This is yet another of The Pink Flamingo’s wait and see what develops compilation of posts. I like doing this to see trends – and there are trends here. Bottom line, compassionate conservative is no longer acceptable. Compassion is no longer acceptable. Neither is Reagan. We now have a party based on Ayn Rand’s hatred of all things Christian.
Want to know how the GOP will lose in 2012?
Once upon a time the GOP had a Great Man as POTUS. These days, though, he is viewed as impure.
“…The truth is that the Republican Party has not had a conversation about the Bush years and what they mean in 2012. Like it or not: our party was once led by a self-styled compassionate conservative who spent federal dollars to save people with HIV/AIDS in Africa, bailed out Wall Street, assailed nativism, protectionism, and isolationism, and rightfully said after Saddam Hussein was overthrown “everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear.”
So I propose this question for the next Republican debate: “Candidates, what do you think is the legacy of the last Republican to work in the Oval Office, George W. Bush?”…”
During the “Tea Party”/CNN Debate, the tea partiers showed just how morally depraved they truly were and how abjectly dangerous some of these people are with their anti-Christian libertarian Randian ideas. I cringed, sickened.
“…CNN’s Wolf Blitzer posed this question to Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul: “A healthy young, 30-year-old man has a good job, makes a good living but decides, ‘You know what? I’m not going to spend $200 or $300 a month on health insurance because I’m healthy, I don’t need it.’ But something terrible happens, all the sudden he needs it. What’s going to happen if he goes into a coma? Who pays for that?”
“What he should do is whatever he wants to do,” Paul replied. “That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to prepare to take care of everybody…”
“Are you saying society should just let him die?” Blitzer asked.
The audience responded with shouts of “Yes!”
“We’ve given up on this concept that we might take care of ourselves, assume responsibility for ourselves, our neighbors, our friends, our churches would do it,” Paul explained. “This is the reason the cost is so high… We have lack of competition. There’s no competition in medicine. Everybody’s protected by licensing ”…”
“…With two Republican debates behind us since the entrance of Governor Rick Perry, the Teastablishment candidate, and former President George W. Bush into the race, now’s the time to take stock of where things are.
As a supporter of the Bush restoration, I’d like to lead off with what I believe was the former President’s finest moment. After some members of the Tampa Tea Party audience cheered their approval for the death of a young coma victim without health insurance, the former President raised his hand and asked Wolf Blitzer if he could interject:
“If I may, Wolf. Now, I understand moral hazard, but let’s not cheer the death of an innocent. When people are hurting, the government’s gotta move.”
The former chief executive then segued (in a clunky way, granted) to a stirring defense of the PEPFAR program, which has saved millions of lives in Africa. PEPFAR is a great Republican achievement, and I’m surprised it’s not celebrated as a great example of ‘soft power’, especially since Bush’s approval numbers in Africa are around the 80’s and 90’s….”
The libertarians are causing the GOP to look as though there is no heart or soul. That’s a bit true because libertarians who follow Ayn Rand have literally sold their soul to someone who detested Christ. Why should they care about helping others?
Libertarians have pushed the GOP to the point where there is no longer moderation. The Pink Flamingo is not talking about moderates, but moderation. The losertarians have pushed the GOP to become extremely liberal in their demands for conservative purity.
“...Ron Paul told TPM on Wednesday that even if there’s a “case or two” that makes Americans uncomfortable, the government should stay out of the health care business. Even if one of the cases in question is his former campaign manager, Kent Snyder, who died with $400,000 in unpaid medical bills after being unable to secure health insurance due to a pre-existing condition.
At a Christian Science Monitor breakfast, Paul took questions from reporters on Snyder, whose story surfaced in the press after Paul said in the last Republican debate that the government should not intervene even to save a comatose 30 year old who did not have insurance. As Gawker noted, Snyder died in June 2008 without health insurance, leaving behind $400,000 in bills. His friends and family set up a fund to raise money to pay off the debt. It’s not clear how much money they were able to raise: a site set up by Ron Paul aide Justine Lam to track the medical fund stopped updating in 2008 with only $34,870 in donations.
“Well first off, people do get care, even under this terrible situation we have in medicine today,” Paul told reporters when asked about his former aide. “Kent, my campaign manager, wasn’t denied any care at all.”…”
There is a much bigger story here. First, it is rather obvious Ron Paul could have stepped in and helped his employee. He could have assisted with insurance, but he did not. The libertarians talked a good game, but when it came down to putting money where their mouths were, they defaulted, leaving the hospital to pick up the tab, thus raising medical costs for us all.
Libertarians don’t have much use for factual accuracy. Case in point:
“...The Republican Party has obviously changed greatly since Reagan first ran for president in 1968, and even since he left office with a solid 63% approval rating in January 1989. It is hard to imagine a governor with Reagan’s record on taxes and abortion faring very well in today’s GOP nominating fight, even if he did repudiate those positions.
Reagan’s willingness to compromise has also fallen badly out of favor in a Republican Party fired up by its give-no-quarter “tea party” ranks.
