AverageAmericanGuy: I wouldn't say it's the entire Republican party or even all Republicans in Congress.

The House is certainly described correctly. Boehner has done great damage to bipartisanship and civility in his tenure as Speaker. He has driven the House Repubs to extreme positions of opposition against Obama and the Democrats and driven a wedge between the parties.

The Senate still maintains at least the outward appearance of cooperation and statesmanship, but as the states decided that electing Senators by consensus is better than selecting them by agreement, the quality of Senators has plummeted to little more than glorified Representatives. Still, the Senate isn't quite as bad as the House in regards to civility.

Worst of all, as long as Boehner and the Republicans run the House, and as long as Obama is still President, this will go on. So if you don't like it, you either vote the House Republicans out completely (not likely given the statistical likelihood of forcing them all out at once) or vote Obama out (much more plausible, statistically).

The choice is yours, libs.

Yeah, Libs. The choice is yours. This is all YOUR fault. Unless you get rid of that negro president you all voted for then all us in the GOP are gonna keep pounding our dicks in America's ass.

Douche-twat!

meat0918: We have conservatives booing Bill Nye because he told them the fact is that the moon is a reflector, not a primary light source.

And we have liberals burning down buildings because some eco wacko thought it would be a bad idea to build a house in a certain location.

Dumbasses to the right, dumbasses to the left and we all pretend that the other side is exactly like 'them'.

"So vote Republican?"

Cold day in Hell.

Baz744: Biased liberals are biased. Their book completely fails to discuss how extremist liberals are also ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, indifferent to facts and evidence, and crippling our constitutional system.

NSIS, but I invite you to cite some evidence of liberal extremism in contemporary America and its effects, so that we may discuss this further.

Lenny_da_Hog: Baz744: Biased liberals are biased. Their book completely fails to discuss how extremist liberals are also ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, indifferent to facts and evidence, and crippling our constitutional system. How can we take seriously such an obviously partisan hit piece? Would be more credible with a balanced presentation.

Good thing there are only about 14 extremist liberals in the US.

If you don't believe everything the corporate media shiates into your TV, especially about how that consolidated oligopoly is the liberal media, then you are an extremist liberal.
I hope there are more than 14 but sometimes that seems like a plausible count.

Mrbogey: Yes, I get it. It's an election year.

// So we have to see "Republicans are the worst they've ever been" articles
// Next is the "Why can't they be like that guy we hated back in the day" articles


AHEM...



In case you haven't noticed, the Dems have shifted to a Third Way policy that incorporates a lot of free market principles. The GOP response has been to shift further to the libertarian fringe. This has seen the GOP become more extremist and absolutist and unwilling to compromise.

They're so uncompromising that the whole lot of GOP candidates said they wouldn't accept a deficit reduction bill that contained $10 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases.

Let's be honest here, they've completely lost their shiat.

HeadLever: meat0918: We have conservatives booing Bill Nye because he told them the fact is that the moon is a reflector, not a primary light source.

And we have liberals burning down buildings because some eco wacko thought it would be a bad idea to build a house in a certain location.

Dumbasses to the right, dumbasses to the left and we all pretend that the other side is exactly like 'them'.

Oh, don't get me started on how some of the extreme left ignore science, but different parts of the scientific world.

If I have to deal with one more woo filled Indigo Mom touting her tantruming asshole kid as the savior of humanity, I'm gonna lose it.

The difference, as of right now, is we don't have liberals trying to make it a crime to teach science and only science in state legislature and school board after state legislature and school board.

Calmamity: The media is just as much to blame for acting like the batsh*t insane crap coming out of the Republicans is equal to and deserves the same treatment in the press as what the Democrats are saying.

exactly. what they need to do is call it for what it is. outrageous bullshiat. when these derpmongers come on the Sunday talk shows they should be treated with disdain and scorn.

Omahawg: oh, i wouldn't either. ike was more of a liberal (in the old sense, not the witchhunt blasphemy it became during the 90s).

In some ways (taxes) yes. In other ways (careful spending and foreign policy), not really. Overall, he was a moderate conservative, IMO.

Dusk-You-n-Me: DeltaPunch: whether we admit it or not, the conservatives in the country are effectively winning."

bugontherug: I'd say they're winning by moving public policy discussion so ridiculously far to the right.

More from my previous link.

So, even as the Republicans have moved hard to the right, the Democrats protect the status quo. Which, with each passing year, has moved farther right. Basically, Republicans enact their agenda and it becomes the status quo. Then the Democrats come along and protect what they've done. That becomes the center. At which point the Republicans call the Democrats communists and move even farther right. The Dems are "hardly blameless" alright.

She goes on to talk about how Simpson-Bowles very quickly became the center.

The Democratic Party doesn't really bear the blame for the far right's success in moving public policy discussion so far to the right. The insinuation that they are is ridiculous. What you're describing is exactly the behavior you'd expect of a left party when the center shifts to the right. Of course they shift to the right to adjust to the new center, lest they become politically irrelevant. I suppose your solution is to stop voting Democrat, so that the Republicans can implement even more right wing policy. Amirite?

Politicians aren't to be blamed for being politicians. The real question is, why have right wing institutions been so successful at moving the political center to the right? Part of the answer is "money." The right naturally enjoys better financing than the left. But that was true even during liberalism's zenith, so it's not the whole answer.

I see the right-wingers are out waving false equivalencies

meat0918: but different parts of the scientific world.

Yep, the one that contradicts their world view. Look hard enough and the retard right and loony left are actually pretty close together.

HeadLever: meat0918: but different parts of the scientific world.

Yep, the one that contradicts their world view. Look hard enough and the retard right and loony left are actually pretty close together.

It's more of a circle than straight line, isn't it.

Dusk-You-n-Me:
We need a real left in this country.

We do. But we don't accomplish that by sitting on our thumbs, or throwing away our votes on third parties, and letting the Republicans win. Rather, we accomplish that by figuring out how the right has been so successful in moving policy discussion to the right, and imitating that. It may sound disgusting, but you have to realize that in addition to money, part of how the right has been so successful has been by imitating the early-to-mid 20th century far left. They've adopted so many of their methods it's hilarious.

doglover: democracy has always been about name calling and general schisming.

But just a few decades ago the animosity was limited to the floors of Congress. It was said that reps from across the aisle would say the most horrible things about each other during sessions, but would then go out for beers afterwards. The rancor wasn't genuine, but part of the political theatre.

Now? They actually hate each other.

bugontherug: Politicians aren't to be blamed for being politicians. The real question is, why have right wing institutions been so successful at moving the political center to the right? Part of the answer is "money." The right naturally enjoys better financing than the left. But that was true even during liberalism's zenith, so it's not the whole answer.

The problem has historically been that the Democrats have had huge variation in party membership and little party discipline to push through legislation because they couldn't get their fringe members to vote for it. The Bush years have hardened the Democrats and they now have a workable party unity that speaks with one voice.

On the other hand, the Republicans have consistently had strong party unity and discipline, being able to force through legislation almost at will. The rise of the Tea Party has broken this at a fundamental level and the power center of the Republican party has shifted significantly with the old guard giving up quite a bit of ground to the new radicalized Right. Boehner is using the new power center to block legislation, but it's doubtful he could ever lead the Republicans in creating new legislation that could pass by force of majority party alone.

If the Democrats were smart, they'd be focused on taking back the House and winning a super majority there, eliminating the Republican powerbase there completely. Then they could negotiate with the Senate on an equal footing, and with a Democrat in the White House, push through what they want.

They won't, because all they care about are their pet issues to the detriment of the party as a whole, but they should.

DeltaPunch: whether we admit it or not, the conservatives in the country are effectively winning.

Thank you, Wimp Lo.

Baz744: Biased liberals are biased. Their book completely fails to discuss how extremist liberals are also ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, indifferent to facts and evidence, and crippling our constitutional system. How can we take seriously such an obviously partisan hit piece? Would be more credible with a balanced presentation.

I thought that the sarcasm in this post was obvious, but apparently not, so...

He's being sarcastic.

