Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The GOPs Real Agenda.

Posted 1 year ago on March 17, 2013, 10:29 a.m. EST by shoozTroll (17632)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

While Boehner tears up, the damage is still being done.

"Don't be fooled. On the ground, a very different reality is unfolding: In the Republican-led Congress, GOP-dominated statehouses and even before the nation's highest court, the reactionary impulses of the Republican Party appear unbowed. Across the nation, the GOP's severely conservative agenda – which seeks to impose job-killing austerity, to roll back voting and reproductive rights, to deprive the working poor of health care, and to destroy agencies that protect the environment from industry and consumers from predatory banks – is moving forward under full steam."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-gops-real-agenda-20130313

53 Comments

53 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Good Read, I disagree about what he says are huge improvements in the Budget under obama. He doesn't say it as strongly as I worded it above, but I don't really understand the fine line that he is drawing about budget improvement. But usually Matt is smarter than me, so maybe his wording is just off in the start of his article.

Matt seems so much more on in the inside that I am. And I don't read that much. He helped expain the abortion movement, explained how wacky Gov Perry is although Texas tax structure is very different... GOP is certainly all for Austerity when the evidence shows this is a disaster. GOP also is Brain washed and has sold their souls for Defense Industry and War. GOP is no different in its ignorance of how to work a budget and look for budget cuts. War First, all others be damned ... the Party of Fear.

Found another good one on Rollingstones, about the GOP selling out to the 1% as long as they keep saying cut taxes, no tax increases. It is so clear they are corrupted for just campaign dollars.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109

And this author shows how Even Ronald Reagan would Raise taxes.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Compared to our libe(R)tarian/teabagge(R)/conse(R)vative/(R)eplican't party of today. Reagan was a commie.

As far as the budget? Keep in mind how deep the hole we fell into at the end of the Bush administration is. It took close to 10 years to get out from under the Reagan recession.

I feel the current "crisis" has as much to do with the perception as anything else.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/racism-yes-signed-the-gop/

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

All politicians in Wshington have drunk the koolaid and can no longer see reality. Or if they do, they just know they have to cut taxes, oppose new taxes, so that they can get the corporate lobby and campaing dollars. Simple.

But they don't measure the right stuff either, so Freshmen and Sophmore congressmen don't know the stats are skewed.

1) Cost Of Living Numbers for Pensions and Social Security are low balled based on CPI Basket of Goods.
2) CPI Is low be design and doesn't include many of the typical American purchases like gasoline, steak, hamburger, home prices, insurance prices, education prices for private K-12 or for College (but I'm not really an expert)
3) Don't thing they really measure the money supply either.
4) We have 100 Millon people that don't work. If we measure the unemployment it is like 30 Million that want good jobs today.
5) The Wage Gap is widening, more people are part time, more don't have benefits, more don't have retirement or pension plans, more are collge level graduates but don't get jobs ....wow.

But if they just listen to Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, they don't know jack.

The other side is they may have planned to drive down wages in the US in the 1970s ... under Kissinger and Brezinski and Milton Freidman... with Neoliberal Policies.

Unions had gained power in the 1960s ... it might have been a game of push back. Anti-Trust against Standard Oil and then Bell Telephone ... these guys really dug into the planning of destroying wages and bringing back profitability to Corporations (Higher profit with lower taxes)

[-] 1 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

Don't let austerity hawks blame unemployment on SS.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/15167-worms-pond-scum-and-economists

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Slogan: NO MORE GREENSPANS.

That is what I get from the article. I will criticize the article for not naming names of Economist that want to get rid of SS & Medicare.

Bill Black named all the key board memebers in the "Third Way" which is actually a financial think tank instead of being a democratic think tank. Randy Wray is an Economist at UMKC along with Willian K. Black... I'm sure they don't believe in the crap about Austerity or cuts to the Social Safety Net. They seem to be in the School of Economics called MMT, Modern Monetary Theory.

Chicago School of Economics is militon Freidman's school - no good. There are the Neoliberals the Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, Timothy Geithner, Hank Paulson, and all of Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Believe in. Well... so does the Head of the SEC, FDIC, DOJ, OCC, FINRA, Congress, and the POTUS....

[-] 1 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

Nice summary of broad economic theory and problems thereof.

[-] -1 points by sylquester (-41) 1 year ago

"Reagan recession"?? Please,more details,thanks.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

It was a long, long story. 10 years of it.

All the details you need are these.

It really sucked for the 99%.

I listened to the same kind of crap (sans Limbaugh and FLAKESnews, as it was Reagan that created them), that I hear today.

It took upwards of 10years to end for the 99%, that actually ended for.

For some? It didn't.

