The Hard Right Is Hypocritical to the Core, And I Can Prove It in One Sentence

I already know you'll do all you can to avoid answering this question, because you already know the answer.

You still haven't addressed the thread topic.

1. Which party ran on "national debt is too high" between 2008 and 2016?

2. Which party has controlled Congress without doing anything about national debt for multiple years now?

I'll wait for your direct, non-but Obama answer.

me-waiting-on-you-to-respond-17413882.png
 
You're a Republican and you're acting like you care about consistent principles...LOL
He's a Christian, lying and hypocrisy is deeply engrained in his identity. It's what they do.
 
This post utterly stupid and completely ignores the differences of opinion between the two parties on what we should be spending our resources on........

.......Before you spout out nonsense, we got it, you disagree.......

........That plus your terrible error on why the debt rose during Obama's presidency is why people can't take YOU seriously.
You're a better poster than this. Personal insults are a sign of someone that's not confident in their positions.


Do you really have trouble understanding that liberals might be ok with tax dollars going towards something like college educations or healthcare instead of cutting taxes on the wealthy?
It's not their money to spend on such things.

Individual human intelligence is the source of all wealth.


But you're not even making an attempt to understand people with opposing views.
Take a good look around this forum. Have you ever seen an instance of a leftist honestly attempting to understand people with opposing views?

It's quite curious that you're asking me to an extend a courtesy to others that has not been extended to me, and you certainly haven't extended that courtesy to me in the past either.
 
Here it is: Anyone Hear from the Tea Party Lately?

These guys have were all over American politics for the past 10 years or so. In fact, the majority of our current GOP Congress was installed during the 2010 midterms due to the Tea Party movement.

These American patriots, as I remember, were very, and I mean VERY concerned about the national debt.

So I figured, since they don't seem to be around any more, that must mean the national debt problem was solved.

1200px-US_National_Debt_public_intergovernmental.png


Oh, there it is.

So what's up, Tea Party?

Why are you all taking a knee?

573961702ec74facab1316d09999fcfd-8bc9cc2a30664a44b3dce73642f1c943-0.jpg


https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/po...-last-night/BngSUNF0imTWwYozAZDDfO/story.html

There is a deep truth here. For decades, the hardcore right in this country hasn’t been about specific policies or a particular spending level, but a feeling of grievance that is wrapped up in culture, economics, and demographics.
Tea party started with centrist or even left leaning economics.. But it was all white people. The establishment knew that went against everything they had been working toward, so they quickly took it over via donations and establishment "leaders" and destroyed it. Then it was just brainless older fox news fans who thought their "don't tread on me" flag made them look tough. Sad, actually.
 
Last edited:
Here it is: Anyone Hear from the Tea Party Lately?

These guys have were all over American politics for the past 10 years or so. In fact, the majority of our current GOP Congress was installed during the 2010 midterms due to the Tea Party movement.

These American patriots, as I remember, were very, and I mean VERY concerned about the national debt.

So I figured, since they don't seem to be around any more, that must mean the national debt problem was solved.

1200px-US_National_Debt_public_intergovernmental.png


Oh, there it is.

So what's up, Tea Party?

Why are you all taking a knee?

573961702ec74facab1316d09999fcfd-8bc9cc2a30664a44b3dce73642f1c943-0.jpg


https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/po...-last-night/BngSUNF0imTWwYozAZDDfO/story.html

There is a deep truth here. For decades, the hardcore right in this country hasn’t been about specific policies or a particular spending level, but a feeling of grievance that is wrapped up in culture, economics, and demographics.

For the most part yjey simply paid lip service to the debt - most are ok with it if their taxes are lower. But it's still a plank of their platform:


https://www.teapartypatriots.org/ourvision/debt-free-future/

Btw, didn't they pretty much fizzle out around 2011?
 
So that's your defense of your party?
In the words of my Father:

"You can always tell who's a liberal, because they'll never give a straight answer to a straight question. They'll always try to answer your question with another question."

If you want my answers, you're going to have to answer my clear and concise question first:

Can you name me a consistent debt and deficit hawk in the Democratic party that will actually hold up legislation over the matter when their party is in power?

If you're still unable to give a straight answer to this question, then it's safe for everyone reading this to assume the answer must be:

"No"
 
You still haven't addressed the thread topic.

1. Which party ran on "national debt is too high" between 2008 and 2016?

2. Which party has controlled Congress without doing anything about national debt for multiple years now?

I'll wait for your direct, non-but Obama answer.

It's a consistent pattern, too. The GOP as an institution is always fighting to increase debts, while the Democratic Party as an institution has the opposite goal. The basic split is that Republicans despair about the possibility of growth and generally think that America is in a death spiral, while Democrats tend to be more optimistic about growth.

