More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Steven Weber

Steven Weber

Posted: April 3, 2010 09:38 AM

Republicans: the Damned Truth and the Truth Be Damned

What's Your Reaction:

Oh boy. It's like trying to fix a stubborn cowlick while wearing boxing gloves.

Republicans just do not, will not, uh uh, want to cooperate in this little thing called Democracy. Period. And their game plan looks like this:

2010-04-03-noYesses

(Pardon the crude attempt at a Vonnegut-like visual aid.)

The proof that they will never, ever let this president -- this Democratic president -- tell them what's what is that no matter what he posits in terms of fixing all the things Bush broke, things which always could have been improved upon, things which would benefit less fortunate Americans, things which would restore our prestige abroad, which would restore the warmth to the nation's character, the Republicans look at him (and by extension the majority of America) with dead eyes, crossed arms and do absolutely nothing.

No alternative plans, suggestions, advice. No involvement, curiosity, no moments of introspection. Allowing violently disposed fringe elements to steer policy when that job used to be the bailiwick of legislators and operatives schooled in poly-sci. It's an approach that begs the question:

Do Republicans actually like Democracy?

Really. Their strategy seems to be one of complete disdain for the last 200 or so years of that defining American civil exercise. They are behaving as though they've discarded all pretense of caring or participation. Weird.

Ooh! I know! Perhaps the Republicans are playing into some master plan wherein all power is gradually, systematically leeched from the masses and centralized into a snug, capitalistic, corporate version of an aristocracy, keeping The People perpetually strained but entertained by shiny yet easily broken/disposable/replaceable baubles and only minimally involved in the basic running of the country so as to provide the citizenry with an illusion of democratic participation and therefore allowing them to distinguish their lives from that of common, old fashioned serfs.

Nah. That would be too simplistic, too 19th century. But back to today:

Even after realizing that Obama, master of many things they aren't, is also demonstrating a centrist rather than a dreaded leftist approach to governance, in many ways incorporating aspects which they themselves have favored in the past, to put forward his workable agenda as opposed to the armageddon/fascist/socialist dystopia the frothing Republican mouthpieces warned of, they still refuse to play.

Damn vexing! So, what could it be?

Hmm. Could it... is it because... oh, I don't know... is it because he's...

...black?

Nah. That would be too simplistic, too 19th century. Oh. Wait a minute...

 

Follow Steven Weber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@TheStevenWeber

 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,360
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
03:25 PM on 04/10/2010
Johnlorenzo.. here is my response to your latest comment...

you said:

"I feel you are the one confusing what I am saying. Believe in whatever you choose. Just be sure that your belief system is not knowingly causing harm to many others."

I don't believe that my "belief system" (Christianity) is causing harm to others. Are some of it's followers? unfortunately yes. Please don't confuse the two.

This debate started because I stated my belief that Jesus is the only way. And you claimed that that was "judgmental and biased". Are you still saying that this belief (system) is "judgmental and biased"... "causing harm to others"??

Because if so, what you are really saying is that if my beliefs are offensive (which I guess constitues as "causing harm") to others, I should abandon them... right? I should just abandon my faith that governs my entire life, I should just abandon my Creator who sacrificed His Son for me... I should just abandon it if others are offended...? (Oh you WISH liberals.. dream on!)

Do I need to go any further here? And how is this not offensive and disprespectful of my right to believe as I choose???

This IS liberal ignorance and hypocrisy.
04:12 PM on 04/10/2010
You said: "You don't want to, or seem to be unable to, address the points I have brought up. You simply keep yelling, "you hate Christianity," no matter what I say. This shows fear. Why?"

No... it is you who is not addressing my point.. the point that started this debate.. that I am wrong (not my belief but ME) for believing that Jesus is the only way. I've proven that you are wrong and you are ignoring this...

I haven't stated that you "hate Christianity" since you pointed out that your problem is with "right wing" Christians. "This shows fear"? No, this shows avoidance on your part of the issue being debated because you realize that you are wrong. But in typical dishonest liberal fashion you try to turn it around and make it look like I'm the one who is wrong.


