Here's the problem, Democrats

[OCinBuffalo]

First, we begin with the following: http://www.msnbc.com...t-isnt-cultural

 

Now, read that, and my guess is most of the left-leaning people would say "sounds right to me". There's the standard "not my fault that 'the man' took away the jobs", and the standard "segregation of neighborhoods", followed by the standard attack on police.

 

All points are arguable, and can be backed up by some data. But, if you read the whole thing, I doubt you picked up on something hilarious, largely because you've been coniditioned not to pick up on it:

So, no: the problems plaguing the inner city aren’t created by culture. They are the indirect result of government policies. And it’s going to take progressive government policies to solve them.

This, right here, is why people like me mock you. This crystalizes it, and the best part: it's in your own words!

 

Re-read the last 2 sentences. Don't get it? Read it again. Do you see it? What would any rational person call the War on Poverty policies of the last 50 years, if not "progressive"? So, the problem has been "indirectly" caused by progressive policies, and the solution? What? More progressive policies?

 

This is the problem: if the War on Poverty(otherwise known as Lyndon B Johnson's intentional effort to buy black votes = "I'll have those !@#$s voting Democratic for the next 200 years!") was actually successful, what would you be saying, that's any different, in any way, than what you are saying right now?

 

Answer: nothing. You will say the same thing, no matter the outcome, no matter the facts, no matter the data collected.

 

THIS is why you are losing the white vote at a historical rate. This is why the TEA party even exists. This is becasue: after all this time, we KNOW that you couldn't care less about the poor, or black people, or anybody other than: your interests. You want $, you want votes, you want attention for being "morally superior"(as I've demonstrated on the board with useful trolls, see: Gay Marriage). Your whole game is to get these things, because they are your primary objective. If the poor/black are actually helped, by accident? Nice side benefit, but, "how can we use this to get more $/votes", follows right after.

 

As Hancock would say: "You're...all...idiots". Idiots, because you don't think the country is wise to your game. In many cases however, I don't even thing YOU are wise to your own game. Did you actually see the quote above straight? Or, not unitl I pointed it out to you?

 

The useful idiots keep buying the product. However, look at Obamacare: that's the latest is crap Democratic product, and the people that matter? They aren't buying.

 

So, this is your problem: you better start saying something different, because if you don't, any credibility you have left will be gone. I'm not saying "kill the poor". I am saying: it's as far past time to try something new, as it is to realize that "helping the poor" has gone from a movement, to a business model, to a scam, and most people know it.

Edited March 19, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[keepthefaith]

The left will simply argue that the right is not providing the necessary support that inner cities need. Free health care, free pre-school, free college, a government guaranteed job and everything else that is necessary to get people from point A to point B in life.

[Dante]

All they will say is we need more money and some more time. Totally open ended. It satiates their repressed guilt (not sure why the guilt) while avoiding having to address the real cultural issues that may be to politically painful to discuss,.

[B-Man]

Here is what Paul Ryan said in an interview, that the democrats are (typically) using to try and whip up fund raising outrage.

We have got this tailspin of culture in our inner cities in particular of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work — so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with.

Everybody’s got to get involved. So this is what we talk about when we talk about civil society.

If you’re driving from the suburb to the sports arena downtown by these blighted neighborhoods, you can’t just say “I’m paying my taxes, government’s going to fix that.” You need to get involved. You need to get involved yourself, whether through a good mentor program or some religious charity, whatever it is to make a difference, and that’s how we help resuscitate our culture

.

 

The party of slavery and Jim Crow responded by sending out an email calling Ryan’s words a “thinly veiled racial attack” and a “dog-whistle to ugly racial politics.” The Democrats claimed–without actually quoting Ryan, of course–that he “told ultra-conservative radio host Bill Bennett that poverty in America is caused by a ‘culture problem’ of ‘inner city’ men too lazy to work.” The Democrats’ goal, as always, was to stir up and mislead their party’s faithful so as to raise money. They also called on their followers to sign an online petition denouncing Paul Ryan.

 

Far from being a “thinly veiled racial attack,” Ryan’s point was that listeners should become personally involved through mentoring and supporting religious and other organizations to try to improve labor force participation, and not just leave the intractable problem of urban poverty in the hands of the government.

 

It is impossible to overstate not just how dishonest, but how vicious the Democratic Party is. “Denounce Paul Ryan!” For what? For expressing concern about a very real human problem and urging his radio listeners to try to do something about it.

