What's up with all the right-wingers on this site? — Page 5

A Day in the Life of Joe Republican

By John Gray Cincinnati, Ohio -  jgray7@cinci.rr.com - July - 2004

Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water
because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards.

He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too because his employer needs to offer competitive benefits to hire the best people.

Joe prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with every
ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree
hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

Joe drives to work in one of the safest cars in the world because some liberal fought to raise safety
standards and emission controls.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with good pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some Liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally
insured by the FSLIC up to $100,000 because some liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from greedy, unscrupulous bankers like the ones who ruined the banking system before the depression.

Joe needs to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.

Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He
arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers
Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republican's might still be sitting in the dark!)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension
because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.

He turns on a radio talk show, the host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn't tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day)

Joe agrees, "We don't need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I'm a self
made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have".

My God, the world would be a total hellhole without socialists! We'd all have died from dirty meat and dirty air by now if it weren't for them! We'd also be too poor to feed ourselves without their ingenious command and control of our economy!

I thank God that there are brilliant people out there who know what's best for everybody else! You have shown me the light, FF! Thank you!

I know I said I was done with this thread, but these really can't be let go and I plan to research every single one of them.

FanFiltration said:

Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally
insured by the FSLIC up to $100,000 because some liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from greedy, unscrupulous bankers like the ones who ruined the banking system before the depression.

I'm starting here because you obviously don't know anything.  I think you meant FDIC.  FSLIC is the, now defunct, Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation.  Anyway, here's the Wikipedia article on the FDIC:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Deposit_Insurance_Corporation

You'll notice that the cap ($100,000) was put in place by a Republican, Arthur Vandenberg.  It was originally a temporary cap of $2500 using temporary funds.  It had to be funded by banks, so there was really no money in it at the start.  You'll also notice that even though it was not supported by the banks, soon after it passed nearly all of the 19,000 bank offices in the country had signed up for it.  The liberal you might be referring to was the President, FDR.  What's interesting though is that he was opposed to the insurance and only agreed to support it due to overwhelming congressional approval.  So much for a liberal coming to save the day.  So much for the evil bankers since it was one of those bankers that lead the charge to getting all the banks on board.

That's all I have time for now.  It's really easy to write something like this up without having any of the facts, but the facts are really easy to come by too.

We're fighting a losing war. Obama says he's going to make government "cool" again. There's no stopping a visionary hope like that!

McCain, why he just wants to stop the corrupt spending initiatives of Obama, other Democrats, and even other Republicans. He wants to limit government spending and give money back to the people. That is so behind the times and uncool, man.

This is even more interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act#Repeal_of_the_Act

Looks like Clinton repealed it.  I have not read the details of that page.  I just noticed that little tidbit and decided to add it here.

Janskeet said:

Also if you don't mind, tell me what party you lean towards the most (or hate the least)?

I will avoid getting sucked into these discussions.  But to answer your question, I consider myself a liberal.  I don't always agree with the democrats, but more often disagree with the republicans.  I think the Bush administration has left such a mess that things will get worse regardless of who wins this November.  If Obama wins, I feel sorry for him because he will have a very difficult situation on his hands.  If McCain wins, we are in for some even more serious problems.  That's my opinion and it's as far as I'll go in this thread... I've got work to do -- on Puggo GRANDE!!!

Tiptup said:

McCain, why he just wants to stop the corrupt spending initiatives of Obama, other Democrats, and even other Republicans.

You could have heard a pin drop at the GOP convention when McCain indirectly harshly critisized Bush's insane spending.  Seems like most of the cheerleaders there forgot what their party actually stands for.  Even when you set aside the cost of the Iraq war, George's Bush's spending and growth of government bereaucracy is so prolific that it makes Bill Clinton look like a staunch conservative in retrospect.

I can't find anything specific on clean water acts right now, so I'm going to skip it.  The second point pretty much involves the FDA though.

FanFiltration said:

He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.