You said: "Millions and millions of people don't believe in the same religion you do. And they never will. So what? You live the best life you can and should do so without causing others harm. I believe that includes learning to gracefully deal with the fact that many will continue to take offense when Christians keep getting in their face and insisting that Jesus is the only way, and that they are completely right about it and that is that."
04:17 PM on 04/10/2010
Ok.. but "gracefully dealing with it" is a two way street... your implication was that I was "getting in your face" for stating that I believe that Jesus is the only way. Gracefully dealing with it, for starters, would be understanding that when someone makes a statement of belief.. it is not "getting in your face"... it is making a statement of belief.

And to also understand that statements of belief..ARE assertions that they believe they are right... just as statements of your beliefs are assertions that you believe you are right... grace on your part is needed here... understanding that it is okay to believe that we are right.. just as you believe that you are right. How many times must this be explained to you before you get it??

You said: "It's a tall order to have to really think for yourself. It can create doubt sometimes. And that is probably what so many Christians fear most – that they might have to adjust their thinking. Scary, I know."

It's a "tall order" for liberals to understand that those with opposing views have the same rights to them as they do without automatically being labeled intolerant. And that if you label conservatives intolerant for having a different view than yours.. then the same should apply to you.

It's a "tall order" for many liberals to understand the definition of hypocrisy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnLorenzo
Examine the reasons of your true intent.
01:28 PM on 04/12/2010
kams,

You said: "I don't believe that my "belief system" (Christianity) is causing harm to others. Are some of it's followers? unfortunately yes. Please don't confuse the two."

Oh trust me, I am not the one confused. Conservative Christians have done unbelievable harm to millions over the past decades. They have supported laws to remove choice, equality, and even funding for the sick. Simply because their "religion" tells them to do so. You know this is true. So what do you do about all this hypocrisy you are surrounded by? Do you question your pastor? Do you put down your fellow "Christians" for being narrow-minded and unloving?

You said: "I should just abandon my faith that governs my entire life?"

I never said that. However, I bet you have never seriously given thought to the possibility that your faith is misplaced in some instances. It's called "blind faith." Open eyes can help you become a better person. A truer Christian if you will.

You said: "that I am wrong (not my belief but ME) for believing that Jesus is the only way."

No. What I said was it is offensive to those who don't feel the same. When was the last time a religious liberal came knocking on your door asking you to convert?

(cont.)
02:52 PM on 04/10/2010
Johnagain... in response to you latest comments...

You said: "And Christianity is of course based on a the 'factual' record of the Bible, not just thoughts in your mind."

At least Christianity HAS the record of the Bible... which even though it cannot be proven as fact in some instances, it cannot be disproved either. And in many instances there is corroborating documentation outside of the faith. And also, which you neglected to acknowledge.. the many prophecies that have been realized.

No, sorry... it's not just thoughts in my or anyone else's mind. The Bible has the credentials to back it up.


"The word I used was ignorant. But yes, you are also arrogant."

No, way back in the beginning you commented to someone else about "the arrogance of kams".

I have to say that you have become more & more arrogant (and insulting) as this debate has progressed.

You are proving my point.. it's pride and arrogance that prevents many from humbling themselves and acknowledging God. Your ego & pride are showing in your responses to my points.

I've proven my point to you..and you clearly are not going to acknowledge that.. the point of how wrong you (and Johnlorenzo ) were for labeling me as intolerant etc. for having a view that did not agree with your liberal view....
the extremely ignorant view that my believing that Jesus is the only way is intolerant. Again, you can disagree with my view all you want... that's your right...
02:58 PM on 04/10/2010
I do not call you intolerant for doing so... your's and Johnlorenzo's problem was in calling me intolerant for disagreeing with YOUR biased liberal view.

It's hypocritical ignorance... or as I call it.."Reverse Ignorance"..

http://tothewire.wordpress.com/a-troubling-new-social-ill-reverse-ignorance/



You said: "This perhaps one of the most ridiculous and comical things you've written so far. And you've written so many. Any credible scientist would laugh out loud at the very notion of comparing the 'credentials' (whatever that is supposed to mean) of one religion to another. NONE of them have any factual legitimacy."

