Absolutely Adequate wrote:A friend of mine in Texas said that when Paul was elected he was the most right-wing pol in power there. Now, he's one of the most left - and he hasn't changed his stance one iota.
Who considers Paul anywhere near the left? People often mistake Libertarians for having left leaning social views, but despite their "anything goes" mentality on some issues, that's not left at all. Also, I am not up to date with all of the elected officials in Texas, but Paul is the farthest-right presidential candidate, somehow I doubt he is farther to the left than most of Texas.
The problem is that the republican party's marriage in the late 70's, early 80's completely changed what we think of as "conservative" in America. Once they began that merger, we saw the beginnings of big-government Conservatives, neo-cons, etc. They became more concerned about gay marriage and the brain-dead than they did about traditionally conservative positions. And now the right's lunatic fringe (Rush, Malkin, Hannity, etc) have turned on Paul because he doesn't represent modern day republicanism.
I guess the problem is that "conservative" and "republican" have become synonymous in the minds of most Americans even though they are almost polar opposites.
And thus the a substantial reason to read K Street Gang. It's written by a conservative, go out and read it guys!
Both parties make me sick. They will say/do anything as long as it harms the other.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
thedude wrote:Both parties make me sick. They will say/do anything as long as it gets them reelected.
Fixed.
And for proof, look no further than Mitt Romney, who once he was done worrying about being reelected governor of Massachusetts and started considering the presidency, suddenly had a "change of heart" on several social issues.
thedude wrote:Both parties make me sick. They will say/do anything as long as it gets them reelected.
Fixed.
And for proof, look no further than Mitt Romney, who once he was done worrying about being reelected governor of Massachusetts and started considering the presidency, suddenly had a "change of heart" on several social issues.
I really question Romney's sincerity completely. When running for governor of Massachusettes, being a Mormon really didn't matter... but that's a blue state and he was elected on his political issues, as well as his socially liberal stance on abortion and gay marriage.
Now he's trying to appeal to the compassionate neo-conservatives that presumably got GWB elected twice, but I'm not sure where they are after the democrats ran away with the house and senate.
If you're a battery, you're either working or you're dead....
Big Pimpin wrote:Over the past several years, the Republican Party has become something I'm not particularly proud of and, frankly, don't much care for any more. That being said, I didn't find this humorous at all. Maybe it's just me.
This is something that a lot of Canadians felt with the Liberal government a year or 2 ago. Sometime no matter what you believe, when a party stays in too long, it becomes corrupted and needs change. I know I would have voted conservative in the Canadian election if I turned 18 earlier.
Are you interested in joining a 28 teams dynasty league? If so, PM me.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Chrisy Moltisanti » Thu May 24, 2007 10:49 pm 