Hmm, that's interesting.  The FDA was created by a Republican controlled House and Senate and signed by a Republican President:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDA#History

Now yes, it would seem that Teddy was a bit of a "progressive", but I don't think you could convince me that every Republican in both houses of Congress leaned the same way, especially since Taft beat him in the next election.  So once again, we have a bunch of Republicans creating a government organization to oversee the general safety of food and medication.

Of course, I think the general point is that none of these people did these things because they were "liberal" or "conservative".  They did them because they thought it was the right thing to do at the time.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too because his employer needs to offer competitive benefits to hire the best people.

This actually has to be a joke.  A $10 copay has more to do with HMO's or "managed" care than it has to do with union workers.  Most union workers that I've ever known take a PPO plan (private practice office) over an HMO any day of the week.  The PPO costs a little more, but you also have a far greater choice of doctors because you aren't limited to who your insurance says you can see.

There's also no law, State or Federal, that I'm aware of that mandates any of it.  Employers are free to not offer medical insurance and most don't if you're not working full time.  Of course, maybe you just haven't been paying attention to everything the Dems have been saying about wanting universal health care either.

I'll be back with more later :)

FanFiltration said:

A Day in the Life of Joe Republican

By John Gray Cincinnati, Ohio -  jgray7@cinci.rr.com - July - 2004

Sigh... Not only is that inaccurate at parts, like lj pointed out, but it is retarded. Stupid articles like this really help support the massive gap between the two parties. I can imagine all this liberals reading that artiles and smiling stupidly, "Yah, take that you fing dumb Repubs!" Come on, you could just as easily knock that article on its ass and flip everything the other way around and write an article on "A Day in the Life of Larry Liberal". Hopefully you are smart enough to realize this FF, hopefully.

Yeah Come on, somebody step up and write that Larry Liberal piece might be worth a good laugh.

Then you need to come up with some retarded labels for the moderates as well as the independents.

I hope people know spin when they see it, especially labelling and stereotypes which have nothing to do with the issues at stake.

Plus it is way too easy to label all Democrats as Liberal Communist Traitors, and all Republicans Fascist Nazis and Control freaks.

You Have liberals using Eisenhower's "beware of the military industrial complex"  like it is their own and he was a Republican.  Though They use that famous speech now to refer to Bush and say today Eisenhower would be a liberal.

A Day in the Life of Larry Liberal

Larry gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He got the coffee at a reasonable price because of free market competition.

He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. The medications were developed by a pharmaceuticals company, the root of all evil.

Larry dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. He waves hello to his black neighbors,who he doesn't own as slaves because a Republican president freed them during the Civil War.

Larry drives to work in one of the safest countries in the world because some facist conservative fought to maintain a strong police force and military.

Larry has a good job and makes an acceptable living wage because his conservative parents encouraged him to pursue his education and make it on his own isntead of trusting in the government to make up for his shortcomings.

He visits his father, who lives in a nice house in the country, which he worked hard in a free market, capitalist system to afford, and which his father can continue to own because the Republicans have kept property taxes in the area low.

Larry is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives off an individual retirement account, an investment he made so that he would not be sucking on the drying nipple of Social Security in his senior years.

He turns on Air America and finds nothing but static; they're bankrupt ecause nobody wants to listen to a bunch of whiny liberals. Instead he turns on Keith Olberman and listens to the anchor

Larry agrees, "Yeah, Bush lied, people died! And that bastard wants to stop women from getting abortions too!"

Damn Chaltab, you beat me to it :P

Darth Chaltab said:

A Day in the Life of Larry Liberal

Larry has a good job and makes an acceptable living wage because his conservative parents encouraged him to pursue his education and make it on his own isntead of trusting in the government to make up for his shortcomings.

He visits his father, who lives in a nice house in the country, which he worked hard in a free market, capitalist system to afford, and which his father can continue to own because the Republicans have kept property taxes in the area low.

Larry is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives off an individual retirement account, an investment he made so that he would not be sucking on the drying nipple of Social Security in his senior years.

 

 I don't know how long it's been since you've talked to Larry, but his job went to China, he has to drive to Canada to get his heart meds, his father lost his house because he couldn't pay the taxes, and they were both bilked out of there retirement accounts by thieving corporate managers. To top it all off Larry's son got both of his legs blown off in Iraq last year. Have you picked up a newspaper in the last five years you retard?