Arrogance again...

So, by your reasoning historical books in general have no factual legitimacy. (?)

The Bible is a historical document. There is archeological evidence and documentation of other historians to corroborate much of it.

And are you saying that scientists only work with proven factual information?

Maybe I should have said a group of scientists instead of "a" scientist... the CONSENSUS would be that Christianity has the better credentials.

And speaking of consensus... that Matthew and John were written 150 years later is not....NOT the consensus... could you please state where you got your information from?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnLorenzo
Examine the reasons of your true intent.
01:30 PM on 04/12/2010
(continued from above)

You said: "But in typical dishonest liberal fashion you try to turn it around and make it look like I'm the one who is wrong."

You seem to have the GOP-conservative speak down perfectly. Conservatives can try to spin it around but liberals are not the ones making up "facts" or spreading twisted stories.

You said: "your implication was that I was "getting in your face" for stating that I believe that Jesus is the only way."

No, you are putting words into a different order again. My point was that if any religion's point-of-view comes from the perspective that belief in that religion is the one and only way a person can ever be saved, loved, correct, chosen, etc. that religion has some real problems. A great creator would not have made people so that he/she could hate them simply because they have followed their free will. If these individuals have committed harm or murder, society is the one to punish them. And they should be punished. Humans know that no one can live in a society over-run by hateful, greedy, murderous people.

You said: "It's a "tall order" for many liberals to understand the definition of hypocrisy."

I believe conservatives will never understand where their pious hypocrisy's lie.
12:55 AM on 04/09/2010
Johnagain, here's my response to your most recent comment...

You said: "That is the precise description of the God of the Old Testament."

Could you please quote the verses?

Christians would never call God "petty" and "narrow minded". Those are your words.

You said: "You are simply incapable of thinking on a higher plane than one that asserts 'my view is the only correct one, and everyone else is going to he11 for not believing exactly as I do'. "


You call it a "higher plane"? People who are capable of seeing things from a perspective other than their own call it ignorance.

Now I notice that you are using the word "only". That I am ignorant for believing that my view is the "only" correct one. So, you ARE claiming that there is more than one truth. That's impossible, illogical and unreasonable. There can only be one truth. There is no basis or even a justifiable argument for multiple creators or supreme beings. It doesn't make sense. If you believe that is the case, could you please state what your references are for these "truths"?

cont...
01:06 AM on 04/09/2010
No, logic dictates that there is only ONE Truth. So right away your statement that I am intolerant for believing that my faith is the "only" correct one (with the insinuation that there is more than one truth) is illogical and lacking in common sense.

Now, to further show (again) how ridiculous this view of yours is I will point out (again) that while you are finding me intolerant for believing that my view is the correct one, can I ask if you believe that YOUR view is the correct one? The view that there is more than one "truth"? Do you believe this (your belief) to be true? I would think that you do. That IS what your are insisting I believe and insisting that I am intolerant for not believing. So HOW does that make you any different from me??? You are allowed to think that your view is true... because it's YOUR view I guess, but I am wrong for believing that my view is true.


Your erroneous and HYPOCRITICAL liberal views make no sense!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Johnagain
WTFWJD?
09:27 AM on 04/09/2010
"No, logic dictates that there is only ONE Truth.|"

Then perhaps I need to re-restate my basic premise. I am saying that there is MORE THAN ONE WAY to what a person would consider spiritual enlightenment or 'truth' (heaven, nirvana, salvation, etc). And your way isn't the only one. I'm not saying that there is more than one God, and so I don't also want give the impression that I mean that there is more than one 'truth', in the strict definition of that word. But as I've said before, when I refer to spiritual truth, I don't mean the same thing as something quantifiable or measurable like a scientific truth. What is spiritual truth to you will not be the same as for someone else, simply because what you believe to be spiritually true is a construct of your own individual mind. It does not exist tangibly in the material world in the same way that the moon or Mount Everest does. I say that as a scientist, someone who spends their life measuring and analyzing things in the material world. When you, or my Mother, or the Pope, describe what you believe to be spiritually true, you are not describing anything that can be independently verified. Hence claiming that you've found the one truth is like me claiming that you haven't. We can go back and forth forever on it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Johnagain
WTFWJD?
09:27 AM on 04/09/2010
I for one much prefer to stay in the realm of things that can be tested and verified. That is the real world to me. I find the real world to be quite enough, and in fact infinite in its wonder. The more I learn about the physical world (in my case the nature of cancer and the body's response to it), the more I realize that we don't yet know. And the great thing about science is that it gives us a set of tools and methodologies to actually make a positive difference in the world (or it can be misused). I see science as having provided man far more than any other human endeavor, including those things provided by organized religion. Our extended life spans, our ability to live past childhood diseases, to survive cancer, heart disease, infectious diseases, to feed millions with high yield crops, to fly from one continent to another, to land on the moon, see distant galaxies or subatomic particles, record music and images, stay warm in the winter and cool in the summer, even this computer that we type on, are all the results of science.
09:05 PM on 04/07/2010
All of you must like paying more taxes and working harder for less?
It is coming.Didnt we become free from fighting the oppressive King of the English?
Why would you want more government?
If I work hard and make money why would I want to give it to the government?
If I was to give it all away I would rather give it to my family or ones I loved?
Did we not use to be on top why do we want to do what someone tells us
I dont think America was built on being told what to do?
That is what I see.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Johnagain
WTFWJD?
11:07 PM on 04/07/2010
"Why would you want more government?"

Do you like having police protection, fire protection, EMS on call, public parks, sewers, waste treatment plants, highways and roads, libraries, public schools, county hospitals, federally funded universities and research centers (most medical research in this country is federally funded), courts, prisons, the electrical grid, the air traffic control system, the military, coast guard, embassies and consulates, food inspections, border patrol, etc?

It is no longer 1780. Life in a modern industrialized society requires all of the things mentioned above and more. Back when this nation gained independence, most of those things either didn't exist or were nowhere near as necessary.

Taxes are a fact of modern life. No one likes to pay them, in the same way that no one likes to do laundry or mow the lawn. But it is a requirement. Anti-tax id.iots like you are exactly like a teenager, who while living at home, thinks that they don't need their parents. That is until they move out on their own and find out just how much they relied on them. You have never lived in a part of the world where the things I mentioned above do not exist. I have. The true twisted irony is that you ingrates take all of those things totally for granted, and don't think that you should have to pay for them. You must assume that somebody else is supposed to pay for all that stuff.
04:15 PM on 04/07/2010
Johnlorenzo, this is my response to your last comment ...

It is true, I do believe that liberals (liberalism) is bad for America. I do believe that it is in direct conflict with God's will in so many ways. I understand that others do not agree with me and follow different faiths. And I will defend their right to continue to believe as they choose. But I will also continue to express MY beliefs that I ALSO have a right to. And by doing so, that DOES NOT mean that I am TELLING others what to believe. That is one of the many misconceptions of liberals. No one is forced to discuss religion with me. I desire to debate different beliefs with anyone who wants to. And please note that I used the word "debate". It's a concept that I truly believe liberals cannot comprehend.

Yes, I think it is "bad" to discourage debate. To attack anyone with an opposing belief as intolerant. That is definitely one of the things that I do not like about modern day liberalistic ideology. This belief can actually be characterized as juvenile or immature. It's not logical or reasonable... it's ignorant. It is actually, ironically, intolerance of opposing views. It is the truly ignorant hypocritically calling the non-ignorant.. ignorant. I gave it a name... "reverse ignorance".

http://tothewire.wordpress.com/a-troubling-new-social-ill-reverse-ignorance/

cont...
04:36 PM on 04/07/2010
cont..

To twist my expression of my beliefs as me insisting that everyone believe as I do is also ignorant. I would never expect someone to just believe because I "tell" them to. Who thinks like that??? Liberals apparently because this accusation comes from them all the time.

By you assuming that I am insisting that others believe what I believe just because it is what I believe makes you the ignorant one.

