Reagan ran for President fear mongering about the black welfare queen popping out babies to get more and more government assistance. Which was both a lie and racist, but it convinced a lot of resentful whites to vote for him and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Wait wait wait. I was following along there until you wrote this:
... and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Most people I know that believe in entitlement reform have no axe to grind with the black community and want entitlement reform across the board. Anyone who just doesn't want black people to access welfare is a blatant racist. No argument there. But that is hardly a pillar position of the conservative movement.
I'm pretty clear, as are many others, that there is A LOT of poor white trash in this country sucking on the government.
There are actually more whites on welfare than blacks but the guy is such a fucking bigot when he thinks of Welfare he thinks of black people and that's why he called Welfare reform racist.
Reagan ran for President fear mongering about the black welfare queen popping out babies to get more and more government assistance. Which was both a lie and racist, but it convinced a lot of resentful whites to vote for him and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Your claim was that welfare reform under Clinton was racist. You were asked how that was the case and you're now lying about what Reagan said about the Welfare Queen. Who give a fuck about what you're "convinced" of Kunt? You were "convinced" that Clinton "gutted" Welfare despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $25B. I'm not interested in your worthless opinions I want facts and so far all I see is that welfare reform is "racist" because it made your Kunt hurt. I don't see any facts.
Reagan ran for President fear mongering about the black welfare queen popping out babies to get more and more government assistance. Which was both a lie and racist, but it convinced a lot of resentful whites to vote for him and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Your claim was that welfare reform under Clinton was racist. You were asked how that was the case and you're now lying about what Reagan said about the Welfare Queen. Who give a fuck about what you're "convinced" of Kunt? You were "convinced" that Clinton "gutted" Welfare despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $25B. I'm not interested in your worthless opinions I want facts and so far all I see is that welfare reform is "racist" because it made your Kunt hurt. I don't see any facts.
Lol lyin Bob still peddling lies.
Tell us what this chart has to do with your "point"?
Reagan ran for President fear mongering about the black welfare queen popping out babies to get more and more government assistance. Which was both a lie and racist, but it convinced a lot of resentful whites to vote for him and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Your claim was that welfare reform under Clinton was racist. You were asked how that was the case and you're now lying about what Reagan said about the Welfare Queen. Who give a fuck about what you're "convinced" of Kunt? You were "convinced" that Clinton "gutted" Welfare despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $25B. I'm not interested in your worthless opinions I want facts and so far all I see is that welfare reform is "racist" because it made your Kunt hurt. I don't see any facts.
Lol lyin Bob still peddling lies.
Hondo still so fucking stupid he thinks that charts refutes anything I said. Tell us what you think that chart says Hondo.
Reagan ran for President fear mongering about the black welfare queen popping out babies to get more and more government assistance. Which was both a lie and racist, but it convinced a lot of resentful whites to vote for him and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Your claim was that welfare reform under Clinton was racist. You were asked how that was the case and you're now lying about what Reagan said about the Welfare Queen. Who give a fuck about what you're "convinced" of Kunt? You were "convinced" that Clinton "gutted" Welfare despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $25B. I'm not interested in your worthless opinions I want facts and so far all I see is that welfare reform is "racist" because it made your Kunt hurt. I don't see any facts.
Lol lyin Bob still peddling lies.
Tell us what this chart has to do with your "point"?
Bob lies and uses "welfare went up 25 billion during Clinton" which not only lacks context. It doesn't take into account the fact that welfare reform was later in Clinton's term. It also is fully disingenuous and a lie.
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
So Bob didn't lie, you are talking relative he is talking real numbers
Reagan ran for President fear mongering about the black welfare queen popping out babies to get more and more government assistance. Which was both a lie and racist, but it convinced a lot of resentful whites to vote for him and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Wait wait wait. I was following along there until you wrote this:
... and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Most people I know that believe in entitlement reform have no axe to grind with the black community and want entitlement reform across the board. Anyone who just doesn't want black people to access welfare is a blatant racist. No argument there. But that is hardly a pillar position of the conservative movement.
I'm pretty clear, as are many others, that there is A LOT of poor white trash in this country sucking on the government.
There are actually more whites on welfare than blacks but the guy is such a fucking bigot when he thinks of Welfare he thinks of black people
Duh! How do you think we got "welfare reform" in the first place?
