Looks like Judd Gregg accepts...

Darla said:
Oh I am so tired of that stupid fucking strawman.

There are NO left wing extremists in government. He has appointed precisely one liberal.

There are a myriad of choices between "suck republican dick" and "appoint only left-wing extremists."

You are so used to decades of democrats sucking republican dick and republicans calling that "bipartisanship" that you believe we should all be equally brainwashed.

Not all of us are.
Click to expand...

Darla,

I think you misunderstood my post.

While I disagree with your assertion that there are no left-wing extremists in our government (I'd consider Barbara Boxer, Bernie Sanders, and many others to be rather extreme in their viewpoints), my point is that it seems many on the left-wing will instinctively shun any appointee who isn't a purely liberal, and in the process ignore their experience/qualifications for the position. This is putting politics over principle and Lord knows we've had enough of that.

I didn't vote for Obama (I held my nose and voted for McShame), but I'm thrilled that he is working from the center and making appointments in the best interest of the American people, even if it means losing his "base." I am a bit puzzled as to why you insist on attacking me.
 
Tabasco said:
Darla,

I think you misunderstood my post.

While I disagree with your assertion that there are no left-wing extremists in our government (I'd consider Barbara Boxer, Bernie Sanders, and many others to be rather extreme in their viewpoints), my point is that it seems many on the left-wing will instinctively shun any appointee who isn't a purely liberal, and in the process ignore their experience/qualifications for the position. This is putting politics over principle and Lord knows we've had enough of that.

I didn't vote for Obama (I held my nose and voted for McShame), but I'm thrilled that he is working from the center and making appointments in the best interest of the American people, even if it means losing his "base." I am a bit puzzled as to why you insist on attacking me.
Click to expand...

The commerce department is a political post. You cannot act as if decisions are merely what is "right" and "wrong" and ideology plays no part. A paper-pusher in the lower departments should be appointed on who pushes paper best; the commerce department should be run by the person who best represent the liberal ideology America voted for when it denounced the evil conservatives in the recent elections. This is not liberal vs. conservative, this is good vs. evil, and we can't afford to let some evil into the cabinent, not one ounce.
 
Watermark said:
The commerce department is a political post. You cannot act as if decisions are merely what is "right" and "wrong" and ideology plays no part. A paper-pusher in the lower departments should be appointed on who pushes paper best; the commerce department should be run by the person who best represent the liberal ideology America voted for when it denounced the evil conservatives in the recent elections. This is not liberal vs. conservative, this is good vs. evil, and we can't afford to let some evil into the cabinent, not one ounce.
Click to expand...

lol okay. Yeah I really bet the driving force behind Obama's election was the average American's love of ideological liberalism.
 
Tabasco said:
Darla,

I think you misunderstood my post.

While I disagree with your assertion that there are no left-wing extremists in our government (I'd consider Barbara Boxer, Bernie Sanders, and many others to be rather extreme in their viewpoints), my point is that it seems many on the left-wing will instinctively shun any appointee who isn't a purely liberal, and in the process ignore their experience/qualifications for the position. This is putting politics over principle and Lord knows we've had enough of that.

I didn't vote for Obama (I held my nose and voted for McShame), but I'm thrilled that he is working from the center and making appointments in the best interest of the American people, even if it means losing his "base." I am a bit puzzled as to why you insist on attacking me.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, that's ridiculous.

The right is famous for rejecting any idea and/or politician that does not conform to its ideology. Any illusion of too much bipartisanship puts such a person on the outside .. ask John McCain who had to struggle to get back into the conservative fold .. and still was never fully accepted.

Your views are purely partisan on this.

Further, politics is about conflict .. and to pretend otherwise demonstrates ignorance of the basic nature of politics.

Centrists politics are for losers .. and republicans don't practice it, don't even preach it. Sure, you're happy to see it now because you're on the right, but when the right is in control .. and given your partisan speak .. I'm betting you want a conservative agenda followed, not centrist politics.
 