Republicans just want lower taxes for rich people (which essentially all well-known pundits, donors, and elected officials are). Tax cuts are somewhat popular so they can get that passed if they can frame cuts as being beneficial to the middle class (note that the median American barely pays federal income taxes). But spending cuts are very unpopular so they try to present small programs that they dislike anyway as being in need of cuts and act like that will impact the debt numbers, which they know perfectly well they will not. Democrats want to enact policies they believe will boost growth and fix problems in the economy, and that means they need a reliable funding source. Incentives regarding debt are completely different (at the operational level--we're not talking regular Joes here), and that's reflected in their different actions on debt.
 
You're a better poster than this. Personal insults are a sign of someone that's not confident in their positions.



Take a good look around this forum. Have you ever seen an instance of a leftist honestly attempting to understand people with opposing views?

It's quite curious that you're asking me to an extend a courtesy to others that has not been extended to me, and you certainly haven't extended that courtesy to me in the past either.
Pretty rich coming from you.

Take a look at any @Jack V Savage post. Not a leftist per say but probably is to you; take a look at any @panamaican post. Even @Trotsky.
 
You're a better poster than this. Personal insults are a sign of someone that's not confident in their positions.

There were no personal insults in there. I called your view stupid, that is not a personal dig.

It's not their money to spend on such things.

Save it, I know your views here. My issue is that you're not giving a good faith effort to understand opposing views which was clear by your original post.

Individual human intelligence is the source of all wealth.

It's massively important and it definitely drives a lot of wealth, but it should be embarrassing for a farmer to make this error.

Take a good look around this forum. Have you ever seen an instance of a leftist honestly attempting to understand people with opposing views?

Yes, all the time. This thread is an honest assessment of the Tea Party. You may not like it, but it's true.

It's quite curious that you're asking me to an extend a courtesy to others that has not been extended to me, and you certainly haven't extended that courtesy to me in the past either.

False, I always make the attempt to understand others views and if I have them wrong will fully grant that I had it wrong. I don't have to respect bad posts though, and that's why you think it's personal. I'd bet you're a nice guy in real life actually. I just think you're badly informed and very partisan.
 
In the words of my Father:

"You can always tell who's a liberal, because they'll never give a straight answer to a straight question. They'll always try to answer your question with another question."

If you want my answers, you're going to have to answer my clear and concise question first:

Can you name me a consistent debt and deficit hawk in the Democratic party that will actually hold up legislation over the matter when their party is in power?

If you're still unable to give a straight answer to this question, then it's safe for everyone reading this to assume the answer must be:

"No"
I cannot name a liberal who is a consistent deficit hawk, no. (And you can name one Republican Senator...)

So I gave a straight answer to your question.

Does that mean that 1) I am not a liberal or 2) you father was full of shit?

(Logic is a bitch...)
 
Last edited:
I cannot name a liberal who is a consistent deficit hawk, no. (And you can name one Republican Senator...)

So I gave a straight answer to your question.

Does that mean that 1) I am not a liberal or 2) you father was full of shit?
It was a really stupid question because there is actually no need to be a "deficit hawk" for one. It's like asking someone to name a Democrat that thinks the earth is flat.

There is, however, a gigantic difference in the approach to policy in that Democrats make good faith efforts to pay for the programs they want and do so with a reasonable amount of detail. Republicans just fucking lie, like they did hear with tax cuts.

Your last few threads have been straight forward gut shots to the GOP based on plain truths. Bravo.
 
Pretty rich coming from you.

Take a look at any @Jack V Savage post. Not a leftist per say but probably is to you; take a look at any @panamaican post. Even @Trotsky.
I quit interacting with @Jack V Savage because his posts were constantly filled with personal insults, and falied attempts at impugning my character. The discussions were no longer productive, so I unilaterally ended the conversation. My time on sherdog has become much more productive as a result.

@Trotsky and I certainly don't agree on very much, but our conversations are certainly much more cordial. At worst he's guilty of using a bit too much hyperbole (I remember a post of his calling the Republican party literal comic book villains).

@panamaican is a fairly reasonable left-of-center poster. Our politics don't align, but I really can't recall the last time pan and I had an out-and-out disagreement on something.
 
I quit interacting with @Jack V Savage because his posts were constantly filled with personal insults, and falied attempts at impugning my character. The discussions were no longer productive, so I unilaterally ended the conversation. My time on sherdog has become much more productive as a result.

This is a lie, of course. You didn't get mad about personal insults, which I rarely use, but about arguments which you were unable to address. Specifically, I demonstrated that the "non-aggression principle" as applied by right-wing libertarians relied on circular reasoning.
 
Back
Top