Rob said:

Have you picked up a newspaper in the last five years you retard?

Well, President George Bush is not a good example of a conservative.  Unfortunately, he has proved to be a big spender...an economic liberal.

C3PX said: That comment very nicely sums up exactly why I am not a Democrat. That self righteous, we are so intelligent, if you think differently than us then you are by default an idiot, etc. attitude. It bugs the crap out of me, and most Democrats I have known have it. It is kind of like the popular kids back in high school, "if you don't wear __insert brand name here__insert product name here__, then you are not cool!" If you are not a Democrat, then you are not smart. Because all smart people are Democrats.

Sorry, just suddenly had the urge to quote myself.

It is ashame people have such a lack of understanding of how things work that they cannot separate party from policy. Bush made a lot of fuck ups during his time in office, increased spending through the damn roof and grew government. Things that are by definition very UNconservative. You guys seem to feel because Bush (a nonconservative) failed (in your eyes), that conservatism has now been proven as a failure. THat is a lot like saying, "I have tried a fried egg once and it tasted like crap, therefore I am certian that fried chicken also tastes like crap." That is a very dumb way of thinking. Perhaps the Democratic party is not the intellectual party after all.

Conservatism hasn't failed, nor will it ever. These things worked for the country in the past, they'll still work now. That is not to say all progressive ways of thinking are bad, but sometimes leaping into change for the sake of change is not the wisest idea. What we have had for the last eight years has hardly been the ideal Republican President. Maybe if you guys could come up with a single candidate who is not a freaking cardboard cutout of every other Dem candidate, you would not have had to suffer for eight years. Al Gore? John Kerry? Even Hilary Clinton was the same thing, only with a few different parts. It is about time you get someone with a little depth to them! You finally did that with Barak (though it is some pretty dang scary Marxist depth), and for your sake, hopefully that goes somewhere.

I really don't want to vote for McCain, I do not like the guy at all. I am not at all impressed with his track record, or many of his policies.

Trooperman said:

Well, President George Bush is not a good example of a conservative.  Unfortunately, he has proved to be a big spender...an economic liberal.

 Pay attention dummy, we're talking about Republicans here, not conservatives.  Neither of the two major parties are conservative, it's an abstract term as far as their concerned.  The discussion here is about "Joe Republican" and "Joe Liberal".  Since neither of the current parties are conservative, let's stick to discussing which of the two parties has a better track record in terms of running the country.

Rob said:

Trooperman said:

Well, President George Bush is not a good example of a conservative.  Unfortunately, he has proved to be a big spender...an economic liberal.

 

 Pay attention dummy, we're talking about Republicans here, not conservatives.  Neither of the two major parties are conservative, it's an abstract term as far as their concerned.  The discussion here is about "Joe Republican" and "Joe Liberal".  Since neither of the current parties are conservative, let's stick to discussing which of the two parties has a better track record in terms of running the country.

Lol- no comment necessary.

I'm sorry I called you a dummy, I've just got my panties all in a bunch right now.  These bucket carrying retards aound here spend all day with their finger in their rear end and the Rush up so loud that it drowns out all common sense.  The fact that anyone still listens to that fat old dope fiend is mind boggling.

C3PX said:

You guys seem to feel because Bush (a nonconservative) failed (in your eyes), that conservatism has now been proven as a failure.

If they read Newsweek, that might be why.  They have a regular column by Fareed Zakaria.  One of the recent titles was "The End of a Conservative Age".  I don't need to read it to know that the guy leans pretty far left.  Conservatism isn't dead and it wasn't a failure.  It just needs to be revitalized.

Rob said:

Even when you set aside the cost of the Iraq war, George's Bush's spending and growth of government bereaucracy is so prolific that it makes Bill Clinton look like a staunch conservative in retrospect.

Agreed. Clinton never actually spent that much on any of the ideas he promised. He was much more responsible by comparison. It's a sad state of affairs.

