• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans begin breaking pledge to America already

pbrauer

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
25,394
Reaction score
7,208
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
They haven't won a single seat in Congress or any governorships, but the GOP has already begun breaking its Pledge to America.

 
The only thing politicians truly pledge is to look out for their own political careers.
 
The only thing politicians truly pledge is to look out for their own political careers.

So far I only know of 1 politician whose track record speaks for itself... but I don't think people are quite ready to put him in the presidents seat.

I do know that there's a good chance a number of those politicians who have flip-flopped around their whole careers are at risk of losing their jobs in the coming elections, and that's republicans and democrats alike... Which MIGHT be enough to stall some bills on occasion, but there's simply not enough people who actually care about something bigger then their jobs that there's alot of factors working against fixing the country, even in the face of an already challenged economy rife with abuses and corruption of it's own.

It's gonna be an uphill battle to reverse things at this point.

Edit : I mean reverse things since at least Bush, possibly as far back as Clinton... Not just Obama's continuation of the agenda of the "special interests" and other lobby groups.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I would support the GOP if they went back to a fiscal conservative model, even if they do have some social neo-con loons. Financial restraint is the only thing that can save America now, and it looks like even the party that used to be the guardian of wise spending has turned its back on fiscal responsibility.
 
Since when does the GOP keep it's important promises?

Not that Democrats are perfect, but they tend to get done what they say they will--or at least try.
 
For me it's not about whether or not Reps return to being good fiscal stewarts, it's about them putting the People ahead of their own self-interest, i.e., their political careers. Now, granted both sides do it. However, since Obama became President it just seems as thought they're on a mission to do very little other than bicker, create chaos and dissention rather than working together with the majority political power to enact good, sound, responsible legislation.

Using this recent jobs bill as a prime example, they came out with their Pledge promising to put the focus on job creation and being fiscally responsible but the moment they have a chance to step up to the plate and walk the walk they instead vote against the jobs bill - all but one Republican...ONE! Same can be said of health care reform. If people would just go back and review the Republican proposals that were out there before what eventually was signed into law what they'd discover is just about every proposal had many of the exact same proposals, i.e., benefit plans, medical review commissions, HIE structure (state-sponsored exchanges w/f"start-up financing, i.e., grants" provided by the Treasury) AND an individual tax penalty at either the state or federal level if you didn't acquire health insurance. If people would just take the time to educate themselves on what's going on rather than just taking the word of politicians or the talking heads at face value what they'd learn (particularly concerning health care reform) would astound them!

The legislation that was eventually signed into law has many Republican ideas in it. Only Republicans won't tell their constituants this. They rather let their opposition hang than to share in the responsibility whether some of their ideas were adopted or not.
 
They haven't won a single seat in Congress or any governorships, but the GOP has already begun breaking its Pledge to America.

This pledge was meant to be broken. You can't seriously expect Boehner and McConnell to actually follow through on something they clearly didn't believe in. Did those two wankers do anything to stop the excesses of the Bush years? No. And now crackpots think they can enforce the opposite of what they partook in. Really.

The largest private professional service company in the world is a pass-through.

Furthermore, the idea that the GOP will actually make the necessary cuts is pure fantasy. Republicans are fighting Obama tooth and nail to stop spending cuts in their district. To think that in power they will actually make the cuts themselves is pure unadulterated delusions. The GOP is promising what people want to hear with full intention of never carrying it out. The silver lining is that we may actually see a third party arise from this. Actual conservatives pissed off from watching the GOP essentially backstab them could create a real threat to the 2 party system.
 
Using this recent jobs bill as a prime example, they came out with their Pledge promising to put the focus on job creation and being fiscally responsible but the moment they have a chance to step up to the plate and walk the walk they instead vote against the jobs bill - all but one Republican...ONE! Same can be said of health care reform. If people would just go back and review the Republican proposals that were out there before what eventually was signed into law what they'd discover is just about every proposal had many of the exact same proposals, i.e., benefit plans, medical review commissions, HIE structure (state-sponsored exchanges w/f"start-up financing, i.e., grants" provided by the Treasury) AND an individual tax penalty at either the state or federal level if you didn't acquire health insurance. If people would just take the time to educate themselves on what's going on rather than just taking the word of politicians or the talking heads at face value what they'd learn (particularly concerning health care reform) would astound them!

That's the morbidly amusing thing about this election. Obama has enacted a whole slew of Republican ideas so much to accurately label him Bush III and all he gets from people who were adamantly defending Bush is crap. Apparently enacting Republican Agenda items makes him evil to Republicans. Go figure. And every time someone challenges me on this, I bring up a list and they either run like a coward or raise the bar to somehow argue he's still bad despite enacting Republican ideas.

What truly amuses me is that those who would have benefited from TARP the most are those kicking out their Congress members who voted for it. Considering that most of our retirements are in securities and bonds, without a banking or financial sector, we basically have nothing. Even those with gold in their portfolios, without actual gold in their houses, you're just as vulnerable. Congress members like Castle saved his voters' retirement funds and they kicked him out for doing so. Honestly, the fat cats should be bending over for Bush and Obama. Without them, they would have lost huge amounts of wealth.

The legislation that was eventually signed into law has many Republican ideas in it. Only Republicans won't tell their constituants this. They rather let their opposition hang than to share in the responsibility whether some of their ideas were adopted or not.

Because they'd have to admit their attacks are largely bull****. But Democrats and Republicans are morally reprehensible and unethical. It's a shame people still think one party is better then the other.
 
