Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 264
  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Republican Hypocracies

    Will a Trump presidency be any different? Was he really voted in as an "anti-establishment" candidate?

    The following four Washington insider, mulit-year lobbyists have been tagged to help with transition:

    Michael Torrey - asked to help put together the new department of agriculture - lobbyist for the soda and dairy industry

    Jeff Eisenbach - lobbyist for Verizon and other telecom giants - tapped to put together the new FCC

    Michael Catanzaro - oil and gas lobbyist will help with energy issues

    Mike Ference - lobbyist for Halliburton and Koch industries will also help with energy.


    So much for "draining the swamp"

    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  2. #2
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,194
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Is there anyone in any industry that knows what is going on, but isn't connected to the industry?

    So far trump doesn't owe anything to any lobbyist.

    Of course I'm all ears to better candidates, or if there is an obvious choice over looked.
    Other than that your tears taste wonderful. *j*
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

  3. #3
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,071
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    I think it's one of those promises (like the wall silliness) that he just can't make good on.

    You cannot really find experts on both politics and policy in an area without choosing some kind of lobbyist. You can get folks familiar with the industry but not politics, but they won't know how to run a government agency. And you could get people who know government but not the industry, but they would be bumbling fools on policy. So you pick the lobyest that is closest to what you want or whom you owe a favor.

    Not that it is impossible, just really darned difficult and a lot riskier that pulling form the lobiest set.

    It's hypocracy, though I'm not sure you can lay it squarely on Republicans... since Trump really is a RINO in many respects. He's not really part and parcel of the party, he forced his way in. Trump had plenty of support from a good number of lobbyists. Mostly they worked on 501Cs and pacs on his behalf.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  4. #4
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Draining the swamp doesnt mean that he completely ignores everyone with any ties whatsoever to government and only brings in people that have no connection of any sort to all parts of his administration.

    I find this particular sob story from the left very ineffective and reeking of desperation.

    President-elect Trump won. Get over it.

  5. #5
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,071
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    I find this particular sob story from the left very ineffective and reeking of desperation.
    It's a rather simple critique. He said he would fight the power and influence of lobbyists but he has immediately utilized them in key roles. Its like saying you will go on a diet and eating a box of doughnuts with extra frosting.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  6. #6
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    It's a rather simple critique. He said he would fight the power and influence of lobbyists but he has immediately utilized them in key roles. Its like saying you will go on a diet and eating a box of doughnuts with extra frosting.
    If he doesn't appoint some experienced people to key roles , then you liberals cry about the government being ran by people who don't know what they're doing. If he does, then you call him a hypocritic. No wonder no one takes the left serious and you keep getting crushed in elections

    The guy, last I checked, made exactly 2 appointments. CoS and Chief Strategist. The former never has held public office, though has ran the GOP and has the knowledge, respect and connections to be effective. It's a good pick. The latter is in the same boat. No government experience at all, methinks, but has the experience outside of the swamp to be effective.

    The rest of this "hypocritical" nonsense comes from the news. The same news agencies who called the election for Killary 12 months ago. Not an opinion I hold in regard.

    No one cares what liberals think on any subject. So, calling him hypocritical isn't going to influence anyone in anyway

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,071
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    If he doesn't appoint some experienced people to key roles , then you liberals cry about the government being ran by people who don't know what they're doing. If he does, then you call him a hypocritic. No wonder no one takes the left serious and you keep getting crushed in elections.
    No one forced him to say he was going to drain the swamp and attack the power of lobyists. Saying he is going to do something unrealistic is his own damned fault. I will also mock him for not building a wall and not making Mexico pay for it as he so often claimed he would. Instead he will at best put up some meager fences and try to use tariffs to pay back the money it costs.

    No one cares what liberals think on any subject. So, calling him hypocritical isn't going to influence anyone in anyway
    Apparently you care or you wouldn't be here discussing it.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  8. Likes CowboyX liked this post
  9. #8
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Backpeddlin' and 'splainin' away - nerve touched, my work is done until the next hypocritical thing come up...oh, wait, he's going to keep parts of Obamacare

    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  10. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    As I've said, it's reassuring to me that you libs don't seem to understand why you keep losing. It would seem you are more blinded by your hate and ideology than even I thought. This is a good thing. The sooner liberalism dies, the better.

