Discussion: The REPUBLICAN Party XIV

[SV Fan]

Arguably, the Libertarian party is probably the best 3rd party whose ideals represent that.

I think the big problem with the Libertarian party is they have extreme viewpoints on all issues that it will scare off alot of people.

Some people for instance might want to cut government spending but the Libertarian party wants to go to the cleaners.Some people may say hey reduces taxes might make sense but they want to reduce it to 0% and completely reform the tax system

Some people not buy into full out legalization of weed or full out gay marriage and would be more open into slow steps to making both reality.

I think a person who had moderate libertarian views might get alot of support(ie instead of suggesting we go from step A right to step Z right away, maybe suggest going from step A to Step B and see how that works, if it works move to step C)

 

[wiegeabo]

The problem is, people assume that, because the Libertarians want to do that, the instant they get power, they'll suddenly do that.

They tend to forget how the real world works. The only guarantee is that, if it happens, it would take time. You can't just flip the switch on everything. There are procedures and laws in place that prevent that.

 

[enterthemadness]

Probably a third of the country, at least, fall into the category of social liberal and fiscally conservative. Progressive on social issues, but responsible with spending. Why? Because that's how they live their lives anyway.

Arguably, the Libertarian party is probably the best 3rd party whose ideals represent that.

But people don't go to a third party, any third party, typically for 1 of 3 main reasons:

1) The spoiler effect: They're too afraid to leave their current party because the evil other side will gain power by default and take over. Can't throw your vote away like that!

2) Lack of power: What's the point of going to a 3rd party if they're so small. It's not like they can really do anything.

3) Ignorance: They don't even know the 3rd party is out there. Or they do, but haven't done the research to realize how well it might fit with their beliefs.


What they fail to understand is:

1) Voting for someone you don't really believe in just because it's the lesser of two evils is still throwing your vote away.

2) If everyone who wanted to join the 3rd party but was afraid to do so, actually did so, we'd suddenly have a viable 3rd party in this country.

3) It's hard to be aware of a 3rd party if the game is, at least somewhat, geared towards keeping the Big Two in everyone's mind. Partly because the Big Two have the power to do so, and partly for the first two reasons.

this post.

 

[wiegeabo]

Look, It’s Come Down To This: Either I Have To Murder John Boehner Or He Has To Murder Me

Obama, via the Onion


Actually...I think a deathmatch might be a good thing. We get it on world-wide pay-per-view. All the proceeds go to the budget. We'll have the deficit paid off by Easter.

 

[Burgundy LaRue]

The problem is, people assume that, because the Libertarians want to do that, the instant they get power, they'll suddenly do that.

They tend to forget how the real world works. The only guarantee is that, if it happens, it would take time. You can't just flip the switch on everything. There are procedures and laws in place that prevent that.

But it seems that this could also possibly lead to more gridlock with another set of ideas to fight over in Congress.

Of course, I'm coming from the POV of someone who lives in a hardcore Republican state that will likely not vote in another Democrat governor for at least 20 years. How can I think of three parties when I don't even have two?

 

[Kelly]

Looks like Ryan is making some compromises with some Dems in HOW the cuts will be done. From what I have heard....it sounds pretty ok to me.

 

[SV Fan]

Looks like Ryan is making some compromises with some Dems in HOW the cuts will be done. From what I have heard....it sounds pretty ok to me.

Compromise is not finding 1 or 2 people across the isle who might agree with you while ignoring 99% of the other ones. Anytime I hear about Ryan's so called compromise it seems to be with a Democrat House member who lives in a very red state or district who has a slightly to the left POV of Ryan's on that particular issue. If Ryan wants to make a deal that is full of compromise find somebody like Barney Frank and come to agreement with that person.

 

[Kelly]

Compromise is not finding 1 or 2 people across the isle who might agree with you while ignoring 99% of the other ones. Anytime I hear about Ryan's so called compromise it seems to be with a Democrat House member who lives in a very red state or district who has a slightly to the left POV of Ryan's on that particular issue. If Ryan wants to make a deal that is full of compromise find somebody like Barney Frank and come to agreement with that person.

I tend to look at what the compromise is....and this one looks pretty good.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Compromise is not finding 1 or 2 people across the isle who might agree with you while ignoring 99% of the other ones. Anytime I hear about Ryan's so called compromise it seems to be with a Democrat House member who lives in a very red state or district who has a slightly to the left POV of Ryan's on that particular issue. If Ryan wants to make a deal that is full of compromise find somebody like Barney Frank and come to agreement with that person.