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
So Bob didn't lie, you are talking relative he is talking real numbers
Did it increase 25 billion?
No chart needed, its a yes or no question
It's a lie. That's like running a race with 1 person in it and gloating that you won. You need context. I'm not surprised that you tongue Bob's ass too.
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
So Bob didn't lie, you are talking relative he is talking real numbers
Did it increase 25 billion?
No chart needed, its a yes or no question
It's a lie. That's like running a race with 1 person in it and gloating that you won. You need context. I'm not surprised that you tongue Bob's ass too.
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
Your chart shows spending on "welfare" as a percentage of GDP, it doesn't clearly set forth what kind of Welfare spending it's referring to and it doesn't give any real dollar amounts. It also says nothing about inflation or population growth. It doesn't provide any "context" is just proves you're a liar and a moron.
Real spending on welfare increased by $25 Billion dollars. It wasn't "cut" and it wasn't "gutted" and this increase in welfare spending came at a time when millions were leaving the welfare rolls.
You chart doesn't show any decline in welfare spending. It shows a decline in spending as a percentage of GDP but if you have a larger GDP that might mean that real spending in terms of dollars has increased.
Why didn't you provide that "context" you hypocritical and pathological lying piece of shit?
Reagan ran for President fear mongering about the black welfare queen popping out babies to get more and more government assistance. Which was both a lie and racist, but it convinced a lot of resentful whites to vote for him and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Wait wait wait. I was following along there until you wrote this:
... and a pillar of the modern conservative movement is the belief that non-whites shouldn’t get any welfare. It’s why they want to nuke food stamps and medicaid but not medicare.
Most people I know that believe in entitlement reform have no axe to grind with the black community and want entitlement reform across the board. Anyone who just doesn't want black people to access welfare is a blatant racist. No argument there. But that is hardly a pillar position of the conservative movement.
I'm pretty clear, as are many others, that there is A LOT of poor white trash in this country sucking on the government.
There are actually more whites on welfare than blacks but the guy is such a fucking bigot when he thinks of Welfare he thinks of black people
Duh! How do you think we got "welfare reform" in the first place?
I this is where O'Keefed the real conservative, who voted for Reagan just ask him and who still uses that vote now nearly 40 years old to tout how he is real conservative while he trashes welfare reform.
Welfare reform set forth the expectation that welfare was never meant to be a permanent way of life. And despite all of the fear mongering that we heard from liberals about how people were going to be starving in the streets, after it was passed, real income for people formally on welfare increased and the poverty level dropped.
Simply telling people that there was an expectation that they work for a living caused the welfare rolls to plummet.
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
Your chart shows spending on "welfare" as a percentage of GDP, it doesn't clearly set forth what kind of Welfare spending it's referring to and it doesn't give any real dollar amounts. It also says nothing about inflation or population growth. It doesn't provide any "context" is just proves you're a liar and a moron.
Real spending on welfare increased by $25 Billion dollars. It wasn't "cut" and it wasn't "gutted" and this increase in welfare spending came at a time when millions were leaving the welfare rolls.
You chart doesn't show any decline in welfare spending. It shows a decline in spending as a percentage of GDP but if you have a larger GDP that might mean that real spending in terms of dollars has increased.
Why didn't you provide that "context" you hypocritical and pathological lying piece of shit?
Hondo loves that percentage of GDP dodge
Cut taxes and revenues go up but what about the percentage of GDP??? I wonder if increased growth increases the GDP
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
Your chart shows spending on "welfare" as a percentage of GDP, it doesn't clearly set forth what kind of Welfare spending it's referring to and it doesn't give any real dollar amounts. It also says nothing about inflation or population growth. It doesn't provide any "context" is just proves you're a liar and a moron.
Real spending on welfare increased by $25 Billion dollars. It wasn't "cut" and it wasn't "gutted" and this increase in welfare spending came at a time when millions were leaving the welfare rolls.
You chart doesn't show any decline in welfare spending. It shows a decline in spending as a percentage of GDP but if you have a larger GDP that might mean that real spending in terms of dollars has increased.
Why didn't you provide that "context" you hypocritical and pathological lying piece of shit?