[-] -1 points by sylquester (-41) 1 year ago

Wasn't Reagan president for only 8 yrs?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

What's that got to do with it?

It was still Reagan's recession when the CIA's, Bush was elected.

[-] 0 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

Hallelujah. Testify!

[-] 4 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Hey it runs in my family. Smarter people than me have seen the trend. Republicans never want to pay for their spending. They want to cut taxes while they set records in Defense Spending. Anyway, Ronald Reagan was the first in my memory. Reagan also proved that you spend a bunch of money all at once ... the government can't spend it fast enough if the programs aren't ready, aren't proved, haven't progressed past the proper milestones in development, etc.

And there is some analysis on the internet that Reagan Relized he didn't get the GDP Boost out of his Defense Spending and ended up spending less money. He was told that he would get great GDP Growth for his Defense Spending .. that would make up for his tax cuts. He ended up also increase taxes since revenue was lower than projected. Unless I am mistaken.

[-] 0 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

I think it was his guy Stockman who first verbalized the "starve the beast" strategy to cut taxes, & run up the debt in order to defund Social Security, Medicare & anything else for the poor, sick, & elderly.

That is the real GOP agenda

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Stockman became one of the most controversial OMB directors ever during a tenure that lasted until his resignation during August 1985. Committed to the doctrine of supply-side economics, he assisted the approval of the "Reagan Budget" (the Gramm-Latta Budget), which Stockman hoped to be a serious curtailment of the "welfare state", gaining a reputation as a tough negotiator with House Speaker Tip O'Neill's Democratic-controlled House of Representatives and Majority Leader Howard Baker's Republican-controlled Senate.

I didn't know anything about David Stockman... thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Stockman

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Stockman#Office_of_Management_and_Budget

After Stockman's first year at OMB and after "being taken to the woodshed by the president" due to his candor with Atlantic Monthly's William Greider, Stockman became inspired with the projected trend of increasingly large federal deficits and the rapidly expanding national debt. On 1 August 1985, he resigned OMB and later wrote a memoir of his experience in the Reagan Administration titled The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed (ISBN 0060155604), in which he specifically criticized the failure of congressional Republicans to endorse a reduction of government spending as necessary offsets to the large tax decreases, in order to avoid the creation of large deficits and an increasing national debt.

wow, here it is. The strategy came from a buffoon that could not keep his mouth shut to the media..... A man that was completely wrong - has been raised to the highest Republican Principal.

[-] 0 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

Later in life he renounced much of his initial economic philosophy.

http://flaglerlive.com/8577/david-stockman-reagan-nixon-bush-trickledown/

And the repubs are still pushing this self destructive bullshit.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Yep

[-] 1 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

And they wonder why so many people see them as anti everything.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-new-gop-20130319,0,4073628.story

Too many primaries!! That's the problem.

[-] 3 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

John Boehner On Gay Marriage: 'I Can't Imagine' Ever Supporting This http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/john-boehner-gay-marriage_n_2896074.html Days after Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) reversed his stance on gay marriage, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is not doing the same.

Portman announced to Ohio newspapers on Friday that after his own son came out in February 2011, he has grown to change his perspective on the issue. In a Sunday interview on ABC's "This Week," Boehner was asked by host Martha Raddatz about whether he could ever envision a similar shift happening on his end.

"Listen, I believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman," Boehner said. "All right. It's what I grew up with. It's what I believe. It's what my church teaches me. And I can't imagine that position would ever change."

Boehner added that he appreciated Portman's change of heart, but his own position has been "made clear."

On NBC's "Meet The Press," Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) was asked whether the shift on marriage equality is tied to younger conservatives seeing the issue as "something that is."

"Well, I think there's no doubt about that," Walker said. "But I think that's all the more reason, when I talk about things, I talk about the economic and fiscal crisis in our state and in our country. That's what people want to resonate about. They don't want to get focused on those issues."

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Walker has been chasing business out of Wisconsin, since he was elected.

But there's so much more damage they are doing every day in the States. "TAX CUTS: STARVE THE STATES

Controlling only one-half of Congress, the Republicans can do little more than play defense by creating a deadlock in Washington. But with 24 statehouses now run by Republican governors and GOP-majority legislatures, the party is turning the states into laboratories for radical conservative governance.

In recent years, the GOP has sent talent from Congress back home to pursue its cruel economic agenda. From Louisiana to Kansas to Indiana, Republican governors with congressional pedigrees are working to slash state income and corporate taxes that hit the wealthiest – often calling on the working poor to make up the difference by paying higher sales taxes. In Indiana, Gov. Mike Pence – until 2010 the number-three Republican in the House leadership – has asked the legislature to squander a rare surplus by passing an "across-the-board tax cut" that heavily favors the rich: Twenty-eight percent of benefits would go to the top five percent of earners. One in three low-income Hoosiers would see no tax cut at all."