Here is the definition of debate..

de·bate (d-bt)
v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
v.intr.
1. To consider something; deliberate.
2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
3. To engage in a formal discussion or argument


Please note that NO WHERE will you find the word "intolerance".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnLorenzo
Examine the reasons of your true intent.
06:07 PM on 04/07/2010
kams – I am not being "ignorant," or aggressive when I say this: I feel you are very, deeply upset about many things in your life. As a fellow human being it makes me feel bad for you. But no one can make another look at things from a different perspective. You have to somehow do it for yourself.

There is no room here to have the type of debate you think you need. Suffice it to say that because of your opinions, and beliefs, I can tell you have not been engaged in what I call the "broader world." Because you fail to even recognize the most basic of hate and terrors the right-wing Christians have wrought upon the world. This has been mainly towards diverse groups and other religions that have never tried to hurt or eradicate right-wing Christians. But humans can only take so much of this biased hatred. If you feel threatened or not listened to today you can thank all those pious right-wing, judgmental Christians that have fought for years to squash and silence the rest with their laws, denial of equal rights, and beliefs.
02:59 PM on 04/07/2010
Johnagain.. my response to your last comment is below...
02:54 PM on 04/07/2010
I'm soooo glad you posted the definition of intolerance.

Intolerant: adjective; a: unwilling to grant equal freedom of expression especially in religious matters b : unwilling to grant or share social, political, or professional rights

And then you said: "Your stance, that you have found the ONLY path leading to salvation/spiritual enlightenment/'truth' makes you the very embodiment of intolerance."

I'm going to try one more time to "deprogram" you.

How..HOW is stating my belief... MY belief that I have a RIGHT to... how does that translate into my unwillingness to grant equal freedom of expression to others???
I haven't. And I also haven't hurled insults at others for stating their beliefs.. on the contrary I am begging for a debate where I can hear opposing beliefs.. to discuss them. YOU on the other hand have insulted me for not agreeing with your belief.. a distorted belief that everyone's truth is the truth. You are telling me to agree or shut up because I am being intolerant for disagreeing. Incredible!!!

Disagreement does not equal intolerance....please say it with me again... disagreement does NOT equal intolerance.
03:30 PM on 04/07/2010
Someone on F.o.x News, I can't remember who, said this...." tolerance USED to mean respecting the rights of others to believe as they choose... now, somehow, it has come to mean respecting their actual beliefs".

Excuse me... EXCUSE ME PLEASE.. but.. I will NOT respect a "religion" that advocates the killing of non believers. I will NOT respect a "religion" that claims that Jesus is the brother of lucifer. I will NOT respect a "religion" that worships satan. This is twisted liberalistic ideology and it's RE TAR DED!

This IS the aggressive liberal agenda in action...you truly seem to not realize that you've been brainwashed, that you are one of millions of pawns being used to promote corrupt and erroneous liberal ideology. An ideology that attempts to silence those with opposing views. What hypocritical irony that is!

I really don't think you (and many other liberal minded) realize what the true agenda of liberalism is... to stifle or fully eradicate Christianity from society... from the world.
03:38 PM on 04/07/2010
And here's the proof... by you insisting that I agree with YOUR "truth" that all beliefs are "valid"... that automatically discounts me as a Christian. The BASIS of Christianity.. it's FOUNDATION.. is the belief that Jesus died for us to pay for our sins so that we could be with God after we die. Scripture states that Jesus is the ONLY way. So, if I agree with you, I am no longer a Christian...

Disgusting liberal tactics... "agree with us or be labeled intolerant"... which no one wants that social stigma, especially today, due to aggressive liberal tactics that have been going on for years.