At least he's trying something and not just sitting at home watching TV.

 

[Marx]

UPDATE: MITT ROMNEY FINALLY BREAKS SILENCE ON PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION LOSS
http://news.yahoo.com/first-intervi...ailed-reach-175009152--abc-news-politics.html

 

[enterthemadness]

Rand Paul pulls a Filibuster against John Brennan.

“I will speak until I can no longer speak,” Paul said. “I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gins-talking-filibuster-against-john-brennan/

Been watching for about 5 minutes or so. He is going on the 2 hour mark now.

 

[enterthemadness]

Rand Paul leading Filibuster hits 5 hour Mark.



http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/

 

[enterthemadness]

8 hours into this...damn.


And no on here is talking about it but me...

 

[enterthemadness]

9 hours in. Oh boy...may be in for a all-nighter

 

[Marvolo]

What exactly is he filibustering?

 

[enterthemadness]

What exactly is he filibustering?

He wants Obama Adminstration to answer him on if Obama can or cannot use drone strikes in the USA, I believe.

 

[Schlosser85]

He wants Obama to specifically say that he will not use drone strikes against American citizens on American soil.

 

[Victarion]

8 hours into this...damn.


And no on here is talking about it but me...

What's Rand been saying?

 

[Marvolo]

He wants Obama Adminstration to answer him on if Obama can or cannot use drone strikes in the USA, I believe.

He wants Obama to specifically say that he will not use drone strikes against American citizens on American soil.

Why? If an american has a nuke or bomb of some sort and a tactical drone strike can diffuse the situation then run a tactical drone right up his ass. We can't let terrorists think they can recruit americans and they will have immunity in the States.

 

[enterthemadness]

What's Rand been saying?

All kinds of stuff. I've only been mildly listening. More interested to see how long he can keep doing this.

Here are quotes though, vai The Blaze. With video.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-filibuster-on-civil-liberties-drone-strikes/

 

[Marvolo]

All kinds of stuff. I've only been mildly listening. More interested to see how long he can keep doing this.

Here are quotes though, vai The Blaze. With video.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-filibuster-on-civil-liberties-drone-strikes/

They should only be allowed to talk about the bill and topic in question. If the leader of the house or senate thinks they are off topic they should be able to shut them down. And they shouldn't be allowed water on the floor. See how long they make it when dehydration sets in.

Country is barely running and constantly facing shutdown because congress takes the country hostage with the debt ceiling and budget and then they want to act like they are protecting the people. BS.

 

[enterthemadness]

Why? If an american has a nuke or bomb of some sort and a tactical drone strike can diffuse the situation then run a tactical drone right up his ass. We can't let terrorists think they can recruit americans and they will have immunity in the States.

Slippery Slope. And that's a very unlikely scenario. I am 100% against drones. I don't want us or anyone having them, but that seems to be useless now. It's gonna be much worse than nukes.

 

[Marvolo]

Slippery Slope. And that's a very unlikely scenario. I am 100% against drones. I don't want us or anyone having them, but that seems to be useless now. It's gonna be much worse than nukes.

Drones keep our soldiers safe in war.

 

[Victarion]

I agree with your sentiments, Marvolo. Yet, at the same time, I've got a fear of people with grudges getting into power and abusing the drones. Unfounded and irrational?

edit: I mean using the drones against people in the States.

 

[enterthemadness]

They should only be allowed to talk about the bill and topic in question. If the leader of the house or senate thinks they are off topic they should be able to shut them down. And they shouldn't be allowed water on the floor. See how long they make it when dehydration sets in.

Country is barely running and constantly facing shutdown because congress takes the country hostage with the debt ceiling and budget and then they want to act like they are protecting the people. BS.

Rand Paul is a senator, not a Congressman.

No, he can talk about whatever he wants really. But it mostly has to be about drones. But you can tie that into our stupid War on Drugs. Not armed drones, but drones spying on us to see if we are breaking the law.

One guy did 24 hrs and 18 minutes in the 50's. Then a group did a 75 hour one in the 60's.

I see no problem with him eating and drinking water and using the bathroom. He's had 8 other Senators speak as well today.