Last edited:
I just think people need to wake up and recognize that not everything they hear is 100% accurate. Take the bailouts, for example. Most people really believe that it was Pres. Obama's idea to initiate TARP, but that was 100% G. W. Bush from bailing out the banks to bailing out GM and Chystler. All Obama did was pickup where Bush left off and managed TARP per deadlines originally set by Bush! In fact, the rules Bernenke and Geitner applied to TARP after AIG made all their CEO bonus payouts actually helped ensure that the taxpayers would actually see a return on their "investment" not to mention that the "warrants" (guarantees) on the interests on stocks and bonds and other investments wouldn't go below a certain value. To that end, it was a win-win for the American People. The government kept the banks alive, the banks gave the People a guaranteed minimum ROI. Think about it...

After spending $700 billion the final price tag for TARP is estimated to (reportedly) cost $50 billion? That's a helluva lot less than what it cost the American people to bailout banks from the S&L crisis in the 80's. Unfortunately, all we keep hearing are these absord accusations that the Pres. is trying to nationalize banks, the auto industry and bring health care under a socialized format when nothing like that is happening.

The banks will regain total control and their government attointees on their Boards will go away once they payback their loans. Same goes for GM/Chsyler. The Treasury owns non-voting preferred stock, but taking preferred stock (or bonds) over common-stock ensures that: 1) set a limit on how low the stock price would go upon resell to the parent owners, 2) that the Treasury would get paid first before all other stockholders should these entities fail, and 3) that the People would recoup as much of their "investment" as possible. The way I see things, the American people should be glad that this time their tax dollars weren't severely wasted as was done in the past as we stand to get the bulk of the money back.
 
How's that hope and change working out for our Obama supporters

or the promise that no one under 250K a year will be paying more taxes under the Obama Regime?

or Gitmo will be closed

or we will be out of the ME

etc etc etc
 
How's that hope and change working out for our Obama supporters

or the promise that no one under 250K a year will be paying more taxes under the Obama Regime?

or Gitmo will be closed

or we will be out of the ME

etc etc etc

What are you, DP's equivalent of Tickle Me Elmo? Someone puts it out there how the Republicans are full of crap, and your only reply is to repeat the same old tired crap about the Democrats?
 
What are you, DP's equivalent of Tickle Me Elmo? Someone puts it out there how the Republicans are full of crap, and your only reply is to repeat the same old tired crap about the Democrats?

I like pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. The left is far more hypocritical than the right because the central theme from the dem masters is that they want to help the poor which of course is a lie-keeping people poor is the fundamental strategy dems operate under in order to win elections

republican bible thumpers tend to be hypocritical on family values but that doesn't harm the country. that some "family values" gay basher is getting some tail on the side or using a "wide stance" in a toilet stall doesn't effect me. creating multi-generations of welfare addicts and jacking up my taxes to buy the votes of the dependents does.
 
Pork?

Do you mean pork as in bacon, or pork as in Federal dollars spent on local projects for the sole and express purpose of buying voter support for an elected official?

I could really go for a BLT, but if that's not what you meant then you're totally full of **** and totally out of gas. :lol:
 
Pork?

Do you mean pork as in bacon, or pork as in Federal dollars spent on local projects for the sole and express purpose of buying voter support for an elected official?

I could really go for a BLT, but if that's not what you meant then you're totally full of **** and totally out of gas. :lol:

you're the one who wants more government -not me

oink oink
 
No, actually, I don't -- not in the long term.

I recognize that the size of government needs to be ramped down slowly over time so that it's not just policy change but also social change. In other words, change that lasts.

Come back and tell me what I think when you've got game, Elmo.
 
:mrgreen:
No, actually, I don't -- not in the long term.

I recognize that the size of government needs to be ramped down slowly over time so that it's not just policy change but also social change. In other words, change that lasts.

Come back and tell me what I think when you've got game, Elmo.

My bad, there must be two posters with the same Avatar and Handle. THe one that wants to roll government back and the one that has defended the Obama expansion.

Sorry I confused you with the other one:mrgreen:
 
:mrgreen:

My bad, there must be two posters with the same Avatar and Handle. THe one that wants to roll government back and the one that has defended the Obama expansion.

Sorry I confused you with the other one:mrgreen:

I hear ya man, I work in the aviation industry, which is under the control of the Federal Aviation Administration! Why do we have socialized airlines? That's not in the constitution! Big Government says I have to have a 45 minute fuel reserve, plus enough to get to an alternate airport. More job-killing Marxism. :roll:
 
Last edited:
I would support the GOP if they went back to a fiscal conservative model, even if they do have some social neo-con loons. Financial restraint is the only thing that can save America now, and it looks like even the party that used to be the guardian of wise spending has turned its back on fiscal responsibility.

Aren't you in Canada?
 
I hear ya man, I work in the aviation industry, which is under the control of the Federal Aviation Administration! Why do we have socialized airlines? That's not in the constitution! Big Government says I have to have a 45 minute fuel reserve, plus enough to get to an alternate airport. More job-killing Marxism. :roll:

wow, that is really a stupid comment. and completely non responsive

but not surprising-not surprising at all
 
Aren't you in Canada?

Canadians are our buddies and have a vested interest in seeing that we stay healthy.
*fistbumps Canada*
 
wow, that is really a stupid comment. and completely non responsive

but not surprising-not surprising at all

You're right. It is really stupid. Implying that any regulation is a "government takeover" of an industry that is somehow inherently bad is pretty stupid.
 
You're right. It is really stupid. Implying that any regulation is a "government takeover" of an industry that is somehow inherently bad is pretty stupid.

find where I have done that
 
Back
Top Bottom