Wake up liberals... most of you don't even realize that you are being used. And many of you are serving so well.
11:54 AM on 04/06/2010
I'm a registered Democrat who voted for Gore in 2000. After 9/11 my political world view changed to a more conservative perspective. Many of you may not remember this, but there used to be a thing called conservative Democrats back in the day. Unfortunately, you'd be hard pressed to find any moderate Democrats today, let alone conservative ones. Sadly the moveon.org and left wing fringe have taken over as is evidenced by Mr. Webers simplistic view that all Republicans oppose Obama based on race. There is simply no evidence to back this up. Kind of like the claims that the Tea Partiers spit on members of congress and used the "N" word. There were dozens, if not hundreds of press people w/ tape and film, yet not one cintella of footage to confirm it happened, These baseless claims only serve to distract from the honest and legitimate debate about Obama and his liberal, left-wing policies. The left desn't think he's radical enough, while the right believes (rightly so in my opinion) he is taking this country down a dangerous path of a western european style of democratic socialism. The point is this is an honest and fair debate based on the merits of his ploicies, NOT the color of his skin. I would hope Mr. Weber does a little more substantive and thoughtful research before he fires off his next missive against the "mean and evil Republicans"
12:40 PM on 04/06/2010
If Obama wanted to take our country down the path to European socialism, he would have promoted single-payer health care instead of just tweaking our current system run by the profit motivated insurance industry. Conservatives are unable to even recognize a moderate these days.
02:15 PM on 04/06/2010
You are a clear case in point of the left thinking he's not radical, or left enough. He didn't get the "public option" because of the oppositon with-in his own party, not to mention the the public out-cry. Not becasue he's a moderate. If he could've pushed it through with Obmacare, believe me he would have. Nice try though.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Johnagain
WTFWJD?
02:07 AM on 04/07/2010
Most conservatives in America today have been bombarded for 30 years with so much corporate/fascist propaganda, all of which has pushed them so far to the right, and so far from the realm of rationality, that ANYONE who advocates ANYTHING that impinges in the slightest way on corporate profit is demonized and declared a threat to the very existence of all that we hold dear. There is no room for any kind of debate with these people. Obama is by any pre-Bush II definition, a classic moderate, and yet the Republican 'base' will go to their graves convinced that he is the socialist anti-christ. That is why I think that Obama and the Democrats in Congress just need to tell the Republicans to f' themselves, and do what they have been elected to do, and implement policies that benefit Americans. They need to do this in spite of the ignorance and fear of those same Americans.

I am an elitist, I realize. But in a country where 60% of the population doesn't believe in evolution, I am left with little alternative. Americans are simply too stupid to know what is good for them. The Democrats are tasked, as Bill Maher has said, with dragging the hillbilly half of America into the next century.
11:54 PM on 04/06/2010
I don't know what world you lived in, but there were, indeed conservative Democrats prior to 9/11. Clinton and the DLC was nothing but the conservative Democrats taking control of the party. Clinton took many of the GOP policies and positions and made them his own. NAFTA comes to mind.

As for your claim that no scintillla of evidence. Here is just one video which seems to contradict your argument: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPkjyMhaFOw The fact is that the Tea Partiers were not engaged in the "honest and fair debate" you say is needed. It's not happening because the GOP (and Tea Partiers) automatically oppose anything Obama puts on the table.

You can want to sweep the vitriol of the Tea Partiers and the GOP under the rug, but it won't work. There's way too much evidence to the contrary. Palin's gun sight map. Congressman shouting out "baby killer" on the house floor McCain saying no matter what Obama proposes he's going vote against it. This is an "honest and fair debate" as far as your concerned??

Policies should be the focus of the discussion. The GOP won't do that. They voted (as a block) against HCR even though it contained many policies which (before Obama had supported them) they had touted as solutions. Now that Obama embraced them, those same ideas are "socialism." They've done this time and time again.

So before you fire off an unsubstantiated post, perhaps you should do your research first.
07:24 AM on 04/06/2010
There is only one question that is of importance, are we going to be Americans or not? Americans do not behave like the politicians and political groups are behaving today, regardless if they call them self Democrats, Republicans, Independents, or Tea Party!
07:24 AM on 04/06/2010
This behavior is just the pre-setup for what to come. In the end it will mean the dissolution of the United States of America and the creation of Red and Blue States. The end of being a nation that was envisioned by our founding fathers. It will be a nations of semi dictatorships (red) or liberal democracies (blue) states in the form of a EU. In the end all lose because as a power we stop to exist and - what a surprise the terrorist have won.