  11. #10
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    As I've said, it's reassuring to me that you libs don't seem to understand why you keep losing. It would seem you are more blinded by your hate and ideology than even I thought. This is a good thing. The sooner liberalism dies, the better.
    Seeing that we won the popular vote (with voter turnout at a 20 year low) and won ballot initiatives like the minimum wage and marijuana in the face of the conservative war on drugs I'd say liberalism isn't going anywhere soon, but by all means keep holding your breath.

    ----------

    Back to the hypocrisies:

    Mike Pence is going to court over his emails

    "Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election, but an email controversy may still end up plaguing the White House. Turns out, Vice President-elect Mike Pence is also being dogged by a case over alleged "email secrecy," the Indianapolis Star reported Monday.

    On Nov. 21, the Indiana Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments over whether Pence should be forced to release redacted portions of documents, including email communications between Pence and Daniel Hodge, the chief of staff of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R). The documents in question pertain to Pence's decision to hire outside counsel in a lawsuit Republican governors brought against President Obama for his 2014 executive action on immigration. Democratic labor lawyer William Groth requested the documents because he suspected Pence's hiring of an external law firm was a "waste of taxpayer dollars." [T]he people have the right to know how much of their money was spent,” Groth said.

    Though Pence responded to Groth with 57 pages of information, the documents reportedly had "substantial redaction" and a political "white paper" was apparently not attached, Indy Star reported. Groth brought the matter to the Indiana Superior Court, which ruled "the issue was not a matter for the courts to decide."

    Groth appealed that decision in June, resulting in the Nov. 21 court date. Experts argue that if the courts rule in favor of Pence, "'that would severely limit the Access to Public Records Act,'" a former Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law professor told Indy Star. Another law professor said: "It comes down to this — the court is giving up its ability to check another branch of government, and that should worry people.""

    emphasis mine...*snicker*
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  12. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Illegal Payments Scandal Rocks Trump Henchman Bannon As He Takes White House Job

    "Donald Trump’s aide and former campaign chairman, Stephen F. Bannon, is at the center of an illegal payments allegation, less than 24 hours after his position in the Trump White House was announced.

    Bannon is set to serve as Trump’s “chief strategist and senior counselor.”

    Per The Daily Beast, Bannon received multiple payments from a pro-Trump super PAC just days before election day. Make America Number 1 paid $187,500 to Glittering Steel, Bannon’s film production company.

    The Daily Beast notes that “sources familiar with the company” say that it is “essentially a front for Bannon.”

    The Campaign Legal Center alleges in a complaint filed with the Federal Elections Commission that the super PAC paid Bannon so that the official Trump campaign would not have to pay for his expenses, an arrangement that if true would break federal campaign laws.

    Make America Number 1 PAC was put together by billionaire Robert Mercer, a hedge fund manager, and his daughter Rebekah Mercer. The two have emerged as one of the major funders of the right wing cause and its politicians."

    Lock Him Up,
    Lock Him Up,
    Lock Him Up!


    er, or maybe just ignore it.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  13. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    72
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    As I've said, it's reassuring to me that you libs don't seem to understand why you keep losing. It would seem you are more blinded by your hate and ideology than even I thought. This is a good thing. The sooner liberalism dies, the better.
    it is good to see that hypocrisy does not die just because of victory. Here is a great example of the conservatives showing that very hate by wishing a quick death on liberals.

    So basically what your saying is that you would wish a one party state run country much similar to what lenin set up in russia. I am curious to see if you would also advocate a an ice pick through the back of the head of any who stand a chance of taking away your new found boss.

    And that is not only what you got but what has been promised. Someone who does not fulfill the mandates of the people but one who admits he will tell everyone what to do. You did not elect a president you hired a boss to tell you how to live. Americans = sheeple.

  14. #13
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,071
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    er, or maybe just ignore it.
    Well, if they can prove it in court, they can meet out whatever punishment the law calls for. Campaign financing and payments are one of those areas that is hard to nail someone on.

    ---------- Post added at 09:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by SoylentGreen View Post
    it is good to see that hypocrisy does not die just because of victory. Here is a great example of the conservatives showing that very hate by wishing a quick death on liberals.
    He did say liberalism, not liberals. An important distinction. I'm sure many liberals would also like to see the death of racism, classism, and perhaps conservatism. As ideologies. I know I'd be happy for at least racism to die a quick and unceremonious death. Clasism might be nice but I'm not sure. Concervitism I think we need. And Someguy might actually like certain aspects of Liberalism if we pressed him, at least in the classical sense, not in the demonized version he holds as modern western liberalism.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  15. Thanks Squatch347 thanked for this post
  16. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    72
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Well, if they can prove it in court, they can meet out whatever punishment the law calls for. Campaign financing and payments are one of those areas that is hard to nail someone on.

    ---------- Post added at 09:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 AM ----------



    He did say liberalism, not liberals. An important distinction. I'm sure many liberals would also like to see the death of racism, classism, and perhaps conservatism. As ideologies. I know I'd be happy for at least racism to die a quick and unceremonious death. Clasism might be nice but I'm not sure. Concervitism I think we need. And Someguy might actually like certain aspects of Liberalism if we pressed him, at least in the classical sense, not in the demonized version he holds as modern western liberalism.
    In what way is it an important difference? To wish the death of liberalism would have to be the death of liberals as one goes with the other. Even so, it still does not change the charge i made against him. Wishing the death of one horse in what in america can only be called a two horse race still would give him his dictatorship of a single party just as lenin designed it.

  17. #15
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Well, if they can prove it in court, they can meet out whatever punishment the law calls for. Campaign financing and payments are one of those areas that is hard to nail someone on.[COLOR="Silver"]
    Yet "pay for play" through the Clinton Foundation is a foregone conclusion when you listen to the corporate media.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  18. #16
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by SoylentGreen View Post
    In what way is it an important difference? To wish the death of liberalism would have to be the death of liberals as one goes with the other.
    Its incredibly different. I cant even begin to understand how someone could arrive to the conclusion that they are one in the same....

    I would love for the death of Liberalism, the ideology. Individual liberals, not so much. If you dont see the difference there, I dont know what to tell you.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoylentGreen View Post
    Even so, it still does not change the charge i made against him. Wishing the death of one horse in what in america can only be called a two horse race still would give him his dictatorship of a single party just as lenin designed it.
    What makes you think that the Democratic party dying out would leave the country with only one party? In fact, what makes you think that we have more than one party right now? I think it would be best to have a multi-party system with political groups that actually held real, substantial differences between each other rather than this current system that only has degrees of difference on most issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post

    He did say liberalism, not liberals. An important distinction. I'm sure many liberals would also like to see the death of racism, classism, and perhaps conservatism. As ideologies. I know I'd be happy for at least racism to die a quick and unceremonious death. Clasism might be nice but I'm not sure. Concervitism I think we need. And Someguy might actually like certain aspects of Liberalism if we pressed him, at least in the classical sense, not in the demonized version he holds as modern western liberalism.
    As the members of ODN well know (and I believe it was GoldPhoenix who argued this position best a few years ago) classic Liberalism is essentially what Libertarianism is today. It is nothing like the modern progressive liberalism that has infected this country and the world over. Im a huge fan of classic Liberalism and strongly hold several of the positions that comprise it as my own. However, this neoliberal fascism that has highjacked the Democrat party is something that needs to die a swift death and be purged from the world.

  19. Likes Squatch347 liked this post
  20. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    72
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    Its incredibly different. I cant even begin to understand how someone could arrive to the conclusion that they are one in the same....

    I would love for the death of Liberalism, the ideology. Individual liberals, not so much. If you dont see the difference there, I dont know what to tell you.
    You do know that such things are nothing more than concepts, they need to be held in a mind to be of any use. Kill one, kills the other. If liberalism is dead then the liberal is no more. That is death regardless of whether body lays on the ground.


    What makes you think that the Democratic party dying out would leave the country with only one party? In fact, what makes you think that we have more than one party right now? I think it would be best to have a multi-party system with political groups that actually held real, substantial differences between each other rather than this current system that only has degrees of difference on most issues.
    Your kidding me? American system of election is set to a two horse race with winner take all. It is called a F.P.P. system (First Past the Post) That you have other political parties are irrelevant when you have a system that gathers votes and distributes them in a fashion that gives no access to government for a minor party.
    You people actually have to change your system of voting before you can make realistic claim that there are more than two parties involved.

    As the members of ODN well know (and I believe it was GoldPhoenix who argued this position best a few years ago) classic Liberalism is essentially what Libertarianism is today. It is nothing like the modern progressive liberalism that has infected this country and the world over. Im a huge fan of classic Liberalism and strongly hold several of the positions that comprise it as my own. However, this neoliberal fascism that has highjacked the Democrat party is something that needs to die a swift death and be purged from the world.
    Again i must disagree, and this time just on a matter of degree. From my point of view the policies and intention of the democrats are no better than the crap i get from the right wing parties in my country. Your democrats are more to the right than the left. But to you they seem a extreme left. What you call neoliberal i would call mildly right wing.

  21. #18
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,536
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by SoylentGreen View Post
    Again i must disagree, and this time just on a matter of degree. From my point of view the policies and intention of the democrats are no better than the crap i get from the right wing parties in my country. Your democrats are more to the right than the left. But to you they seem a extreme left. What you call neoliberal i would call mildly right wing.
    I would say if you want an example of a true progressive/liberal, use Bernie Sanders as an example.

  22. #19
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Quote Originally Posted by SoylentGreen View Post
    You do know that such things are nothing more than concepts, they need to be held in a mind to be of any use. Kill one, kills the other. If liberalism is dead then the liberal is no more. That is death regardless of whether body lays on the ground.
    Are you really presenting the argument that "Once a Liberal, always a Liberal" and that it is impossible for a Liberal to change his ideology? Or are you presenting the idea that if the ideology of Liberalism dies, that all of the believers would suffer from heart attacks and kill over too? Im confused as to how, exactly, you arrive to the conclusion that if Liberalism dies, all Liberals die too.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoylentGreen View Post
    Your kidding me? American system of election is set to a two horse race with winner take all. It is called a F.P.P. system (First Past the Post) That you have other political parties are irrelevant when you have a system that gathers votes and distributes them in a fashion that gives no access to government for a minor party.
    You people actually have to change your system of voting before you can make realistic claim that there are more than two parties involved.
    The American election system is a thinly veiled system of controlled opposition...as Ill explain below.


    Quote Originally Posted by SoylentGreen View Post
    Again i must disagree, and this time just on a matter of degree. From my point of view the policies and intention of the democrats are no better than the crap i get from the right wing parties in my country. Your democrats are more to the right than the left. But to you they seem a extreme left. What you call neoliberal i would call mildly right wing.
    You seem to contradict you previous post here. Are the political parties the same or not? And, what exactly are you disagreeing with? Im the one that said the GOP and the Progressive left are the same party essentially and only different, by and large, by small degrees of difference. Classic Liberalism, AKA Libertarianism, is the only different semi-major party in play here. I dont really care about the distinctions between which one is "left wing" or "right wing". Either way, they are still part of the same bird. The modern left and right were designed to form "Controlled Opposition" and to give us the illusion of choice in the American political system. The only thing is that our "choices" are simply to what degree we will be dictated to. They both agree on 99% of issues...such as income tax, property tax, foreign interventionism, Empire building, Federal supremacy, and on and on...they only disagree with the degrees of those things. Should the income tax be 25% or 35%? Property tax 1.5 or 2.5%. How about none? That would be a real choice. So, where are we disagreeing ?

  23. #20
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republican Hypocracies

    Back to the thread topic:

    Anti-Gay Alabama Judge Bill Pryor Allegedly Posed For Nudie Mag In 1980s


    (one of Trump's potential SCOTUS picks *snicker*)

    "The internet is a lot like Pet Sematary: Things long-buried have a way of coming to life.

    Take the nude photos allegedly of conservative federal judge Bill Pryor that appeared on badpuppy.com (NSFW) way back in 1997, when the Web was held together with string and tape. The site Legal Schnauzer claims the images, of a completely nude and erect model, are actually of Pryor, a Republican appointee who sit on the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals for Georgia, Florida and Alabama.

    Now we’re the last ones to shade someone for sharing what God gave them, but Pryor has a solid record of screwing the gay community (and not in the fun way). In addition to opposing reproductive rights and supporting prayer in school, Pryor, now 51, filed a brief in Lawrence v. Texas arguing that sodomy “is a chosen behavior unworthy of constitutional protection” and comparing homosexuality to pedophilia, incest and corpse-raping.

    And there’s this gem:

    Pryor revealed during his confirmation hearings that he and his wife, Kristan W. Pryor, rescheduled a family vacation to Disney World when they discovered the Orlando, Florida, theme park had scheduled “Gay Days” festivities at the same time as their planned visit.

    According to the report,a series of more than a dozen photos were taken in the early 1980s, when Pryor was a college student at the University of Louisiana. They appeared in at least one print mag before landing online.

    What makes Legal Schnauzer’s claims really of interest is the suggestion that the GOP overlords who backed Pryor’s judicial rise have been blackmailing him with these photos for years.

    What is the public to make of revelations that Pryor once was featured on a gay porn Web site? It clearly raises questions about rank hypocrisy, dating to the beginnings of Pryor’s political career.

    It also raises the specter of Pryor being ethically compromised to the point that he is the victim of not-so-subtle blackmail, forced to participate in rulings that he knows are unlawful, at risk of his secrets being revealed. Most importantly, federal nominees typically are asked during the confirmation process about potentially embarrassing or compromising information in their backgrounds. If Pryor failed to disclose the gay-porn photographs, or did not answer a specific question truthfully under oath, it could be grounds for a Senate investigation.

    …Even though major political figures were aware of the photos, they did not prove to be a hurdle when President George W. Bush nominated Pryor to the federal bench in 2003 and installed him via a recess appointment in February 2004. The staunchly right-wing Pryor was perhaps the most controversial nominee of the Bush presidency. A bipartisan “Gang of 14” U.S. senators reached an agreement to allow an up-or-down vote on Pryor and two other nominees, and they were confirmed by a 53-45 margin on June 9, 2005.

    Why then was Pryor chosen, when many experts saw Sharon Lovelace Blackburn (now presiding judge in the Northern District of Alabama) as among numerous more qualified candidates? Our sources say high-level Republicans, likely including White House strategist Karl Rove, knew the gay-porn photos put Pryor in a weak position–and they would make him easy to control on the bench…

    Legal Schnauzer reached out to Pryor, who had little comment:

    I have nothing to say to you except that these accusations are totally false.

    Do not contact me again.

    Bill Pryor

    When the site’s editor, Roger Shuler, commented that several sources had confirmed the model’s identity, Pryor got really steamed:

    This is the last time I will respond to you. Those photos are not of me.

    Do not contact me again.

    Bill Pryor

    Well, we hope Bill was able to at least make enough money with those photos to pay off his student loans. Those are a real mother."
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

 

 
Page 1 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 11 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Republican Fratracide?
    By manise in forum Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 3rd, 2008, 10:54 AM
  2. What is a democrat? A Republican?
    By Jamie678 in forum Politics
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: January 8th, 2008, 03:12 PM
  3. What it means to be a Republican
    By Booger in forum Politics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: March 2nd, 2006, 03:27 AM
  4. Republican Floundering
    By Fyshhed in forum Politics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 5th, 2004, 07:48 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •