The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (SPECIAL ACCESS) KGB Political Debate Central Boehner - stupid leader of the party of stupid

Understood. I actually looked into Silver a bit lately, and he does know his shit. I guess the point I should be making, is that in the case of an election there are multiple ways to win and lose.

What the GOP has lost, is the "libertarian" middle. And point of note on the "small l". As in, those of us who generally think that Big Govt doesnt work and even makes things worse, and the problem is actually the spending of both parties. We normally lean GOP.. or did until Bush.

Because while we buy into the smaller govt message, we do not buy into the social aspects of what the GOP is peddling. So when Romney endorses NDAA provisions , and starts being vague about policy, and promises a doubling of military spending.. we back off on our support. Because we dont care if the Big Govt graft goes to Green Energy, Green Uniforms, or Green Money Lenders ( ie: alternative energy , military contractors, wall st banksters ) we just want the massive extraction of wealth from the private to the public and quasi-public/crony sectors to end. Or at least be contained back to reasonable levels.

For the record I thought Silver was indulging in a bit of wishful thinking. I believed elections would have turned out much closer than it did.

Something I can get behind, but not as a top priority. Well-being of citizens is higher on my priority list, and I am not convinced that small government would lead there even in the long term.

Now question on specific quote - do you think energy independence is a worthwhile goal? In a hypothetical situation where there was a solid spending plan (think national highway system) to reach it, but costs and government involvement were very substantial, would you support it?

Obama was never offered the old budget in any official negotiations. During a press conference he was asked whether he'd start negotiations from that hard-fought compromise, and he explained the common sense reasons why he wouldn't.

I think the broader point you were trying to make is that the Democrats are equally complicit in the current political brinkmanship. Sure, the democrats negotiate with the full knowledge that they're in a position of power. Also, I've heard many democrats suggest we go over the cliff because the GOP has more to lose. I find this equally abhorrent. In general, however, there is only one party negotiating in good faith.



So, I'd consider myself a true centrist if it weren't for the current state of the GOP. From my perspective, it's this unconciliatory view of government's role that's causing the most problems. I'd suggest government does work and has worked for hundreds of years. Further, I'd suggest we have no reasonable alternative for government that work in either the theoretical or practical.

Sure, I agree that in many circumstances less government intervention or oversight is preferable. However, the current GOP believes:

1) There is never a good solution to a problem via the means of government. While I could expound on counter-examples, I would simply state this leads to the GOP not even trying to solve problems or denying the existence of any.

2) There is no compromise, because to compromise is to be complicit in government. Unfortunately, this had lead to the GOP treating the other 50% of the electorate with contempt.

3) Since government is illegitimate, and the GOP has a governmental job, their job is never taken with respect or seriousness. This can been seen with increasely empty campaigns and ambivalence to government operations.

Political graft? Will always exist just like business fraud. Try to clean it up as much as possible; but don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Turkey, conservatives on this message board (and maybe GOP establishment as a whole) are ultra-ultra right. From where they stand, your position and communism are one and the same.

Just yours sini just yours.