Republican Rep. Allen West says many congressional Democrats are Communists

[Tommy Ceez]

Originally Posted by classicman2

In what area did George W. Bush spend like a big government progressive?

The forever wars

[classicman2]

Originally Posted by Tommy Ceez

The forever wars

But a big government progressive would be opposed to forever wars & increased defense spending.

[SuprVgeta]

Originally Posted by classicman2

But a big government progressive would be opposed to forever wars & increased defense spending.

Obviously Obama (a big government progressive) does not subscribe to that belief, as he has expanded the Afghanistan war, bombed Libya, and is now looking at military action in Syria..? And it wasn't Obama who ended Iraq... he got out on Bush's timetable, and opposed Bush's troop surge that allowed us to leave when we did.

We need to get out of Afghanistan. The Taliban is bombed to hell, Bin Laden is dead. Why exactly are we still there? There's no way I'm going to convince you guys of anything, so I don't really know why I bother posting in the political forum sometimes. Continue to put your faith in big government to solve all of life's problems at your own peril.

[mosquitobite]

Originally Posted by classicman2

In what area did George W. Bush spend like a big government progressive?

yep prescription drugs, the never-ending war on terror, NCLB, TSA, DHS, etc etc etc...

Bush never met a taxpayer dollar he didn't like to spend. How many vetoes did he sign exactly over EIGHT YEARS?

And Obama is more of the same...yet the left hated Bush.
Romney will be more of the same...yet the right hates Obama.

Bizarro world, I tell ya.

[classicman2]

I see. Small government conservative presidents (btw: name a couple of small government conservative presidents) don't want to protect the homeland or provide better medical care for the populace; and they would veto the hell out of every bill, regardless of merit, that comes from the congress. Whether a president vetoes no bills or every bill has no bearing.

[DVD Polizei]

Greed has no political affiliations. When you realize this, any action by any politician of any political party...actually makes sense.

[Navinabob]

Crap... they're all Communists now!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...l?ref=politics

Jon Huntsman Criticizes Republican Party, Compares Actions To Communist China

Jon Huntsman leveled harsh criticism at his party on Sunday evening, BuzzFeed's Zeke Miller reported, comparing the Republican Party to communist China and questioning the strength of this year's presidential field.

During an event at the 92nd Street Y in New York City, Huntsman spoke candidly about his party's flaws, lamenting the Republican National Committee's decision to rescind an invitation to a major fundraising event after Huntsman called for a third-party candidate to enter the race.

"This is what they do in China on party matters if you talk off script," Huntsman said.

Huntsman, a former Utah governor who dropped out of the GOP primary in January, served as U.S. ambassador to China under President Barack Obama.

He also criticized the Republican candidates' foreign policy stances, particularly in regard to China.

"I don’t know what world these people are living in," Huntsman said.

Although Huntsman did not mention any specific candidates, he has criticized Mitt Romney in the past for his "wrong-headed" approach. Huntsman, who endorsed Romney after dropping out of the race, said in February that the former Massachusetts governor should take a more opportunity-minded view to relations with China.

Huntsman also spoke on Sunday about his presidential candidacy, revealing that he was less than impressed by his fellow candidates when he attended his first debate in August.

"Is this the best we could do?" Huntsman said he asked himself.

He also joked that his wife forbade him to pander to the party's far-right contingent ahead of Iowa's caucuses, which likely hurt him with conservative voters in the Hawkeye State.

“She said if you pandered, if you sign any of those damn pledges, I’ll leave you,” Huntsman said. "So I had to say I believe in science -- and people on stage look at you quizzically as though you're ... an oddball."

Huntsman, however, did not actively campaign in Iowa, telling CBS News in December that "they pick corn," not presidents, in that early caucus state.

Since dropping out of the race, Huntsman has remained critical of his former opponents and has remained lukewarm in his backing of Romney.

"Gone are the days when the Republican Party used to put forward big, bold, visionary stuff," Huntsman said during the February interview with MSNBC that got him disinvited from the RNC fundraiser. "I think we're going to have problems politically until we get some sort of third-party movement or some alternative voice out there that can put forward new ideas."

And unlike others in his party who have endorsed Romney, Huntsman has refrained from appearing at campaign events on behalf of his party's likely nominee. According to his daughter, Abby Livingston, he won't be joining Romney on the trail anytime soon.

“My dad is not a surrogate for Romney and will not be out stumping for him in the general,” she told ABC News earlier this month. "He is enjoying private life.”

[kvrdave]

I would agree with most of his points. Neither party really goes after someone that truly represents what they want, they go after someone that they believe can get the most votes and then hope they can make them into what they wanted. It takes wicked popularity to end up getting the nomination of a party when you are not who they wanted from the beginning.

[mosquitobite]

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei

Greed has no political affiliations. When you realize this, any action by any politician of any political party...actually makes sense.

[wendersfan]

Originally Posted by kvrdave

I would agree with most of his points. Neither party really goes after someone that truly represents what they want, they go after someone that they believe can get the most votes and then hope they can make them into what they wanted.

If that were the case for the Democrats then Hillary Clinton would be President now. As for the Republicans, Romney might not be the first choice of the party rank-and-file, but he has certainly 'adjusted' his positions on a number of issues to accommodate them, and since, as we all know, candidates actually follow through on what they'll say they'll do, there's no reason to think that Romney won't govern as if he were a founding member of the Tea Party.

[classicman2]

There's every reason to believe that Romney will not govern as a founding member of the Tea Party - history. There hasn't been a president who has governed like a small-government conservative in my life time. Bill Clinton came as close as any one has - IMO.


btw: I'm not advocating any to govern as a small-government conservative.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by SuprVgeta

We need to get out of Afghanistan. The Taliban is bombed to hell, Bin Laden is dead. Why exactly are we still there? There's no way I'm going to convince you guys of anything, so I don't really know why I bother posting in the political forum sometimes. Continue to put your faith in big government to solve all of life's problems at your own peril.

I love it when the Bush conservatives become all anti-war and hippyish.

[Tommy Ceez]

Originally Posted by CRM114

I love it when the Bush conservatives become all anti-war and hippyish.

Go back and read my old posts.

I consider myself somewhat well informed and I was fucking bamboozled

[kvrdave]

Originally Posted by wendersfan

If that were the case for the Democrats then Hillary Clinton would be President now. As for the Republicans, Romney might not be the first choice of the party rank-and-file, but he has certainly 'adjusted' his positions on a number of issues to accommodate them, and since, as we all know, candidates actually follow through on what they'll say they'll do, there's no reason to think that Romney won't govern as if he were a founding member of the Tea Party.

I think Obama represents what the party really wanted over Clinton, but they didn't think he could win.

[mosquitobite]

Originally Posted by CRM114

I love it when the Bush conservatives become all anti-war and hippyish.

I love it when "anti-war" Obama liberals are ok with war in Libya, Syria, Iran...

[CRM114]

We have boots on the ground in those countries? I'm out of it.

[mosquitobite]

So now war is only defined by boots on the ground?

I'm sure the same definition will be applied when the next Republican President pulls it, right? Wars with drones=ok.

I'm not just worried about our American servicemen/women, I'm also worried about the money being wasted in these wars. I'm concerned about civilian casualties in those countries and what it's doing to our country's image world wide.

But, yeah it's all about boots on the ground that make a war right or wrong.

Thanks for proving the point though!

[Tommy Ceez]

Originally Posted by mosquitobite

I love it when "anti-war" Obama liberals are ok with war in Libya, Syria, Iran...

We are at war with Syria? Iran?

Who is calling for blood in those countries? Democrats?

And Libya is the best proof of the anti-intervention concept. We did a indisputably good thing, and it changes no one's perception of us, there were no crowds throwing roses, and the situation there is probably just as bad.

[wishbone]

  
LINK

[Tommy Ceez]

Did that really need to be fact checked?

What about ballistics?

[TheBigDave]

I'm not a big Allen West fan. But this is one of the greatest "kick your opponent in the nuts" ads I've seen this election:

[Dr Mabuse]

I saw that earlier. Man that is an attack ad to beat them all isn't it?

[Supermallet]

I'm surprised it didn't end with West punching Murphy in the face.