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/03/the-democrats-continue-their-smear-of-paul-ryan.php

 

.

[OCinBuffalo]

Here is what Paul Ryan said in an interview, that the democrats are (typically) using to try and whip up fund raising outrage.

We have got this tailspin of culture in our inner cities in particular of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work — so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with.

Everybody’s got to get involved. So this is what we talk about when we talk about civil society.

If you’re driving from the suburb to the sports arena downtown by these blighted neighborhoods, you can’t just say “I’m paying my taxes, government’s going to fix that.” You need to get involved. You need to get involved yourself, whether through a good mentor program or some religious charity, whatever it is to make a difference, and that’s how we help resuscitate our culture

.

 

The party of slavery and Jim Crow responded by sending out an email calling Ryan’s words a “thinly veiled racial attack” and a “dog-whistle to ugly racial politics.” The Democrats claimed–without actually quoting Ryan, of course–that he “told ultra-conservative radio host Bill Bennett that poverty in America is caused by a ‘culture problem’ of ‘inner city’ men too lazy to work.” The Democrats’ goal, as always, was to stir up and mislead their party’s faithful so as to raise money. They also called on their followers to sign an online petition denouncing Paul Ryan.

 

Far from being a “thinly veiled racial attack,” Ryan’s point was that listeners should become personally involved through mentoring and supporting religious and other organizations to try to improve labor force participation, and not just leave the intractable problem of urban poverty in the hands of the government.

 

It is impossible to overstate not just how dishonest, but how vicious the Democratic Party is. “Denounce Paul Ryan!” For what? For expressing concern about a very real human problem and urging his radio listeners to try to do something about it.

 

http://www.powerline...f-paul-ryan.php

 

.

Yeah, but that's the back and forth stuff, which sells commercials on FOX, and internet clicks for Powerline.

 

What I'm talking about, requires no advertising, and no talking head to explain.

 

I'm talking about the collective, conscious, conclusion that has been arrived at by far too many for this scam to survive, while at the same time, is hilariously out of the reach of some. We see the problem in these words, they are completely fooled by/oblivious to them.

 

So much so, that they would come out and contradict themselves in 2 of their own sentences, and not realize they are doing it.

 

To me, that's how you know things have changed: would any, purely motivated by the need to help others, person, be caught dead saying something so stupid?

 

No. They'd be thinking "I want to help others, and this isn't working, so, we need something new". Instead? The "I want to obtain both personal and collective $, votes, power, yet, feel good about myself for actively participating in a big con" person is who thinks this, and therefore: comes right out and says it...because the scam is what must be protected at all costs.

Edited March 19, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[Doc]

No, you misunderstand, or don't want to understand, the problem. It's not all government that created the problem: it was Republican governments that created the problem, and we need Democrat governments to fix it.

[GG]

I'm talking about the collective, conscious, conclusion that has been arrived at by far too many for this scam to survive, while at the same time, is hilariously out of the reach of some. We see the problem in these words, they are completely fooled by/oblivious to them.

 

So much so, that they would come out and contradict themselves in 2 of their own sentences, and not realize they are doing it.

 

Except in their view, it's not a contradiction. The real failure of the government policy is that it doesn't go far enough, not that it doesn't work at all. Because you can't bridge that philosophical divide - as in that you would need the progressives to give up their blind faith - you will continue to have race baiting in politics, and Dems having a generational built in block of voters. The party leaders recognize the sham, but it's certainly not in their best interest to upset the apple cart, because of the fixed voting block and the perpetual stream of sympathetic young voters whose political views are still obscured by the umbrella of their parents' financial support.

[OCinBuffalo]

Except in their view, it's not a contradiction. The real failure of the government policy is that it doesn't go far enough, not that it doesn't work at all. Because you can't bridge that philosophical divide - as in that you would need the progressives to give up their blind faith - you will continue to have race baiting in politics, and Dems having a generational built in block of voters. The party leaders recognize the sham, but it's certainly not in their best interest to upset the apple cart, because of the fixed voting block and the perpetual stream of sympathetic young voters whose political views are still obscured by the umbrella of their parents' financial support.

Sure

 

But, what I'm saying is: in the past, you could count on the 1% of independent/swing voters to be sympathetic to some of this, and perhaps even win close elections with it. Now? The stimulus of a Paul Ryan, devoting a ton of time to listen to and spend time with people in the inner city? It means that 1% decider vote might not be there.

 

Scares the bejesus out of the clown I quoted. One of the things I'm saying is: it's the stimulus of Ryan, doing something they can't deal with, aren't used to, that causes them to say stupid things, like what I quoted.

 

It's jarring to them. Another thing I'm saying: what is merely a ripple for some, is a wave for others, in terms of perception of Republicans, and what they themselves convey, by conveying it themselves, and going around the media. Rand Paul has been doing the same thing as Ryan, but you wouldn't know it: because the media refuses to cover it. However, the minority community sees both of them, doing something they didn't expect.

 

When you have Paul Ryan/Rand Paul physically and repeatedly doing what "the community" has been asking them to do for years?

 

The only response is contradiction. Because? The only, standard, rote response is based on Ryan and Paul NOT being in those communities.

[Tiberius]

Except in their view, it's not a contradiction. The real failure of the government policy is that it doesn't go far enough, not that it doesn't work at all. Because you can't bridge that philosophical divide - as in that you would need the progressives to give up their blind faith - you will continue to have race baiting in politics, and Dems having a generational built in block of voters. The party leaders recognize the sham, but it's certainly not in their best interest to upset the apple cart, because of the fixed voting block and the perpetual stream of sympathetic young voters whose political views are still obscured by the umbrella of their parents' financial support.

 

But don't the Republicans do that with the elderly? They are passing laws like prescription drug bill which was a huge give away to seniors--way more than the young poor get--and they have vowed not to touch socialized medicine for the elderly even though its our biggest entitlement. Even the Tea Party would never slash our biggest entitlement so really your Republicans are even worse than the Dems

[OCinBuffalo]

But don't the Republicans do that with the elderly? They are passing laws like prescription drug bill which was a huge give away to seniors--way more than the young poor get--and they have vowed not to touch socialized medicine for the elderly even though its our biggest entitlement. Even the Tea Party would never slash our biggest entitlement so really your Republicans are even worse than the Dems

Gatorman speaking for the TEA party.

 

When, not only would the TEA party touch everything, if the TEA party was 100% in charge, Democrats would be lucky to have 2 coins of government $ left to rub together. If the TEA party was running things, the Democratic party would literally be put out of business, since government is the Democrat's business.

 

And, to be sure, more than a few Rs would be out of business too under TEA party rule.

 

But, your whole point is completely worthless, because it represents a false choice: There is no "not touching entitlements vs. touching them".

 

Entitlements WILL be touched. The real choice: whether we touch them now, in a reasonable way, or, we put it off until later, when touching them means:

1. allowing them to bankrupt themselves.

2. massive, sweeping and immediate cuts to benefits.

 

This is reality. Deny it all you want, but it's still reality.

[Tiberius]

Gatorman speaking for the TEA party.

When, not only would the TEA party touch everything, if the TEA party was 100% in charge, Democrats would be lucky to have 2 coins of government $ left to rub together. If the TEA party was running things, the Democratic party would literally be put out of business, since government is the oice: There is no "not touching entitlements vs. touching them".Entitlements WILL be touched. The real choice: whether we touch them now, in a reasonable way, or, we put it off until lawhen touching them means:

1. allowing them to bankrupt themselves.

2. massive, sweeping and immediate cuts to benefits.

 

This is reality. Deny it all you want, but it's still reality.

The Republicans dole out this gravy to the elderly in return for votes,

 

there is no way they cut back on them.

 

Same thing with that Trillion dollar farm bill that keeps farmers enslaved to government that passed with a majority of Republican votes.

 

Remember when Bush tried fooling with privatizing social security? That didn't go far because all those poor old Republicans--probably tea par tiers now--went against it

[Jauronimo]

The Republicans dole out this gravy to the elderly in return for votes,

 

there is no way they cut back on them.

 

Same thing with that Trillion dollar farm bill that keeps farmers enslaved to government that passed with a majority of Republican votes.

 

Remember when Bush tried fooling with privatizing social security? That didn't go far because all those poor old Republicans--probably tea par tiers now--went against it

I thought the Republicans were trying kill grandma? At least keep your bull **** rhetoric straight.

[DC Tom]

I thought the Republicans were trying kill grandma? At least keep your bull **** rhetoric straight.

 

[3rdnlng]

I thought the Republicans were trying kill grandma? At least keep your bull **** rhetoric straight.

 

Only if they can push her off the cliff. A long slow death just isn't as much fun as hearing the screams, eh gator?