Destroying Democracy, one state at a time.

Teabagge(R)s taxed me, to fund yet another corporate tax break.

A tax break that FAILED to do what it was promised it would do.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

What do all these things have in common ? beyond the obvious 1%'s slaves ?
Defunding Acorn, defunding planned parent hood, Schiavo, flag burning, anti-abortion, anti gay . . . . . . . . .
THEY ALL TAKE HUGE AMOUNTS OF LEGISLATIVE TIME
AND COST NOTHING

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

It's theater of the painfully absurd.

It's Nero fiddling while Rome burned.

( Dear picky punks, it's a figure of speech, as I too know that fiddles weren't invented yet.)

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Channeling Sen. Joseph McCarthy, Cruz has declared Barack Obama to be "the most radical" president in our history, adding that Obama was educated at Harvard Law School by "Marxists" who, Cruz insists, "believed in the Communists overthrowing the United States government."


This guy is phenomenally ignorant.

Good article.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

The really ironic part?

In this country the (R)epelican'ts are the RED States.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

lol and this is true.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Perhaps I should begin referring to them as such?

It would drive the wingers crazy................:)

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Oh, that would be fun.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I can see the headline now!!

REDS controlling congress freeze freedom in America!!

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Thank you Tim-

Red states and blue states refer to those states of the United States whose residents predominantly vote for the Republican Party (red) or Democratic Party (blue) presidential candidates.

This terminology came into use in the United States presidential election of 2000 on an episode of the Today show on October 30, 2000. According to AlterNet and The Washington Post, the terms were coined by journalist Tim Russert, during his televised coverage of the 2000 presidential election.[1] That was not the first election during which the news media used colored maps to graphically depict voter preferences in the various states, but it was the first time a standard color scheme took hold; the colors were often reversed or different colors used before the 2000 election.

Since 2000, usage of the term has been expanded to differentiate between states being perceived as liberal and those perceived as conservative. This reverses a long-standing convention, where the red symbols (such as the Red Flag or Red Star) are associated with Socialist and revolutionary movements, and conservative movements often choose blue as a contrasting color.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

What color should this teabagge(R) be??

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/19/texas-tea-party-leader-promotes-fascist-party-as-pro-constitution-pro-america/

I always felt they were related, I just never thought they were this close.

I guess I learned something new today.

[-] 1 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

Excellent article. Important facts. Depressing reality.

Our fight continues, and we WILL defeat the efforts to destroy the pgms that benefit the 99%. We will end the corp 1% oligrachs monopoly on power.

This is a great post. Keep up the good work.

[-] 0 points by Narley (280) 1 year ago

As it stands now we’ll never see another republican president. The GOP is too old and too white for liberal State voters. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/18/republicans-want-to-end-perception-as-stuffy-old-men/?hpt=hp_t1

The GOP will reach out to minorities, but it’ll be akin putting lipstick on a pig. Just the same old shit. The GOP is dead.

However, the GOP is alive and well at the State level. Half the States are staunchly conservative. That means the House and Senate will continue to be the battleground.

If we think national politics is now in gridlock, it’s just the beginning. I use gun restrictions as an example.

[-] 1 points by vaprosvyeh (-400) 1 year ago

According to Gallup, conservatives still outnumber both liberals and moderates, even though there has been a small uptick in liberalism.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/160196/alabama-north-dakota-wyoming-conservative-states.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines%20-%20Politics#1

The GOP is in chaos, which I think is a good thing, but the majority of people self identify as conservative regardless of which "party" they vote in, and whatever emerges from the GOP conflict should keep that in mind.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Multi-pronged marketing/PR.

Don't believe a word of those press releases.

The gridlock itself is/was created by the GOP.

The destruction of Democracy in the States is a product of the GOP.

[-] 0 points by urbanguy (-67) 1 year ago

Don't get cocky. Both parties have been declared dead a couple of times in my lifetime.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/Peter-Fenn/2012/11/17/dont-get-cocky-democrats-the-gops-not-finished-yet

[-] -1 points by BridgeToTheGroundTeam (-97) 1 year ago

http://i-govern.org Check it out! Contribute! Change the world!

[-] -1 points by sylquester (-41) 1 year ago

Hillary just flipped on homosexual marriage just like Obama did.

Wasn't the DOMA a Democrat/Clinton idea?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: DECLARE WAR ON WOMEN

In Republican politics, limited government ends at a woman's vagina. Early this year, the GOP-controlled legislature of Arkansas passed a bill outlawing abortion after just 12 weeks' gestation, a law "designed to dial the clock back 40 years," said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. The measure was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe, who decried it as "blatantly" unconstitutional – under Supreme Court precedent a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy before at least 22 weeks. But in March, the state legislature voted to override the veto, enacting the most restrictive abortion law in the nation – and setting up a certain court challenge that may tempt the Roberts court to reconsider Roe v. Wade.

Republican legislatures across the country are also pushing bills that would force a woman to be penetrated by a dildonic-ultrasound wand before she can legally terminate her pregnancy. A similar bill in Virginia last year became synonymous with the Republican party's "War on Women" – a PR fiasco that contributed to the loss of at least two Senate seats. But state Republicans are unabashed in supporting ultrasound mandates: "This bill is a priority," said Scott Fitzgerald, Republican state senate leader in Wisconsin. "It is long overdue."

In Indiana, lawmakers have sought to punish women seeking access to the abortion pill RU-486 by forcing them to undergo not one but two ultrasound penetrations. Public outcry forced the legislature to reduce the ultrasound mandate to one. "This bill is about politics, not women's health or safety," said Betty Cockrum, president of Planned Parenthood of Indiana. "Statehouse politicians need to get out of our doctors' offices."

[-] -2 points by highlander4 (-84) 1 year ago

What one calls austerity, another calls bringing the budget under control.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

And the civilized world correctly, calls it austerity measures.

Measures that have not only proven ineffective, but damaging.

To continue to enact them would constitute lemming like behavior.

Not surprising at all, for a "party", that despite all the propaganda indicating the opposite, is still, as this article points out, very much in complete lock step.

[-] 0 points by vaprosvyeh (-400) 1 year ago

Because everyone knows that a left wing liberal writer working for Mother Jones and Rolling Stone magazine is ALWAYS the best source for pure, unbiased, spin-less information regarding who is stepping in lock!

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

That's my observation, not theirs.

And they most certainly are in lock step.

[+] -4 points by highlander4 (-84) 1 year ago

some cuts to a bloated program would not be considered austerity.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Well, I have to admit.

We shouldn't be bloating programs like this, by actually paying the people that say them.

"The Republican party also remains committed to violence against the environment. The House Science, Space and Technology Committee, which has jurisdiction over global-warming research, has been stacked with hardcore deniers like California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, who once blamed climate change on "dinosaur flatulence," and Georgia Rep. Paul Broun, a creationist who blasts science – "all that stuff I was taught about evolution, embryology, big-bang theory" – as "lies straight from the pit of hell."

Tax payer dollars paying the rent for these bozo's, is the ultimate BLOAT program.

We should cut them off retroactive to the date they started saying such wasted things, so they can pay us back for being such a waste..

Don't you agree?

[-] -1 points by highlander4 (-84) 1 year ago

As tantalizing as that sounds, you cannot pull that kind of coup just because people say things that are stupid and ignorant.

[-] 4 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I thought you wanted to cut wasted bloat??

It doesn't get anymore bloated than that, nor more damaging to the Nation.

What about the 100% bloat of WallStreet?

That's all it is is bloat and we pay for all of that too.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (28455) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Like cutting the military budget? Or discontinuing fossil fuel subsidies?

Yep - THAT would not be austerity.

[-] -2 points by highlander4 (-84) 1 year ago

Absolutely. Defense would need to have some cuts to its bloated programs, as well as education, as well as entitlement.

[-] 4 points by DKAtoday (28455) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Entitlements to the wealthy? Cut? You Bet.

Education? Should be non-profit - there would go the bloat.

[+] -4 points by highlander4 (-84) 1 year ago

Be sure to define non-profit. It non-profit is spending all the money in your budget just so that will be the new baseline, then that sort of defeats the purpose. If there is a surplus in a department then #1 that would be a miracle, and #2 it would only be profit if it were paying people above and beyond their wage within that department

[-] 4 points by DKAtoday (28455) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

NON-Profit - in that there are no exorbitant incomes - not to teachers - not to the management - not to any sort of share holder or Board - money actually spent to educate students. Public education all the way through higher learning not just through high school.

[-] -3 points by eteller (-132) 1 year ago

You mean we dont need to spend over 1 mil to study why lesbians are fat? ( the obama govt actually spent money for this).

[-] -1 points by highlander4 (-84) 1 year ago

No. we need to spend 1 million dollars to find out why gay men are neat and thin; "not that there is anything wrong with that"

[-] -2 points by eteller (-132) 1 year ago

barney frank is neither neat or thin. There should be an investigation, govt funded , of course.