In the end, we are our own largest enemy with the behavior of the current Republicans politicians. Instead of finding a common ground it is the old Bush doctrine "Either you are 100% with us and if not you are against us". No room for compromises and logic!

It is up to the citizens to start to realize this behavior and make an end to it. Only they can stop it by demonstrating against such doctrine. In the end we are not Republicans, Democrats, Independent, or any other affiliate. In the end we are Americans and we should start to act like Americans. Unite, find a common ground and make the best out of any situation. We should unite and care about our fellow citizens, regardless who they are, what they can afford, etc.
07:23 AM on 04/06/2010
What Republicans have done over and over again is flip flopping! First they are for it and then when it is convenient against it or vs verse. For them it is all a power game and nothing else.

In the end it is all about how can we get the best for our self regardless of the outcome for the nation. Only a few privileged ones will benefit and the majority will have to pay for it. Unfortunately it is that more people are listening to threats and horror stories and believe them over looking for reality.

The tactics by the Republicans during this congress is not only immoral but dangerous. They are actually the ones that are defeating the US and not any economic downturn or any terrorist. With their action they are finally achieving what the south could not achieve during the civil war. Divide the United States of America. Yes it sounds very radical but it actually is. This time it is again about ideology, not slaves but being an ultra-conservative or not.
03:16 AM on 04/06/2010
I think the fact that he's black is a huge issue for many republicans, but for some it is simply that they hate to be out of power. All they CARE about is power, and maintaining it. They have no ideas for improving the country when they are IN power, other than trying to get as much money into the corporation's pockets and their own. When they are in power they want to destroy government so they can claim that government doesn't work. The one thing that they hate above all else is that we, the people, can still vote. It is the one remaining right that they haven't yet figured out how to manipulate away from us, though they keep trying, the buggers.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
realpolitic
GOP is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing!
02:59 AM on 04/06/2010
Republicans do not accept democracy. Look at when we had the last Democratic president, Republicans first tried to shut down the government and when that did not work they impeached him for a tawdry affair. Then Bush came and smashed everything insight, riding roughshod over the constitution and Obama came in with the foresight and intelligence to clean things up and get the country back on course. He was even prepared to do so while not gloating and to show humility. What did he get for his efforts, but one Republican vote or two on his stimulus package and none for his centrist health care package? Not only that, but Republicans do everything to discredit President Obama from cat-calling that he is a "lair" while he gives the State of the Union address to labeling him a socialist almost each day in the press. Also, many still say he is not even a citizen. Conservatives have no interest in governance, but only have interest in winning. Conversely, because they have no interest in governance their policies are so bad, only helping the top few percent. I am tired of them and yearn for the day when they are a even smaller, regional party in the deep south and then their anger will even more come into play and they will scorch the airwaves with their hatred, vitriol, and resentments.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dobermanmacleod
LENR Ni-H exothermic reaction
02:07 AM on 04/06/2010
Sad to say, the Republicans (i.e. the Republican Party, not those misguided Republican working class voters) will have the last laugh: the recent US Supreme Court decision that allows corporations (even domestic divisions of foreign entities!) to spend unlimited amounts on political campaigns means America is going to become fascist. Yes, that is correct, the Republicans have won, and corporations will eventually run this country.
06:56 PM on 04/05/2010
Oh, Mr. Weber, if what you state were true, President Obama would have no problem getting all the Democrats behind him. Thirteen percent of Democrats voted against the health care bill. Your argument makes no account for their opposition. And if it were as simple as you state, the administration would not need to continue to have to "sell" it to the public. Fox News can't be that good, can it?
photo
jakiew
repugs follow dictators playbook
12:53 AM on 04/06/2010
read j. white post below.
01:26 AM on 04/06/2010
You may want to reconsider your comment. As the article stated President Obama is more of a centrist than a liberal. What is true for the Republicans stands also for the Democrats. President Obama is not liberal enough for them and that is why they are not voting for his policies. President Obama is doing what a president should do, be in the center and not to conservative or to liberal. It is just that the political climate of today will not allow anything that is reasonable or logical. Just ideological!