Republican Obstructionism Is The Real Scandal That’s Plaguing Washington

[Nilloc]

In practice, we seem to do a pretty good job.

Speak for yourself. As I said, I'd much rather live under the British monarchy from the 1700's than the current system.

And given how many millions of people democratic countries killed in the twentieth century, I don't think I'm the only one who'd say that.

 

[USincognito]

Speak for yourself. As I said, I'd much rather live under the British monarchy from the 1700's than the current system.

Good luck with that.

And given how many millions of people democratic countries killed in the twentieth century, I don't think I'm the only one who'd say that.

By my vague recollection of history, not nearly as many a autocratic countries so I'm still pretty happy living in a liberal democracy where the democratic process (both individual and representative) is tempered by the rule of law.

 

[Nilloc]

Good luck with that.

Good luck with what? It's a preference; no action of mine can bring it about.

By my vague recollection of history, not nearly as many a autocratic countries

That's your defense? They didn't kill as many as other people? I'm sure those living in Japan in 1945 would be real comforted to hear that.

so I'm still pretty happy living in a liberal democracy where the democratic process (both individual and representative) is tempered by the rule of law.

Except that the rule of law is not recognized. It's a lie told to fool people into thinking they actually have liberty and justice. The state breaks they're own laws every single day. They violate someone else's rights constantly. Thousands and thousands of peaceful, non-violent people are in cages for owning a plant the government doesn't like. That's not justice, that' slavery. How about all of America's illegal and immoral wars it's waged in the last hundred years? How does that fit in with the rule of law and recognizing people's rights?

 

[USincognito]

Good luck with what? It's a preference; no action of mine can bring it about.

That's your defense? They didn't kill as many as other people? I'm sure those living in Japan in 1945 would be real comforted to hear that.

Except that the rule of law is not recognized. It's a lie told to fool people into thinking they actually have liberty and justice. The state breaks they're own laws every single day. They violate someone else's rights constantly. Thousands and thousands of peaceful, non-violent people are in cages for owning a plant the government doesn't like. That's not justice, that' slavery. How about all of America's illegal and immoral wars it's waged in the last hundred years? How does that fit in with the rule of law and recognizing people's rights?

Let me ask this before responding. Are you a big fan of a Representative from Texas and when referring to him do you say "Doctor Ron Paul"?

 

[mandelduke]

Republicans even block things that they themselves want done simply because the Democrats want them done as well.

From an outsiders view I would say that Republicans voted into government believe that the people who voted them in are fools.

Get real!

 

[EdwinWillers]

Well it was only a matter of time before someone started a thread to blame Republicans... and for "obstructionism" of all things.

Here's how Democrats define an "obstructionist:"

"When you don't vote for us... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't lie down and let us walk all over you... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't surrender your values to ours... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't surrender your logic to ours... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't agree with us... you're probably being an obstructionist." (and a racist)
"When you don't surrender your will to ours... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't surrender your money to us, voluntarily, eagerly, gleefully... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't surrender what you want to what we want... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't agree our virtues are superior to yours... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't swallow our lies... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you don't believe our propaganda... you're probably being an obstructionist."
"When you think we're nannies, or more accurate, tyrants... you're probably being an obstructionist."
.
.
...there are more, literally thousands more, but perhaps the best (and most succinct) one is

"When you don't do as we say... you're probably being an obstructionist."

Bump for obvious relevancy

 

[Savior2006]

Gosh, it's almost as if CF has a memory hole or something...

Maybe not CF, but key posters who might have a little more problem with race than they are willing to admit.

"Nope. It can't be POSSIBLY be because Democrats and liberals voted for him because he ran as a Democrat and a liberal. It has to be because he was black!"

But it's only liberals who play the race card right?

 

[SharonL]

The race card is old and over used. There is a difference in race and corruption. Race is not in question - corruption is.

 

[Nilloc]

Let me ask this before responding. Are you a big fan of a Representative from Texas and when referring to him do you say "Doctor Ron Paul"?

Yes and no. I don't know what this has to do with anything though.

 

[Savior2006]

The race card is old and over used.

Race is only overused and old when liberals bring it up. It seems to be okay for conservatives to say that Obama got elected because he was black.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Race is only overused and old when liberals bring it up. It seems to be okay for conservatives to say that Obama got elected because he was black.

Conservatives repeat what Obama supporters assert - that they voted for him because he was black; conservatives call that racism, and we're called racist for for saying Obama was elected because he was black.

The spin is truly dizzying.

 

[stamperben]

Conservatives repeat what Obama supporters assert - that they voted for him because he was black; conservatives call that racism, and we're called racist for for saying Obama was elected because he was black.

The spin is truly dizzying.

Yes indeed, but the spin is absolutely terrifying! Although I voted for Obama because of the plain fact he was not a Republican, yes, there were some who voted for him because he was black. But do not forget the other side of this coin, there were those who did not vote for him because he was black. Just as in other elections there are voters who will vote for a candidate based on party alone, much as I did, the bottom line is your side lost. In other words, the race issue was a wash.

 

[Savior2006]

Conservatives repeat what Obama supporters assert - that they voted for him because he was black;

How many Obama supporters assert that? Need I remind you that previous Democratic voters were GOING to vote for him more likely than not. A lot of people out there simply dislike Republicans, think they're full of crap, and are not going to vote for them. My family is like that, and comments like yours don't ever convince us to change our minds.