Lackofname: DeltaPunch: "the fact is we've been getting more and more conservative as a nation over the past few decades -- whether we admit it or not, the conservatives in the country are effectively winning."

[Citation needed]

You just need to look at all the supposedly conservative politicians facing primary challengers in recent elections (Olympia Snowe resigning, etc.). Here is some more long-term evidence:


(538, exit polling)




(voteview)

This last plot shows that today "moderate" Republicans are as conservative as the extreme conservatives were back in 1980, which is actually pretty good visual representation of the oft-quoted line that "even Reagan would be driven out of his party today".

Nadie_AZ: Gyrfalcon: Baz744: Biased liberals are biased. Their book completely fails to discuss how extremist liberals are also ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, indifferent to facts and evidence, and crippling our constitutional system. How can we take seriously such an obviously partisan hit piece? Would be more credible with a balanced presentation.

Well, okay. Here's your forum, bring it on.

I want to hear this, too.

"ideological extreme" - because we care about people less fortunate than ourselves and want to make people who can easily afford to do so pay a little more in taxes

"scornful of compromise" - because we don't want to compromise on a woman's right to control her own body

"indifferent to facts and evidence" - because we tend to agree with the overwhelming amount of scientific evidence on global warming

"crippling our constitutional system" - because we want to get big money out of politics

Dusk-You-n-Me: bugontherug: I suppose your solution is to stop voting Democrat, so that the Republicans can implement even more right wing policy. Amirite?

I don't know what made you think this from what I posted but no, you are not rite.

bugontherug: The real question is, why have right wing institutions been so successful at moving the political center to the right? Part of the answer is "money." The right naturally enjoys better financing than the left. But that was true even during liberalism's zenith, so it's not the whole answer.

Money is a big part of it. A conservative leaning media is another. I would count the marriage of religion and politics as number three. It's a mess, to be sure. And I don't think there's a single, quick, or easy solution.

Sorry. Misread you. Thought you were making a left version of the "both sides are bad" argument, with your conclusion being "throw away your vote on a third party."

Nadie_AZ: Gyrfalcon: Baz744: Biased liberals are biased. Their book completely fails to discuss how extremist liberals are also ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, indifferent to facts and evidence, and crippling our constitutional system. How can we take seriously such an obviously partisan hit piece? Would be more credible with a balanced presentation.

Well, okay. Here's your forum, bring it on.

I want to hear this, too.

Something tells me we'll be waiting one hell of a long time.

Dusk-You-n-Me: bugontherug: I suppose your solution is to stop voting Democrat, so that the Republicans can implement even more right wing policy. Amirite?

I don't know what made you think this from what I posted but no, you are not rite.

bugontherug: The real question is, why have right wing institutions been so successful at moving the political center to the right? Part of the answer is "money." The right naturally enjoys better financing than the left. But that was true even during liberalism's zenith, so it's not the whole answer.

Money is a big part of it. A conservative leaning media is another. I would count the marriage of religion and politics as number three. It's a mess, to be sure. And I don't think there's a single, quick, or easy solution.

I think that they have just adopted a PR strategy closer akin to the methods of the corporate world (who would have thunk it) They distort, frame, and most effectively, emphasize talking points. So much of it is so simplistic that it's almost insulting but it works for folk who don't really follow politics.

Lackofname: DeltaPunch: "the fact is we've been getting more and more conservative as a nation over the past few decades -- whether we admit it or not, the conservatives in the country are effectively winning."

[Citation needed]

Hate to say it, but it is kinda true. Your guess is as good as any why this dynamic is the way it is. Media influence? Election fundraising methods favoring a biased pool of candidates ? Actual voter preference?

The citation would be an observation that a 'generic Republican' of 1970 would be a middle-of-the-road Democrat today. (Or vice-versa: Today's Democrats are like Republicans of 40 years ago)

In the 70's, Republican President gave us the EPA. Another Republican President signed the Clean Air Act.

In the 90's, a Democratic President gave us Welfare Reform and eliminated Glass-Stegall. Now, we've got onerous personal bankruptcy laws, CISPA/SOPA, Patriot Act ... These Democrats are governing to the *right* of any Republican in the 1970's.

Just some big landmark things off the top of my head. I'm for Obama, so far he's given me about a third of what I want -- disappointing, but is a damn sight better than the nothingburger that Romney would give me.

Baz744: Biased liberals are biased. Their book completely fails to discuss how extremist liberals are also ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, indifferent to facts and evidence, and crippling our constitutional system. How can we take seriously such an obviously partisan hit piece? Would be more credible with a balanced presentation.

I am in disbelief at how many bites you got. I'd say good job, but I really don't think you've earned it.

Of course, for anyone in the mainstream media, it's forbidden to stop pretending that Democrats and Republicans always have equally valid views about every issue.

Mavent: DeltaPunch: whether we admit it or not, the conservatives in the country are effectively winning.

Thank you, Wimp Lo.
[i297.photobucket.com image 574x650]

Hey I don't like it, but the fact is this country is getting redder (did you pay attention to 2010?). The most frustrating part is that the right is simultaneously getting more batsh*t insane while convincing more of their base to turn out.

So vote Republican?

Well yeah. They'll take away funding for NPR, and then they'll stop reporting on extremism in Congress. Boom, problem solved.

AverageAmericanGuy: bugontherug: Politicians aren't to be blamed for being politicians. The real question is, why have right wing institutions been so successful at moving the political center to the right? Part of the answer is "money." The right naturally enjoys better financing than the left. But that was true even during liberalism's zenith, so it's not the whole answer.

The problem has historically been that the Democrats have had huge variation in party membership and little party discipline to push through legislation because they couldn't get their fringe members to vote for it. The Bush years have hardened the Democrats and they now have a workable party unity that speaks with one voice.

This is true on the grassroots level too. The Bush years made me mean. Conservatives' fanatical, unflagging support for such a psychologically disturbed, cynical president convinced me that they're actually bad people. Nothing I've seen in the Obama years has made me question that conclusion.

If the Democrats were smart, they'd be focused on taking back the House and winning a super majority there, eliminating the Republican powerbase there completely. Then they could negotiate with the Senate on an equal footing, and with a Democrat in the White House, push through what they want.

They won't, because all they care about are their pet issues to the detriment of the party as a whole, but they should.

Given the current political climate, I don't think any important progressive legislation will pass without a Senate supermajority. Legislatively, I think the Democrats are better off with a supermajority there than the House.

This is a very powerful and accurate statement:

"One of the two major parties, the Republican Party, has become an insurgent outlier - ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition,"

While I have my own opinions on a matter, I at least have the ability to understand and empathize with the position of someone opposite of me is. I may disagree someone, but I almost never dismiss a statement based on my view of who is speaking. I study the subject matter and create my argument based on facts, policy and personal beliefs and always with the understanding that I could be wrong.

Being open to new information to make a rational decision isn't a weakness. It's a huge strength. It's what allows we capitalists, or better yet humans, to adapt to our surroundings.

Mrbogey: Yes, I get it. It's an election year.

// So we have to see "Republicans are the worst they've ever been" articles
// Next is the "Why can't they be like that guy we hated back in the day" articles

No, you really don't "have to". You can continue to willfully ignore reality and substitute it with something that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Cubicle Jockey: doglover: democracy has always been about name calling and general schisming.

But just a few decades ago the animosity was limited to the floors of Congress. It was said that reps from across the aisle would say the most horrible things about each other during sessions, but would then go out for beers afterwards. The rancor wasn't genuine, but part of the political theatre.

Now? They actually hate each other.

Yeah, I've heard tales of old time Congress critters talk about this, too. Heck, after work, members from both sides would be on the same bowling league, and hammer out details for the next day between frames. Now, if you are even seenin public together, the Tea Party / Fox News extremists will hav our head.

bugontherug: Given the current political climate, I don't think any important progressive legislation will pass without a Senate supermajority. Legislatively, I think the Democrats are better off with a supermajority there than the House.

