.

And honestly the "heritage" thing is such a weak excuse. Even if one did have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy, it's been 150 years already. In the modern world, that symbol stands for a regime which supported legalized slavery and revolted against our country. Just put the damn things away.

[Isaac]

I've got an "ethinic" herritige, which requires no effort to communicate, because that's how I look. And most ethincities work that way, except for being white. White people seem to have trouble identifying with theirs. Just my opinion, by the way. So if someone wanted to be "not just white", they'd dress or decorate a certain way. And what if you don't identify with your european heritige? (irish/german/whatever) Why not identify with something more close to home? Anyway, that's how I rationalize it, though I'm sure the confederate flag means something different to each person that waves it. By the way, I don't own a confederate flag, but I do own a few Texas flags, but that has nothing to do with pride. It has more to do with Texas being the greatest state ever with the smartest, nicest, strongest, and bravest people ever. And I have super powers because I'm from Texas, like flying and singing. Have I said Texas enough? Texas. Anyway, the confederate flag and texas flag are two completely different situations with no similarities.

[callmeslick]

I have friends that put that flag on their stuff. It's a heritage thing, as far as I'm concerned. Watching you guys freakout over him is like an indicator of how far away you all live from me. Get out of your cold gray east coast hate filled cities and go south for a change...

look, as a son of the south I appreciate the heritage thing and all, but there is an appropriate display of that flag, and a usage of that flag as a symbol of hatred and bigotry. I've seen both, in Virginia.

[Will Robinson]

Yea, I know people who have flags and other civil war era icons and they don't have a bigoted bone in there body but the guy in the picture was not waiting for the bus to the reenactment staging grounds.
He was all about Help me hate the ★■◆● in the whitehouse.
Just like TC is all about 'Help me group everyone in the Tea Party in with this guy'

In both cases they are seeking people to join them in unfounded hate.

[callmeslick]

Yea, I know people who have flags and other civil war era icons and they don't have a bigoted bone in there body but the guy in the picture was not waiting for the bus to the reenactment staging grounds.

Thanks, Will, I needed a laugh with all this serious ★■◆● going down.


as an aside, I'm waiting for someone in the Marines to ★■◆●-slap him for insulting the Corps

[Isaac]

Have you met this guy? Do you know for a fact that he has no friends of different ethnicities? This is 2013, not 1913...

[callmeslick]

Have you met this guy? Do you know for a fact that he has no friends of different ethnicities? This is 2013, not 1913...

in your state, it is still 1859, at times............by the way, despite your vocal cheerleading, speaking as a Virginian, Texas can be an embarrassment to old school Southerners.

[Will Robinson]

Have you met this guy? Do you know for a fact that he has no friends of different ethnicities? This is 2013, not 1913...

If he wasn't promoting hate by choosing that flag for that location then he was demonstrating one heck of non sequitur in a very unfortunate place to do so!

Marine Corp.....Rebel Flag.....White House...
I'll take WTF?!? for $2000 Alex!


Or he is devious little democrat.....

[CUDA]

I take it more as a sign of rebellion in this case then racism. much like the tea-party's choice of the "don't tread on me" flag

[Top Gun]

You know the fun thing about the Tea Party's usage of that flag is that the rattlesnake symbol can be traced back to Benjamin Franklin's famous political cartoon, which was intended as a call for colonial unity in the face of British oppression. Using it as some way of saying, "★■◆● government, let me do whatever the hell I want" misses the whole point.

[Isaac]

in your state, it is still 1859, at times...

Only when we party.

[Will Robinson]

You know the fun thing about the Tea Party's usage of that flag is that the rattlesnake symbol can be traced back to Benjamin Franklin's famous political cartoon, which was intended as a call for colonial unity in the face of British oppression. Using it as some way of saying, "**** government, let me do whatever the hell I want" misses the whole point.