“People that pragmatic now are what they call RINOs,” said Spencer, using the epithet, “Republican in Name Only,” that is flung by keepers of the faith at those deemed less than pure….”
Have you ever wondered what libertarians are smoking (besides the obvious)? There is a piece in the LA Times that says the SCGOP has been taken over by the libertarians.
So, how’s that libertarian thing working out for SC? Eric Dondero can be so delusional at times. He’s praising Mark Sanford for being such a great libertarian. Too bad he’s not in South Carolina, asking people about Sanford, who was an unmitigated disaster for the state.
Then again, the primary target for SC losertarians is Lindsey.
“...In the aftermath of the 2010 elections, the state GOP controls all levers of government and all but one House seat. Not everyone — particularly in Washington — expects Graham to enjoy a similarly smooth ride in 2014, given the rise of a tea party movement that includes Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) among its champions.
This activist conservative base helped propel previously little-known state legislator Nikki Haley to victory in the 2010 GOP gubernatorial primary and into the governor’s office. The same political energy helped House Republicans finally defeat Budget Chairman John Spratt (D) in 2010 after years of trying.
Graham said he has no plans to change his style, which at times has steered him into high-profile alliances with liberal Democrats on national, hot-button issues such as immigration and climate change. Graham also made clear he would continue to push for federal spending earmarks on local projects vital to South Carolina’s economy, such as the modernization of Charleston’s seaport. Conservatives like DeMint are adamantly opposed.
But Graham, perhaps aware of the trouble he sometimes causes himself with South Carolina’s GOP base, also defended his record as staunchly and consistently conservative on the issues that matter most to his constituents.
“I am a fiscal conservative and got the record to prove it. I’m a social conservative and got the record to prove it,” Graham said. “I try to solve problems that need to be solved. I think most people appreciate that.”
That’s a bit toned down from an interview last year with the New York Times. In the July 2010 article, Graham said the tea party movement is “just unsustainable because they can never come up with a coherent vision for governing the country.”
“It will die out,” he said, comments that fanned the flames as tea partyers asked him to vote against Elena Kagan’s Supreme Court nomination. (He supported her.)
Even Republicans with strong ties to the party’s conservative base are skeptical of Graham’s supposed vulnerability, although they acknowledge his problems and expect him to face a primary challenge of some sort.
Lawton conceded Graham would be difficult to beat in a primary, in large part because the anti-Graham wing of the South Carolina GOP is composed of a collection of competing groups that are unlikely to coalesce behind a single candidate with the stature to beat the incumbent in a primary.
Graham, who has a broad following thanks in part to his frequent television appearances discussing foreign policy and national security, also has a significant financial advantage.
Although the Senator’s second-quarter fundraising results were not yet available, the $2.9 million he reported on hand at the end of March equaled enough to pay for nearly 12 weeks of television advertising at 1,000 gross ratings points in every media market in the state except in Charlotte, which serves the growing region of north central South Carolina.
Graham might also benefit from his warm relationship with DeMint, who through his Senate Conservatives Fund political action committee has supported several successful GOP Senate primary candidates nationwide. DeMint remains neutral in primaries involving incumbents. In South Carolina, where DeMint is widely popular — particularly among conservatives — such neutrality could be a boon to Graham.
“They are friendly,” said former South Carolina GOP Chairman Barry Wynn, a Spartanburg businessman who serves as DeMint’s campaign treasurer. “They don’t overlap 100 percent in their views. But in terms of collegiality, I don’t think there’s one bit of strain.”…”
Libertarians base their political life, now, on lies. Want a whopper?
The losertarians have accepted Ron Paul’s lying game about our military. They own the tea parties, who bully the GOP. Ergo, the GOP is pulling back from national security.
Very bad move.
This is no longer the party of Reagan, let alone Lincoln.
“...As president, the conservative icon approved several tax increases to deal with a soaring budget deficit, repeatedly boosted the nation’s debt limit, signed into law a bill granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants and, despite his anti-Washington rhetoric, oversaw an increase in the size and spending of the federal government. Before that, as California governor, he enacted what at the time was the largest state tax increase in American history. He also signed into law one of the nation’s most permissive abortion bills; any Republican who tried that today would be cast out of the party.
The fact that Reagan often took the actions grudgingly speaks to what, by modern Republican standards, may be one of the greatest heresies of all: At bottom, Reagan was a pragmatist, willing, when necessary, to cut a deal and compromise.
“He had a strong set of core values and operated off of those,” said Stuart Spencer, a GOP strategist who stood by Reagan’s side for virtually his entire political career, starting with his first run for governor. “But when push came to shove, he did various things he didn’t like doing, because he knew it was in the best interests of the state or country at the time.”
Spencer, with characteristic bluntness, dismissed the current vogue of Reagan revisionism: “A lot of those people running out there don’t really understand what he did. It’s just a matter of attaching themselves to a winner.”…”
Right about now, I am quite pleased with Rick Perry. Please, pardon me while I enjoy every minute of this. You know all those alleged stories of Ron Paul allegedly supporting Reagan – he lied!
