[SeMissourian.com] Light Rain ~ 59°F  
Wind Advisory
Monday, Nov. 24, 2014
Post reply Read replies (78) More threads Create thread

GOP must stop being 'stupid party'
Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:10 AM:

From news.yahoo.com

"CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) -- Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal called on the Republican Party to "stop being the stupid party" on Thursday as GOP leaders promised fundamental changes to help stave off future losses.

In the keynote address at the Republican National Committee's winter meeting, Jindal said the GOP doesn't need to change its values but "might need to change just about everything else we are doing."

"We've got to stop being the stupid party. It's time for a new Republican Party that talks like adults," he said. "We had a number of Republicans damage the brand this year with offensive and bizarre comments. I'm here to say we've had enough of that."



Replies

May work to get more voters if they really do change...

-- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:11 AM

Then again, maybe it's best if they keep doing what has not worked for the past four years.

-- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:13 AM

I agree with Governor Jindal comments and also with Governor Barbour and Newt Ginrich both of those men for the past week have said the same thing. The republicans are going to have to adjust there ways and go after the middle class, hispanic, women and young adult voters if they expect to win future elections they have to adjust to the 21st century voters. They have to move to the middle that is where elections are won. This is a whole different ball game today then what it was back in the Reagan days.

-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:24 AM

Granted the Republicans blew it big time in the last two presidential elections. McCain and Romney were two of the worst choices from all the qualified primary runners. If I were to call anyone stupid though it would be anyone who voted for Obama.

-- Posted by dab1969 on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:31 AM

They also want your input about how they should change through a web poll.

http://growthopp.gop.com/default.aspx?s=...

I doubt they will change much.

-- Posted by 3forone on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:33 AM

Then again, maybe it's best if they keep doing what has not worked for the past four years. -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:13 AM

Yes - republicans should push very very hard for

illegal immigration

free health care for illegals and credits for people earning up to $80,000

women in front-line combat

gay marriage

more food stamps, section 8 housing, 99 weeks of unemployment

relieve all college loans to all but white men

encourage more out-of-wedlock pregnancies and government payment for the births

banning all guns that shoot more than a bb

abortion at any time - including scissors in newborn skulls which Obama supports - and payment of abortions by tax payers

electing unqualified inexperienced presidents because they are black or female

Yes - if republicans could just accept everything the democrats are for then we could relive Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama - two of the most incompetent leaders in the history of the United States. Great logic common!

-- Posted by Dug on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 8:20 AM

Then again, maybe it's best if they keep doing what has not worked for the past four years.

-- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 7:13 AM

We know it would help your bottom line.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 8:43 AM

"Yes - republicans should push very very hard for..."

Not at all. Just stop being "stupid."

-- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 9:11 AM

-- Posted by nwmo on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 8:45 AM

Welcome to the dung party.

You have to make somewhat credible statements. Infers pockets being filled with your tax dollars? a) you couldn't be more wrong and b) I thought you democrats liked that? Buying votes?

-- Posted by Dug on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 9:11 AM

I vote straight republican ticket here -- Posted by nwmo on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 9:31 AM

Then you need to switch to democrat. You make points based on nothing but the air between your ears. Give one fact - just one - that makes you believe I receive government money. You can't because I don't. You'd do yourself a favor posting for Obama because most of his supporters ignore facts and post mindless spin.

It's a good fit for you.

-- Posted by Dug on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 11:35 AM

nwmo - quit voting for Obama if you're sick and tired of paying for welfare, unemployment, medicaid, your college loans, obamaphones and rent in yo' momma's basement.

Facts are not that hard to come by if you look around - I'm trying to figure out who you're a sock puppet for. Me'Lange? Username1? An angry spaniard? You're too funny!

-- Posted by Dug on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 11:51 AM

"...if given the chance, we can govern. We have better ideas."

So, what are they?

-- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 12:23 PM

As far as winning elections, conservatism always works when it is adhered to. Just ask Ron Paul.

Democrat will continue to be the party of stupid voters and smart well paid liars. :)

-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 1:23 PM

-- Posted by nwmo on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 1:01 PM

And those posts prove what? Nothing. Go get all my posts for the past 4 years and bring them here as well. Sounds like something a 16 year old would have time to do - or a sock puppet.

As I said, I can walk and chew gum. What do I do for a living sock puppet? Let that occupy your empty mind for a while. Tell momma hi!

-- Posted by Dug on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 1:30 PM

Someone hit a nerve.

-- Posted by ratiocination on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 2:45 PM

You already have one party called the Democrat Party, you probably don't need two.

Before the leadership of the Republican Party threw out libertarian ideas they had a sense of macro economics, today they act like Democrats with no understanding of economics.

Keynesian economics were discarded for the most part after its failure in the 1970's, GW Bush went Keynesian all the way, and his replacement stuck with it. What do you expect from Trotskyites? They miss the days of Wilson and Roosevelt.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 2:58 PM

I think nwmo was a sock puppet that didn't want to reveal their previous name. They like to come in, stir up some posts and then disappear. They're just having fun. It definitely posted just like a couple of other libs running around here!

-- Posted by Dug on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 3:48 PM

I think that Republicans should read Frederic Bastiat's "The Law". Bastiat was an economist and politician in 19th century France.

"The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!

If this is true, it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me to call the attention of my fellow-citizens to it."

The law today is a mechanism used for public and private greed. There are profits to be made off the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and military engagements. Those profits are encouraged by the fourth estate at the expense of the nation's economy.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 5:20 PM

"The Republicans are going to have to forget about integrity and lie like a left wing liberal to get elected."

That was Romney's problem. He told the truth when at the same time he was attacked with lies.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 5:42 PM

Regret, Republicans need to understand law and economics better, and be honest about their ignorance.

Democrats are in the same boat with their ignorance. This thread was about what Republicans need to do.

Both parties need to be honest with themselves and gain the trust of the young. The corruption in Washington along with a poor performing economy has destroyed any trust they might have had.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 6:00 PM

I look for the young to mature and get savy then tear it down and start all over again .

-- Posted by Dissident. on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 6:33 PM

By then too much financial damage will be done to the US to be the same.

Now they are saying with the huge growth of the SS disability fund it will broke in 2016.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/...

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 8:18 PM

The financial damage created by Keynesian economic policies around the world have led to the largest number ever unemployed, 205 million. As one economist put it, Keynesian economics has proven to be a flop.

I am not an economist, but the way I see it government spending cannot replace private spending. Production geared to one type of spending means less production geared toward the other. Government consumption must deprive the private market of monies that would provide greater innovation leading to more production and jobs if left in private hands.

The higher taxes and public debt is a determent to job growth. One other characteristic of government spending, it competes with private spending for scarce goods and resources.

As earlier economists have noted, no economy has grown through consumption, only through production. Since government does not produce, it can only try to grow the economy through consumption (Keynesian).

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 10:17 PM

BC

It is flawed. But this was the New Deal which was a socialist dream.

The Keynesian multiplier is what they have been using but it is flawed. Taxing savings was the plan thinking that people will spend instead of save and it will cause full employment and a robust economy.

The other part is the thinking 50% of government project spending will go back into the economy and make even more jobs as people spend it. The bad thing it was based on a balanced budget and no government borrowing.

The truth is savings and investment is a bigger multiplier than deficit spending.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 11:03 PM

Regret, One only has to look at Japan to see the flaws in government spending to offset lack of private production and consumption. They spent fortunes on infrastructure and the only return was massive debt.

Keynesians from both sides of the aisle have forgotten that goods are wealth, not fiat money. I was not a huge fan, but a fan none-the-less of Reagan's economic advisers that believed that "passing money from one hand to the other does not make a person wealthier".

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 11:20 PM

Other things , clean water , fresh food , will be more valuable .

-- Posted by Dissident. on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 9:40 PM

We are not that far from a tax on water now. Government will use the logic that regulating and keeping water supplys safe calls for a revenue derived from use.

-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 11:22 PM

BC, David Stockman?

~~~~~

One only needs to recall the story of the three farmers selling the mule back and fourth to each other at a profit each time. Works ok until the mule gets sold to someone outside the circle.

~~~~~~

Then there's the banker story of how a dollar put in the bank becomes three. The depositor has a dollar, the bank has a dollar and the borrower has a dollar. :)

-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Jan 26, 2013, at 11:48 PM

Jacob Hornberger related a story about two Arkansas farmers. One of the farmers bought a hog off the other one. The farmer that he bought it off of wanted to buy it back and had to pay the farmer more for it than he received from the first sale. The farmers continued to sell the hog back and forth at a profit. A farmer from Iowa visited the farmer who now owned the hog and paid him an amount that the farmer couldn't refuse. When the other farmer found out about it he became angry. "Why would you sell the hog to that farmer in Iowa, as it was, we were both getting rich".

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 12:24 AM

Old John, I think that David Stockman was the director of OMB under Reagan, at least his first four years, but yes, he was one of his economy advisers along with Laffer and others.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 12:30 AM

Here is what the Keynesian Theory and the royals have cost us.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTBODoBaC...!

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 12:37 AM

Figure this out: I was speaking of the macro economy and not a micro economy. Fiat money cannot make a country richer, only goods can, even though money is a claim on goods.

This will not set well with Democrats who believe that the circulation of money makes an economy richer. That is their defense of the welfare state.

Money only has value against goods.

Finding a reserve of oil and putting it to market makes a country richer, etc... Welfare, no matter what form it takes, does not. Increasing wages for the same amount of production does not make the country wealthier, etc... Only production of "goods" to meet demand makes a country wealthier.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 12:43 AM

Regret, that does put it in perspective.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 12:48 AM

BC, Economics to me then was figuring out how to make my paycheck cover my payments. Stockman was in the news quite a bit and looked down on by the media because of his lack of age and so called authorship of trickle down economics if I'm recalling correctly. I was casually aquainted with his sister living in Cape at the time or I would probably not even have remembered his name.

Right or wrong economically speaking, Reagan is one president in my life time I would have crossed the street to meet.

Neither may be the perfect answer but looking back I would say Reaganomics beats Obamanomics hands down.

-- Posted by Old John on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 12:51 AM

Old John, I'm not an accountant, did take one course before I dropped out. My wife takes care of debits and credits. I haven't written a check in years.

The one thing that I do know, anything the government hands out was taken from someone else' production since money is a medium of exchange between goods.

I have a lot of respect for Stockman.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 1:26 AM

It takes money to make money it has been shown, but if wealth cant be mined it has to be grown. Private banks have a part to play but when government competes there's hell to pay.

-- Posted by Old John on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 2:04 AM

no dab, you would had been stupid to have voted for McCain or Romney. Your party choices were horrible,,just think Palin and Ryan were on the ticket also,,,what freaking characters.

-- Posted by Dexterite1 on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 5:33 AM

dexter,can't remember the last time I voted "for" anyone. It's a sad state of affairs when ones choice is voting against. McCain was viable until Palin entered the race. The Republicans blew it with her, but I saw through Obama's shuck and jive and total lack of experience plus who his real backers were so I voted for(or against)neither one. Romney was just exactly the candidate Obama needed to win again. He was easy to characterize as the enemy of the poor and middle class. I did vote Romney,but again,it was a vote against Obama. Can't wait to see how things have changed in 4 years.

" Stupid is as stupid does" says Forrest. We'll see about your IQ then.

-- Posted by dab1969 on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 7:00 AM

"If I could be stupid for a sec.."

-- Posted by Dissident. on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 1:25 AM

Why limit yourself to a second? (Just kidding.)

First, the price is actually going up to 46 cents. Try getting FedEx or UPS to come to your mailbox, pickup a letter, and deliver it to Fairbanks Alaska for half the price of a cup of coffee. For that matter I recall when stamps were 3 cents and coffee was 5 cents, so it would seem that stamps are still a better bargain.

Paying for stamps is not a tax. Stamps are a commodity that you buy when you want to. If you don't want a to mail a letter, don't buy stamps.

"The Federal Government has nothing to do with the USA Postal Service ."

This is basically correct as the Post Office is not supported by tax dollars. However, Congress still meddles in USPS business. Unprofitable and rural offices and routes cannot be closed or consolidated without approval of Congress. The USPS must go by each of its customer's mailbox, six times a week, whether there is mail for them or not. Congress told the Postal Service to go be self sufficient, and then kept artificial and some archaic restrictions on them. No private business could operate better under similar constraints.

-- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 7:33 AM

I understand Palin has been fired by Fox. Every where she goes every gig she does it is all on short terms she never stays at a place for a long period of time. She needs to stay in Alaska and go back to fishing with her husband.

-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 8:55 AM

-- Posted by Spaniard on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 7:27 AM

All this good, in-depth discussion about economics and politics and this is all you've got Spaniard? You are truly in the tank pretty deep. I think you've lost your critical thinking abilities.

Common, Diss - re: the USPS. With the post office going broke and not associated much with the federal government I thought a good solution would be to have the USPS spend only the money that it has and never run a deficit. Keep in place the infrastructure to move mail across the country and may provide just ONE postmaster per post office - that's all. I haven't run the numbers to see if they could afford that but I would imagine they could.

Then, each local community could decide how much postal service they want. Daily office hours? Daily delivery? PO Box only delivery? Delivery to every personal mail box? Whatever that would take each community should fund the postal workers they want to have. If you want to maintain the current level of postal delivery in Scott City (for example) then the local community CITY would need to hire 4, 5, 6, ? employees to maintain that. Or if the county wanted it then you'd need to hire XX employees on the county payroll.

This way the USPS collects, moves and delivers the mail just to a Post office. The rest is up to the community.

-- Posted by Dug on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 9:08 AM

"Paying for stamps is not a tax. Stamps are a commodity that you buy when you want to. If you don't want a to mail a letter, don't buy stamps.

"The Federal Government has nothing to do with the USA Postal Service ." "

Common, I take it you are a fan of the way the post office operates given we have a choice to purchase stamps or not.

Seems to contradict your reasoning that mandantory medical insurance purchase is a good thing.

-- Posted by Old John on Sun, Jan 27, 2013, at 12:47 PM


Respond to this thread

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account , enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


Want to comment?

In order to participate in semissourian.com's forums, you must be a registered member of the site. Once registered and logged in, you can post comments to existing threads or post new threads of your own. Click below to register now (it's free!). If you're already registered, just start commenting and posting threads.