I think most of the Tea Party people would say their call is the same, to rally people to put an end to the rapid growth of government that is taxing and spending out of control.
You have to assign the sentiment of chaos and anarchy to them to say what you did but they don't advocate those extremes.

Reining in spending, keeping taxes low, having members of government subject to the same regulations as citizens, etc isn't at all the same as "doing whatever the hell I want". So your point isn't 'whole' at all! It is smoke.

[Top Gun]

Except that reining in necessary spending and keeping taxes so artificially low as to negatively impact the economy are directly detrimental to positive forward growth. Reaganomics has been disproven for a good 30 years now, so maybe it's time the Tea Party came up with a new mantra.

[Spidey]

In my mind, that simply proves that the Federal government is way too large a part of the economy.

“Artificially low” heh…that’s funny!

[Top Gun]

What standard are you using to define "too large," though? As slick has noted before, people seem to be perfectly content with all of the aspects of government, little and big, which directly benefit them. The frustration popping up all over the place as a result of this shutdown is evidence enough of that. Yet for whatever reason, a big chunk of people whine and complain about having to pay for said services. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

And yes, "artificially low." The high-end tax rates are the lowest they've been in, what, decades? And they were lowered to that level without any efforts to match the budget accordingly, and were kept equally low during two unfunded wars. For all of you who are so eager to keep making comparisons to household budgets, try and explain to me how voluntarily taking a massive pay decrease while simultaneously substantially increasing your expenses works in any real sense.

[Top Gun]

Getting back to the original topic, if there's one thing that should render any party obsolete, it's pulling utter bull★■◆● like this. Just take a look at that video, and watch the Speaker pro tem. weasel around the true cause of this shutdown.

[Spidey]

Well I pay 180 bucks every 6 months in use and occupancy taxes just to work in the tiny hole I do my job in, and now the city wants to raise my property taxes 500 bucks a year, just in time to coincide with the Feds requiring me to get an insurance plan I don’t want.

And of course this property tax hike will hit my landlord, so guess who will have to pay that one as well.

All this while I’m down to only being able to work a few hours a day, because of my condition.

So don’t tell me taxes are low. I don’t ask for ★■◆● from the government.

And JFTR I only compare the Federal budget to other budgets in one simple regard…SOUND ECONOMIC PRINCIPALS! As in they need to abide by.

[woodchip]

Using it as some way of saying, "★■◆● government, let me do whatever the hell I want" misses the whole point.

No, it is telling the govt to do what the voters want them to do.

[Will Robinson]

Except that reining in necessary spending and keeping taxes so artificially low as to negatively impact the economy are directly detrimental to positive forward growth. Reaganomics has been disproven for a good 30 years now, so maybe it's time the Tea Party came up with a new mantra.

Now you have abandoned your 'they say ★■◆● the government and do whatever they want' charge and assigned something else to them they haven't done.

You are too busy blaming them for what you imagine they would do.

[callmeslick]

Using it as some way of saying, "**** government, let me do whatever the hell I want" misses the whole point.

No, it is telling the govt to do what the voters want them to do.

and, as was noted above, I've been saying for years that the voters clearly want Medicare, Social Security, unemployment insurance, food inspectors, national parks, transportation safety, research and development, a highway system of top quality, and a massive military, among many other things. Responsible budgeting thus means taxation which covers the tab.

[Spidey]

People shouldn’t always get what they want, that’s a poor excuse.

[callmeslick]

so, Spidey, 'representative government'(TM-CUDA) means give the people what you feel is right, not what they demand?

[Spidey]

They should provide what the people “need” not what either “you” or they want.

The government’s job is to “GOVERN” not provide wish lists.

[callmeslick]

but, a Representative is supposed to represent the wishes of his constituents!!! Now, I'm just playing with you here, Spidey, along the lines of what CUDA elsewhere insisted to be the true purpose of 'representative government'. What we need, and have lacked for some time, is true legislative leaders, willing to lay out the real truth about the choices around services and paying for them to the public at election time. Sadly, our system and our population, doesn't seem to reward that sort of statesmanship.

[callmeslick]

good read.......adios GOP?:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... op/280637/

[Will Robinson]

but, a Representative is supposed to represent the wishes of his constituents!!! ...

Not by collection their votes on each issue and then voting according to the winner of the popular vote!
He is supposed to lead his constituents by making what he thinks are the correct choices....the right votes...etc.
And they vote him out if he fails to convince them he has made wise decisions. They chose him to make decisions for them in the primary and general election that put him in Congress.
They are represented by their chosen "leader". Not by some accounting firm that tallies their vote as if they lived in a pure democracy.

The trouble we saw with the impasse is the result of leaders going toe to toe with each other over an issue they disagreed on.

The people that elected the Ted Cruzs' to Congress elected them BECAUSE they said they would fight to get rid of ACA. They put those obstructionist in congress for the very purpose of trying to stop it.
So it isn't Ted Cruz the renegade. It is America not being as onboard with the ACA as those in favor of it need them to be to avoid pushback.

Ted Cruz is more of a leader than Mitch McConnel if they are both to be believed when they say ACA is bad for America. Ted Cruz stayed true to the fight, McConnel sold out the fight for the inclusion of 2 billion dollars of pork for his state put into the Bill to raise the debt limit. That 2 billion sure as hell isn't to pay back existing debt is it?

[callmeslick]

in a perfect situation, Will, the leadership should be in the presentation during the campaign. It would be really nice to see some campaigns focused on how much government vs how much taxation the voters wish to live with. For a brief time, I hoped that last Presidential race might turn into something like that, but it didn't happen. Far too often, politicians, under pressure from 'sound bite' political ads, are reluctant to have such a discourse, knowing that what they say about the downsides will be played back over and over.

[woodchip]

in a perfect situation, Will, the leadership should be in the presentation during the campaign. It would be really nice to see some campaigns focused on how much government vs how much taxation the voters wish to live with. For a brief time, I hoped that last Presidential race might turn into something like that, but it didn't happen. Far too often, politicians, under pressure from 'sound bite' political ads, are reluctant to have such a discourse, knowing that what they say about the downsides will be played back over and over.

This is where real impartial moderators who ask the hard questions instead of of sucking up to one side like Candy Ass Crowley did.

[callmeslick]

the debates are, and have been, a dog and pony show anyway. Singling out Crowley, or anyone else for 'bias' or other criticisms is, to my mind, just more sheeplike adherence to what your handlers have been telling you on the right wing blogosphere.

[woodchip]

the debates are, and have been, a dog and pony show anyway. Singling out Crowley, or anyone else for 'bias' or other criticisms is, to my mind, just more sheeplike adherence to what your handlers have been telling you on the right wing blogosphere.

Don't follow blogs like you do. I watched the debates and thankfully could make up my own mind.

[woodchip]

good read.......adios GOP?:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... op/280637/

A more telling report from of all places the ultra left wing Daily Beast. Don't count out the GOP just yet:

Peter Beinart : If this is Republican surrender, I hope I never see Republican victory.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... ctory.html

Still feel like gloating? (waits to hear from slick how Beinart is really a idiot with no credentials)

[CobGobbler]

Your mind wasn't already made up when you watched the debates woodchip? I'm getting tired of this 'must be a winner and loser' with every single thing. Just get back to work and dont be fooled into thinking it's all gravy again. The same fight will be had again in three months.

[Tunnelcat]

Something else that frosts me about Republicans, the government shutdown and the ACA. THEY wanted the mandate, then THEY DIDN'T want the mandate. So they shut down the government, all to throw a fit after changing their minds.

http://americablog.com/2013/10/original ... ndate.html

The Dems helped Bushie implement HIS Medicare Part D, despite not liking it one little bit, while the Republicans have fought tooth and nail against the ACA and Obama ever since it got voted into law. Unprincipled hypocrites and obstinate no compromisers.