News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

Slap My Momma! Romney Unintended Consequences?

Started by AquaMan, January 13, 2012, 10:10:27 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Conan71

Quote from: nathanm on January 13, 2012, 03:24:42 PM
So does big government, but at least government (nominally, subject to campaign finance laws) answers to the people.

They are no more accountable than the corporatists.  Even the most reprehensible of the lot gets reelected over and over again.  Faceless bureaucrats have ZERO accountability to the people.  At least corporations have a track record of having no problem firing incompetent CEO's.  Not so easy with bureaucratic potentates.
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

nathanm

Quote from: Conan71 on January 13, 2012, 03:27:39 PM
In the society we live in, we are led to believe that politicians actions either create or destroy jobs.  Based on that, I think it's pretty important in times when unemployment is exceedingly high that someone with real-world business experience steps in with policies which businesses say are favorable to creating jobs.

I'm still not sure why you think that putting the people who foobared up into power is going to have a different outcome this time. (I have the same objection to all the former-Wall-Streeters in the Obama administration, by the way) And sure, some corrupt Congresspeople never go away. Thankfully, that's not true for most seats, and it's a problem we need to be solving anyway.

Real conservatives wouldn't be whining about the possibility of voting fraud, they'd be complaining about the gerrymandering and, the idiotic first past the post system, and the vast disparities in Congressional representation that comes with having such a small House. Make the House 4,350 members strong and they instantly become more accountable to their constituents because each person goes from being 1/690,000th (on average, but varying widely due to the small number of districts) of his or her constituency to 1/69,000th.

I guess that would be more government, though...
"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration" --Abraham Lincoln

Conan71

Quote from: nathanm on January 13, 2012, 03:46:05 PM
I'm still not sure why you think that putting the people who foobared up into power is going to have a different outcome this time. (I have the same objection to all the former-Wall-Streeters in the Obama administration, by the way) And sure, some corrupt Congresspeople never go away. Thankfully, that's not true for most seats, and it's a problem we need to be solving anyway.

Real conservatives wouldn't be whining about the possibility of voting fraud, they'd be complaining about the gerrymandering and, the idiotic first past the post system, and the vast disparities in Congressional representation that comes with having such a small House. Make the House 4,350 members strong and they instantly become more accountable to their constituents because each person goes from being 1/690,000th (on average, but varying widely due to the small number of districts) of his or her constituency to 1/69,000th.

I guess that would be more government, though...

That makes real sense. Multiply the congressional budget ten times. Your ratios would have been far more relevant 100 to 200 years ago.

Funny how the Dims are whining about Gerrymandering now. Didn't seem all that important when they had a lock on the house for 40+ years.
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

nathanm

So what, the country is older so we deserve less representation? I think the concern about Congress' budget is missing the forest for the trees. A big reason why special interests have such a lock on Washington is that they don't have to spread their dollars around very much. Increase the size of the body and increase the number of political parties and suddenly it's a lot less feasible to keep most everyone on the payroll.

I like how you think that past bad behavior excuses present bad behavior. Seems to me that corrupting the political process is bad no matter who engages in it.
"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration" --Abraham Lincoln

AquaMan

Quote from: Teatownclown on January 13, 2012, 12:22:46 PM
I think there's still way too much to be revealed other than his set of magic underwear.... ;)

I still think he picks Kay Bailey Hutchison. Jeb Bush knows better...

KBH? What does that do to the Texas crowd and their love/hate for the Bushes or Perry? Does it nullify them and deliver the state?

BTW, I missed the whole magic underwear thing. What is that about?
onward...through the fog

Teatownclown

The Mormons have special magic undergarments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment ....read up on the Mormons.

Read this too:

Why do the Republicans nominate blue bloods?

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/17/why_do_the_republicans_nominate_blue_bloods/singleton/

The potent combination of Jacksonian populism and old money oligarchy

Conan71

Quote from: Teatownclown on January 17, 2012, 08:59:10 PM
The Mormons have special magic undergarments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment ....read up on the Mormons.

Read this too:

Why do the Republicans nominate blue bloods?

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/17/why_do_the_republicans_nominate_blue_bloods/singleton/

The potent combination of Jacksonian populism and old money oligarchy

Other than the Bush family, I really can't think of too many blue bloods they nominated in the last 60 years.  Eisenhower wasn't, Dull wasn't, Nixon wasn't, Reagan wasn't and I think Ford's family was of pretty modest means.

I think the more appropriate question would be why to the Republicans nominate such boring and un-charismatic candidates (aside from St. Ronald)?
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan