Why Does the GOP Want the Rest of the World to Point and Laugh at America?

It’s stark. It’s like night and day. Anyone who says there’s no difference between the parties is certifiable.

While the industrialized world increases R & D on renewable forms of energy, stands for equal rights for all, bans the death penalty and other trends contrary to the days of the Visigoths, the Republicans are moving backwards.

20120512-080241.jpg

Since the New Deal, the GOP has been on the wrong side of History. Perhaps this list is incomplete, but it’s a staggering contrast between Democrats and Republicans.

Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
The debt ceiling
The war in Vietnam
The war in Iraq
Equal rights
Civil liberties (voter suppression i.e.)
Church-state separation
Consumer issues (FDA, EPA)
Public education
Reproductive freedom
National health care
Labor issues
Gun policy
Campaign-finance reform
The environment
Immigration issues
Election and voting issues
American History
The interpretation of our Constitution
GLBT issues
Tax fairness
Workers rights

Consider the history of the GOP when electing anyone with an R next to their name. Odds are, money, power are far more important than facts and being on the right side of history. Their callousness towards the poor speaks volumes.

Remember who could possibly control the White House if 2010 apathy sets in again. The guy that represents a return to the good old days of the 80 hour workweek, no clean water and pay per use fire departments for starters. Look on the bright side. Your kids can go to work and finally start earning their keep. Who cares if they’re 12?

Do we really want Romney? The man has held every position on every issue. A man that claims credit for policies he denounced. A man determined to be on the wrong side of history.

20120512-082807.jpg

{Thanks to @Arseburgers and The Democratic Underground}

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Why Does the GOP Want the Rest of the World to Point and Laugh at America?

  1. I sincerely urge you to actually investigate each of the examples you’ve given as issues that Republicans have been on the wrong side of. Some are simply debatable, such as abortion and gay marriage. Others, you are completely wrong on.

    Republicans are the party that freed the slaves and wrote every piece of civil rights legislation that has been passed since the Emancipation Proclamation through the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Democrats are the party of slavery, the party of the KKK, and the party of the Jim Crow.

    John Kennedy (D) took us into Vietnam, which was not a bad choice actually. Fighting the war was not a bad idea, how we fought the war and our subsequent withdrawal (Nixon – R) was.

    The Iraq War(s) both had broad bipartisan support at the outsets.

    What is tax fairness?

    We need freedom of choice in education. We need to empower families to choose the school that best fits their child’s needs.

    Workers rights? Such as the right not to join a union?

    Social Security is running at a deficit. Medicare is going bankrupt. Socialized medicine has not worked anywhere for very long. It increases costs, decreases access, and decreases quality.

    A fraudulent vote for one candidate disenfranchises a legitimate vote for the another candidate.

    1. I think if you recall actual historical events, not Teabagger revisionist history, I’m not wrong. #1 the Republicans of the 1860’s are completely opposite of today’s teabagging party. Jim Crow laws were initiated by Dixiecrats and Republicans that were more “segregationist”. #2 Vietnam was a mistake, but it was escalated by Johnson and Nixon, Johnson later admitting it was a mistake and plans were in the work for withdrawal far sooner than 1975. #3 The Iraq war impetus was a bunch of fabrications as has since been proven. You can’t be serious on that one!! #4 Tax fairness is each paying according to his or her means. The tax policies of the Reagan era had the wealthiest paying a 39% tax rate, as opposed to Mitt Romney’s 13.9%. #5 Freedom of choice in education is completely ridiculous as most poor people don’t have the means to make a choice. Unions protect workers, and your assertion one has the right not to join an organization designed to protect him/her is preposterous. #6 Social Security is far more solvent than the privatizing psychos of your party would like to admit. Stimulate the economy and increase employment like FDR did and you’ll see more people contributing to the fund. and finally…. Election fraud is about as common as lightning strikes or Glenn Beck being rational. That’s a Fox News talking point and you know it. It’s discrimination against poor people, as per Paul Weyrich’s ALEC playbook.

    2. : I ACTUALLY DID WIN ON THE ISSUES BY USING FACTS. THE FACT YOU BELIEVE THE IRAQ WAR WAS VOTED ON BASED ON ANYTHING OTHER THAN DECEPTION AND FABRICATION LEADS ME TO BELIEVE YOU’VE NOT LOOKED AT HISTORY FROM A NEUTRAL PERSPECTIVE. OBVIOUSLY BEING IN IRAQ AND VIETNAM (& NOW AFGHANISTAN) WERE EPIC FAILURES OF OUR FOREIGN POLICY. REVISIONIST HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS LEND YOU ZERO CREDIBILITY.

  2. As usual, the Left become unhinged when faced with a contrarian viewpoint. I’ll attempt to provide you some constructive information in some instances, while just expressing my opinion in other instances.

    Jim Crow laws came in response to the series of civil rights legislation passed by Republicans following the Civil War. Jim Crow laws began in 1876 and lasted through 1965. They were always pushed by Democrats. As Democrats continued to become more moderate in the mid-20th Century, the Dixiecrats came into play. They were the still tried-and-true racists of the Democratic Party. I’ve written about this here: http://landofthetea.com/2012/03/03/politics-of-race-part-2-historical-perspective-of-republicans-and-democrats/

    The Vietnam war is arguable. If one believes that Communism is bad (I do), and if had been left unfettered in southeast Asia it would have continued to spread throughout the region including Indonesia, then the stand needed to be taken. Eisenhower probably would have if still in office. JFK took a stand, but always seemed poised to withdrawal. We’ll never know what he would have done after his next election if not assassinated. You are correct that the war became full blown under LBJ. Nixon did take five years to withdraw the troops through his Vietnamization plan, so I understand your point.

    There were many reasons for the 2nd Iraq War being fought. Namely, how many final resolutions does the world give someone threatening ultimatums until they finally carry through on an ultimatum? I respect people’s stances being against our engaging in the Iraq War at the outset, but once our country is committed, I do not respect those who hamper our chances of success.

    Tax fairness. So, is a flat tax okay? If we all pay the same percentage with no deductions? Make more, pay more. Right now, approximately 48% of Americans have no federal tax liability. Is that fair? What exactly would be fair?

    You are confusing income taxes with capital gains taxes. Romney’s earnings are through capital gains and is taxed accordingly. Under Reagan, capital gains taxes were at 20%. You cited his marginal income tax rate.

    Freedom of choice in education empowers families by allowing them to take the tax dollars used to educate their child at their current school to another school. It allows them to choose their local school or another one. Currently, unless one can afford to go to private school, one is only allowed to attend the school in their district. What occurs is families who wish their children to attend the best school in the area move to that school’s district. This increases the value of housing in those districts preventing those with less economic means from moving to where the better school is located. (The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer). Why not empower families to choose the school best for their child and have schools compete for the money?

    I’m entirely for unions having the opportunity to exist as the ability for them to serves a valued purpose. But, unions can be as good or as bad as any company can be.

    There are so many better alternative ways to run social security from it’s current format. I can’t fathom why some are so defensive of the current system. Social security won’t go bankrupt because we won’t default on the US Bonds. We’ll pay it out of the operating budget if necessary, but that is besides the point.

    Voter fraud is real and is a concern and a majority of Americans agree with me. I’m not familiar with every state’s Voter ID laws, but the ones I am familiar with take many precautions to protect a person’s right to vote. The state will provide free transportation to obtain their ID Card and a free ID Card if necessary. If someone shows up without their ID, they are able to still cast a provisional ballot that will be counted, if necessary, at a later time. This is such a common sense solution, the only people who could be against it are those who rely on fraud to win elections.

  3. You lost me at unhinged. I became nothing of the sort, just refuted your nonsense point by point. The majority of anyone that agrees with you watches Fox News. Q.E.D.

  4. I use “unhinged” when one resorts to derogatory term like “tea baggers”. Perhaps “unhinged” was too strong. “Juvenile” would have been more apropos. It detracts from the credibility of your opinion. One should want to avoid that.

    Another thing that comes up time and again from those on the Left is Fox News. What is the obsession? I spend little time watching/listening to the main stream news and when I do, I spend as much time watching CNN and/or MSNBC as I do Fox.

    I do sincerely appreciate the forum. Thank you for posting my comments. I respect that.

      1. Tis true some used that term on themselves, but using that logic as justification for using the offensive terminology is akin to saying it is okay to call black people the N word. But, of course, the only ones that can be called that without an uproar are the likes of Kenneth Gladney. But, I digress. Once again, I fall for the Left’s tactics. You can’t win on the issues, so the debate wanders off to focus on lexicons and terminology.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s