The House represents the will of the people, and a majority there is a strong signal that the will of the people has shifted and the Senate should follow suit. Besides, the House seats are up for reelection every 2 years, so this is a battle that can be fought frequently and success much more likely than Senate seats which only come up every 6 years.

StopLurkListen: Lackofname: DeltaPunch: "the fact is we've been getting more and more conservative as a nation over the past few decades -- whether we admit it or not, the conservatives in the country are effectively winning."

[Citation needed]

Hate to say it, but it is kinda true. Your guess is as good as any why this dynamic is the way it is. Media influence? Election fundraising methods favoring a biased pool of candidates ? Actual voter preference?

The citation would be an observation that a 'generic Republican' of 1970 would be a middle-of-the-road Democrat today. (Or vice-versa: Today's Democrats are like Republicans of 40 years ago)

In the 70's, Republican President gave us the EPA. Another Republican President signed the Clean Air Act.

In the 90's, a Democratic President gave us Welfare Reform and eliminated Glass-Stegall. Now, we've got onerous personal bankruptcy laws, CISPA/SOPA, Patriot Act ... These Democrats are governing to the *right* of any Republican in the 1970's.

Just some big landmark things off the top of my head. I'm for Obama, so far he's given me about a third of what I want -- disappointing, but is a damn sight better than the nothingburger that Romney would give me.

OK, you mean actual voting habits.

There's evidence that as a whole on many issues the country is moving Left (based on polls, etc). Including issues like Gay marriage, where the country (and especially the under 40) are moving in a more liberal direction.

Yet conservatives are elected more.

I forget where I saw it but the breakdown was that the country is 40 Conservative, 30 Independent, 20 Liberal, 10 No Farking Clue. So, wiht a higher majority of conservatives, more conservatives get elected. But that doesn't explain "Why are they more conservative".

It's simple really. In General, people look at two opposite things, and then go with somewhere in the middle, because "both sides are equally likely to be wrong/right". You'll likely get this a lot with independents. Conservatives push further right, and Democrats, trying to seem willing to compromise or trying to get the independents, also go right. So as both parties move to the right, the general public staying between the two still gets more conservative.

To give an illustration, let's say on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being Commies and 10 being Fascists, in the 70s you could say that the Democrats were a 3 and the Republicans were a 6, with the public falling somewhere along 4.5 Then 20 years ago, the Dems were 4 and the Republicans a 7, with the public at 5.5 Now, the Dems are a 6 and the Republicans are a 9 with the public at 7.5.

HellRaisingHoosier: Being open to new information to make a rational decision isn't a weakness. It's a huge strength.

It's a human strength, but it is death for a political party. A party that can't maintain discipline will always be torn to shreds by the one that can.

Mrbogey: Yes, I get it. It's an election year.

we've been saying this same shiat since well before 2012

Tremolo: Baz744: Biased liberals are biased. Their book completely fails to discuss how extremist liberals are also ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, indifferent to facts and evidence, and crippling our constitutional system. How can we take seriously such an obviously partisan hit piece? Would be more credible with a balanced presentation.

I am in disbelief at how many bites you got. I'd say good job, but I really don't think you've earned it.


It's that he didn't try so hard that caused me to bite, I reluctantly confess. The above passage is downright eloquent compared to the usual crap from the mods' troll alts.

I vote on the basis of who has most recently wronged me to the greatest extent; if there's malice towards my wealthy associates, I vote Democratic. If I'm upset at women because I'm a social pariah, I vote Republican. Either way, I vote against, not for, something.

snowshovel: Yeah, I've heard tales of old time Congress critters talk about this, too.

A bunch retired because of it. Even though they were put on opposite sides of things while they were senators Bob Dole and Patrick Moynihan were great and close friends, Dole delivered the eulogy at Moynihan's funeral. They could disagree on things, but there was also a lot they agreed on, where it would never occur to them to not see eye to eye.

Snatch Bandergrip: It's that he didn't try so hard that caused me to bite, I reluctantly confess. The above passage is downright eloquent compared to the usual crap from the mods' troll alts.

That's impossible! Why, it says right in the FARQ that trolling other Farkers is forbidden, so this could clearly never happen!