Though, don't forget the importance of a sound monetary policy and Bush's failure there. In that aspect, we've been screwed by pretty much every administration since FDR. (Only Reagan seemed to turn back the tide for a while.)

However, the attacking of the Iraq War is another issue. I don't remember the exact details of the statistic I heard, but compared to the general waste of earmark spending, the entire Iraq War (after its all said and done) won't even equal what our legislature spends in either a single month or a single year (I can't remember which). It's astronomical sums of money and it's all because our government is so fucking huge.

I still believe Bush was better than what Kerry would have given us (and what Obama is threatening). Bush was for lower taxes and did restrain spending somewhat in his second term. However, in retrospect, I think Gore would have been better on spending (since the Republicans might not have not let him spend as much as Bush).


What's your opinion on the Supreme Court, Rob? Bush and both of the parties have screwed up our economy to a large degree (for the moment), but for economic "conservatism" to succeed in the long run, it needs the support of good judges as well. Do you believe that the judges which would have been chosen by Gore or Kerry are a non-issue?

Tiptup said:

What's your opinion on the Supreme Court, Rob? Bush and both of the parties have screwed up our economy to a large degree (for the moment), but for economic "conservatism" to succeed in the long run, it needs the support of good judges as well. Do you believe that the judges which would have been chosen by Gore or Kerry are a non-issue?

 The appointment of Supreme Court Justices, which will become very relevant in the near future, is the only thing that Republicans are still getting right.  There is no doubt that liberal Supreme Court justices intend to strip us of our most basic Constitutonal rights.  The recent decision to uphold the Second Ammendment in the state of Washington was decided by a 5 to 4 margin.  We are now one Supreme Court justice away from losing this, and all of our other fundemental Constitutional rights.

This is one of the many reasons why  John McCain sucks shit.  Many Republicans are letting him slide in an effort to "take one for the team" without realizing that John McCain is one of the other team's star players.  I have no doubt that he would appoint liberal Supreme Court justices in an attempt to reach out to his his liberal pals as he has done for his entire carrier. THAT'S WHY WE CONSERVATIVES HATE HIM, REMEMBER!

As long as we're on the subject of the Second Ammendment, allow me to point out that John McCain has done it more damage than anyone else in our history.  His "Campaign Finance Reform" effectively strips the NRA, or any other Second Ammendment supporters, from voicing there opinion just prior to an election.  Since this is the most important time to inform voters of who does and doesn't support our Second Ammendment rights, we have been directly stripped of our First Ammendment rights, and as such are no longer capable of protecting our other rights.  John McCain has decided that the government will choose what we hear and see prior to an election.  He is not only a liberal, he is the worst kind of liberal.  He has zero interest in our Constitutional rights, and intends to continue his historical expansion of our goverment's power over it's own people. Judge him by what he has done, not by the nosense that pours out of his royal mouth.

The Republican party has been completely hijacked by liberals like McCain and Bush thanks in large part to the type of retards who frequent this thread.  Those who are not capable of turning off the "Conservative" talk radio and thinking for themselves have helped to destroy the Republican Party.  It now caters to religious retards and weak minded sheep.  It needs to be taught a lesson. 

Tiptup said:

Rob said:

Even when you set aside the cost of the Iraq war, George's Bush's spending and growth of government bereaucracy is so prolific that it makes Bill Clinton look like a staunch conservative in retrospect.

Agreed. Clinton never actually spent that much on any of the ideas he promised. He was much more responsible by comparison. It's a sad state of affairs.

Clinton had a Republican Congress to control him for 6 of his 8 years.  Anyone remember the "Contract with America"?

Stop being such a faggy cheerleader you dope.  Bush is the most prolific spender in our country's history.  He spent A LOT more than Clinton did.  Your dopey justifications dont change the facts.

He's not defending Bush's spending (I don't think anyone outside the administration would try and defend Bush's spending); he's just pointing out that Clinton would have spent more than he did if he'd had a Democrat congress.

On top of that, the American people aren't blind to the overspending. Republicans not being fiscally conservative (along with a few immoral Republicans getting conveniently-timed major press coverage) is what lost the GOP control of Congress two years ago.