Epicurus said:
lol okay. Yeah I really bet the driving force behind Obama's election was the average American's love of ideological liberalism.
Click to expand...


The antiwar faction, African-Americans, women, youth, liberal and progressive whites .. I'll take that bet .. and raise you that I'm betting the driving force behind Obama was not the average American's love of conservatism.
 
blackascoal said:
With all due respect, that's ridiculous.

The right is famous for rejecting any idea and/or politician that does not conform to its ideology. Any illusion of too much bipartisanship puts such a person on the outside .. ask John McCain who had to struggle to get back into the conservative fold .. and still was never fully accepted.

Your views are purely partisan on this.

Further, politics is about conflict .. and to pretend otherwise demonstrates ignorance of the basic nature of politics.

Centrists politics are for losers .. and republicans don't practice it, don't even preach it. Sure, you're happy to see it now because you're on the right, but when the right is in control .. and given your partisan speak .. I'm betting you want a conservative agenda followed, not centrist politics.
Click to expand...

Sorry to break it to you, but Obama ran as a centrist/moderate. What else did you expect once he got into office? Sure, he has voted on the left, but he is not a left-wing idealogue and never claimed to be.

You're right - I am not in favor of bipartisanship; that's part of the reason we got the biggest increase in the size and scope of government in American history during the past eight years. Bush was a wuss. But Obama ran as a bipartisan candidate, so I'm puzzled as to why you're surprised at what you got. I assume you voted for him, correct?
 
Last edited:
Tabasco said:
Sorry to break it to you, but Obama ran as a centrist/moderate. What else did you expect once he got into office? Sure, he has voted on the left, but he is not a left-wing idealogue and never claimed to be.

You're right - I am not in favor of bipartisanship; that's part of the reason we got the biggest increase in the size and scope of government in American history during the past eight years. Bush was a wuss. But Obama ran as a bipartisan candidate, so I'm puzzled as to why you're surprised at what you got. I assume you voted for him, correct?
Click to expand...

I voted for Obama .. NO.

Why .. Because I knew he was a centrist, thus a pussy. I stated that here long before the election.

Thus my brother, I'm not surprised one bit that things are turning out exactly as I predicted .. but "surprise" wasn't in my comment to you. My comment to you dealt with you looking out the window pointing fingers at the left when you should be looking in the mirror looking for what's wrong with your own side of the political fence. That reflection is ugly as hell.

" ... my point is that it seems many on the left-wing will instinctively shun any appointee who isn't a purely liberal, and in the process ignore their experience/qualifications for the position. This is putting politics over principle and Lord knows we've had enough of that"
Click to expand...

How do you make that statement with a straight face and ignore the republican brand of shunning those who don't goosestep to orders?

Obama not being a "left-wing ideologue" is no surprise to me, but that isn't the point either. The change Obambi promised turns out to be just more of the same weak-kneed democratic politics .. by the way, I ain't a democrat either .. not a republican .. not a centrist. I'm a socialist .. but before you start telling me that Obambi isn't a socialist, please save it because that ain't the point either.

The point is Obambi's attempt at "changing the way Washington does business" and his love of increasingly ignorant bipartisanship are doomed to failure. Republicans and the right will never embrace him no matter how much he kisses their ass. They will always be out to destroy him, and frankly, I'm glad this is on stage for all to see.

Obama will need his base to cover his ass, but if he continues to ignore them, he'll be left swinging "hope"lessly in the wind.

Bipartisanship is no substitue for good policy.

That's my point.
 
Last edited:
BAC,

I can see your point, and I definitely respect for your viewpoint. We probably disagree on what constitutes good policy, but I think our motives are one and the same. (In other words, we both want what is best for our country).

My comment to you dealt with you looking out the window pointing fingers at the left when you should be looking in the mirror looking for what's wrong with your own side of the political fence. That reflection is ugly as hell.
Click to expand...

They are on a side of their own. As a paleoconservative, I reject the hypocrisy of the neocon establishment and you can be certain I want them out of my party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top