Liar, Liar, Liar Liar….. Ron Paul released an ad telling how he stood with Reagan. You gotta love it!
“Dr” Paul also wants to do away with the FAA.
“...Take the Politico/MSNBC debate Wednesday night. In his first question from the moderators — lobbed at him like so many are to draw just this kind of answer — Paul stood up for the idea that the United States does not need an agency in charge of keeping the skies safe.
“I think in theory, if you understood the free market in a free society, you don’t need government to do that,” Paul told moderator Brian Williams when asked if he thought the government has a role in “making cars safe, making medicine safe, air traffic control, controlling the jets above our heads.”
“We live in a society where we have been adapted to this, and you can’t just drop it all at once, but you can transition away from it,” he said.
Paul was quick to add “that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in regulations.” He just prefers they be done at the state level….”
There is a dirty little ditty at work here. A FIVE YEAR EROSION in funding. Let’s see… How long have the Republicans held Congress? Funding comes from the House. From 2007 – 2011 Nancy Pelosi was the Speaker of the House. John Boehner has only been Speaker since January. Doesn’t that put the budget cutting ball squarely in the Dems court?
“…Still, difficult as it is to imagine, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) determined that in the immediate aftermath of a killer storm that continues to devastate communities up and down the East Coast of the United States, it would be opportune to suggest eliminating FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, one of the nation’s most needed and most effective assets. Let’s just chalk that up to a momentary lapse by a single member of Congress in the heat of a television interview.
Far more concerning has been an extraordinary five-year erosion of funding for almost every important disaster response program across the two federal Cabinet level departments that have principal responsibility for improving the nation’s capacity to plan for, respond to, and recover from disasters. To be specific, in the final 2011 federal budget, preparedness and response funding within the Department of Homeland Security, which contains FEMA, and the Department of Health and Human Services dropped nearly $900 million, approximately 17 percent, compared to the previous year.
Funding for hospital disaster preparedness programs, alone, has dropped approximately 35 percent over the past five years. Even larger cuts have been made to school preparedness programs, regional planning for catastrophic disasters, emergency operations centers, and disaster response training programs for public health agencies. Other than funds available for testing new antidotes and vaccines, essential disaster research dollars have dried up. On state and local levels, these are devastating, to-the-bone cuts that erode the basic capacity of communities to fulfill their basic responsibilities when disaster strikes….”
“…Paul has been turning out adoring crowds lately at right-wing pep rallies. This past weekend he made an appearance at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference where he came within two votes of beating Romney in their Presidential straw poll. In his speech he made an interesting comment. He explained quite rightly that Obama is not a socialist, and described him instead as a “corporatist.”
The label seems to have left many attendees befuddled, but it shouldn’t. It emphasizes a theme I’ve been harping on for months – that much of the GOP is confused by its own rhetoric. For all the bluster about protecting Capitalism from Socialism, they don’t care a whit about either. Paul knows what he and the movement stands for and he’s been saying it loudly for years, it just hasn’t been widely covered.
“…Paul says that corporations are basically being put in charge of the country to run it on our behalf. He’s not the first person to express these ideas. He is speaking from an old tradition; a worldview based on a perversion of Thomas Jefferson’s model of the independent rural farmer-citizen. Though Paul himself may not be best example of it (he’s closer to a traditional Libertarian), the zealots pushing the Party ever farther into the extremes are effectively Confederate Libertarians.
The plantation class that dominated Southern life prior to the war embraced a peculiar worldview. It was similar to Jefferson’s philosophy and modern libertarianism in that it was opposed to any government involvement in economic affairs. But unlike modern libertarianism it was intensely authoritarian on religious and personal matters….”
Andrew Breitbart is the perfect example of a libertarian. He is a sleaze, but no one will admit to it. Why? He’s a tea party darling.
I don’t want to toss out a cheap shot, but how’s this economy working for you? It is obviously enriching the Koch brothers.
“…In April, ThinkProgress caused a stir when we uncovered a series of Koch Industries corporate documents revealing the company’s role as an oil speculator. Like many oil companies, Koch uses legitimate hedging products to create price stability. However, the documents reveal that Koch is also participating in the unregulated derivatives markets as a financial player, buying and selling speculative products that are increasingly contributing to the skyrocketing price of oil. Excessive energy speculation today is at its highest levels ever, and even Goldman Sachs now admits that at least $27 of the price of crude oil is a result from reckless speculation rather than market fundamentals of supply and demand. Many experts interviewed by ThinkProgress argue that the figure is far higher, and out of control speculation has doubled the current price of crude oil….”
Just think, by using their billions to make more billions by driving up the price of oil, and impoverishing the rest of us, the Koch Brothers are the heroes of libertarians everywhere. They are the prefect example of Rand – screw the world and make a profit. That gives them just oh so much more to buy even more politicians.
Just think, if it weren’t for people like the Koch Brothers, we might be paying only $58 a gallon for crude.
You gotta love it.
Maybe we should have a billionaires tax.