The spin is truly dizzying.

Yes, YOUR spin is absolutely dizzying. And as Stamp said, it cuts both ways. McCain's campaign had many supporters who were absolutely racist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjxzmaXAg9E


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YIq5Q15L1o

Romney's campaign was much better than McCain's. I will give the man credit for that.

 

[JCSr]

I voted for Obama because of the plain fact he was not a Republican,

This for me.

It could have been a female Eskimo and I would have voted for her over Rmoney.

Yet we will still have the republicans telling us why we voted for Obama because they believe they have some kind of clue about us.

 

[Savior2006]

This for me.

It could have been a female Eskimo and I would have voted for her over Rmoney.

Yet we will still have the republicans telling us why we voted for Obama because they believe they have some kind of clue about us.

I just wish their clue was somewhat accurate and not based on projection.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Yes indeed, but the spin is absolutely terrifying! Although I voted for Obama because of the plain fact he was not a Republican, yes, there were some who voted for him because he was black. But do not forget the other side of this coin, there were those who did not vote for him because he was black. Just as in other elections there are voters who will vote for a candidate based on party alone, much as I did, the bottom line is your side lost. In other words, the race issue was a wash.

Well it might be "a wash" if you could demonstrate the numbers of those who *did* vote for him vs. those who didn't strictly because he was black were the same. Until then, positing an equal number of possible reasons on both sides does not an equation make.

I still maintain the only side of this issue who think race matters, who point to his race whenever objections are raised against the man, his beliefs, his ideology, his background, his affiliations, his friends, his philosophy, his voting record.... whatever - the accusation crops up 100% of the time that we are racist for opposing him, for questioning any of the above. 100% Ben. And *we* are the ones being accused in the very same breath of being "racist."

WE DON'T CARE WHAT THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN IS!!! OK? I oppose everything he stands for, his ideology, his philosophy, his politics, his absurdly obvious lies, his affiliations, and yes, the fact that he spends more time campaigning and playing golf than he does with his pretense as president of the United States and his promise to uphold the Constitution.

If that makes me a racist, fine - the word has completely lost all meaning anyway.

 

[EdwinWillers]

This for me.

It could have been a female Eskimo and I would have voted for her over Rmoney.

Yet we will still have the republicans telling us why we voted for Obama because they believe they have some kind of clue about us.

Again with the strawmen.

 

[JCSr]

Again with the strawmen.

At this point I am convinced that you have no idea what a straw man is.

 

[Savior2006]

Well it might be "a wash" if you could demonstrate the numbers of those who *did* vote for him vs. those who didn't strictly because he was black were the same. Until then, positing an equal number of possible reasons on both sides does not an equation make.

I still maintain the only side of this issue who think race matters, who point to his race whenever objections are raised against the man, his beliefs, his ideology, his background, his affiliations, his friends, his philosophy, his voting record.... whatever - the accusation crops up 100% of the time that we are racist for opposing him, for questioning any of the above. 100% Ben.

We can't help that. Some people rare going to have some BS excuses for criticism. We can't help that. Every time anyone said anything about Palin, how she struggled with interviews and took no responsibility for her mistakes, people on the right went on and on about "ZOMG you guyz are soo afraaddd of her." Every time anyone criticized Bush for his expansions of gov't, GarfieldJL comes out and accuses them of having "derangement syndrome."

WE DON'T CARE WHAT THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN IS!!! OK?

If by we, you mean "conservatives" I'd have to disagree. Some do care. Some don't.

I oppose everything he stands for, his ideology, his philosophy, his politics, his absurdly obvious lies, his affiliations, and yes, the fact that he spends more time campaigning and playing golf than he does with his pretense as president of the United States and his promise to uphold the Constitution.

Obama had to campaign same as everyone else, and give me a break with the stupid golf crap. Seriously. If he flew kites instead you'd be complaining about that.

If that makes me a racist, fine - the word has completely lost all meaning anyway.

Nope. Still has the same meaning.

 

[stamperben]

Well it might be "a wash" if you could demonstrate the numbers of those who *did* vote for him vs. those who didn't strictly because he was black were the same. Until then, positing an equal number of possible reasons on both sides does not an equation make.

I still maintain the only side of this issue who think race matters, who point to his race whenever objections are raised against the man, his beliefs, his ideology, his background, his affiliations, his friends, his philosophy, his voting record.... whatever - the accusation crops up 100% of the time that we are racist for opposing him, for questioning any of the above. 100% Ben. And *we* are the ones being accused in the very same breath of being "racist."

WE DON'T CARE WHAT THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN IS!!! OK? I oppose everything he stands for, his ideology, his philosophy, his politics, his absurdly obvious lies, his affiliations, and yes, the fact that he spends more time campaigning and playing golf than he does with his pretense as president of the United States and his promise to uphold the Constitution.

If that makes me a racist, fine - the word has completely lost all meaning anyway.

No sir. You originally said:

Conservatives repeat what Obama supporters assert - that they voted for him because he was black; conservatives call that racism, and we're called racist for for saying Obama was elected because he was black.

​

It is on YOU to "demonstrate" the numbers.

I will maintain that it was political ideology that won the Office of the President.