Hondo loves that percentage of GDP dodge
Cut taxes and revenues go up but what about the percentage of GDP??? I wonder if increased growth increases the GDP
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
Your chart shows spending on "welfare" as a percentage of GDP, it doesn't clearly set forth what kind of Welfare spending it's referring to and it doesn't give any real dollar amounts. It also says nothing about inflation or population growth. It doesn't provide any "context" is just proves you're a liar and a moron.
Real spending on welfare increased by $25 Billion dollars. It wasn't "cut" and it wasn't "gutted" and this increase in welfare spending came at a time when millions were leaving the welfare rolls.
You chart doesn't show any decline in welfare spending. It shows a decline in spending as a percentage of GDP but if you have a larger GDP that might mean that real spending in terms of dollars has increased.
Why didn't you provide that "context" you hypocritical and pathological lying piece of shit?
Hondo loves that percentage of GDP dodge
Cut taxes and revenues go up but what about the percentage of GDP??? I wonder if increased growth increases the GDP
That's the entire point right here. Thanks race.
It's not your point but it is a point that makes you look like an idiot
Why can't you tell us what your chart says Hondo? And how does welfare reform occurring later in Clinton's term refute anything I've said?
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Do you want me to hold your hand too?
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
Your chart shows spending on "welfare" as a percentage of GDP, it doesn't clearly set forth what kind of Welfare spending it's referring to and it doesn't give any real dollar amounts. It also says nothing about inflation or population growth. It doesn't provide any "context" is just proves you're a liar and a moron.
Real spending on welfare increased by $25 Billion dollars. It wasn't "cut" and it wasn't "gutted" and this increase in welfare spending came at a time when millions were leaving the welfare rolls.
You chart doesn't show any decline in welfare spending. It shows a decline in spending as a percentage of GDP but if you have a larger GDP that might mean that real spending in terms of dollars has increased.
Why didn't you provide that "context" you hypocritical and pathological lying piece of shit?
Hondo loves that percentage of GDP dodge
Cut taxes and revenues go up but what about the percentage of GDP??? I wonder if increased growth increases the GDP
That's the entire point right here. Thanks race.
The entire point is that you're a pathological liar and a Kunt? Why didn't say so from the beginning Hondo.
So my "lie" that Welfare spending increased by $25 billion dollars is really a fact and as always, the only person who has been shown to have lied is you and HC.
You liberals were always very disrespectful of Barbara, Race.
She always was the best of the bunch.
Bullshit
Compelling argument.
Your a shitty liar
Always have been
You whooshed here. You haven't always been the morally straight, upstanding and totally sane Trumpanzee you now embody.
I guess that made sense to you when you wrote it
But a professor!
That's called an example that proves my point. You have google same as I do
If you want to keep pretending she wasn't savaged you are welcome to your own personal narrative. This is a safe space
I'm more interested in your apparent claim you weren't a fucking liberal when the jokes about the President being married to his mother were actually circulating. That's a changed story.
Bill Clinton isn't a liberal. I was the same democrat then that I was when I voted for Trump.
So the point stands that she was savaged then and a hero now for going after Trump. Thanks for playing. If you can find some tweets from me in 1990 knock yourself out
Surely Dukakis was a liberal.
Not by today's definition. Nor would Carter or Mondale be.
I've never denied being a democrat. Some folks here don't believe it so thanks for the back up
Now back to the left praising the woman they once savage. Are you done dodging and weaving?
I don't need to duck. I've always loved Barbara.
And Dukakis would be a liberal at any time you and I have been alive.
HRYK. Only a liberal could blow a 17 pt lead with 3 minutes left in the game.
You liberals were always very disrespectful of Barbara, Race.
She always was the best of the bunch.
Bullshit
Compelling argument.
Your a shitty liar
Always have been
You whooshed here. You haven't always been the morally straight, upstanding and totally sane Trumpanzee you now embody.
I guess that made sense to you when you wrote it
But a professor!
That's called an example that proves my point. You have google same as I do
If you want to keep pretending she wasn't savaged you are welcome to your own personal narrative. This is a safe space
I'm more interested in your apparent claim you weren't a fucking liberal when the jokes about the President being married to his mother were actually circulating. That's a changed story.
Bill Clinton isn't a liberal. I was the same democrat then that I was when I voted for Trump.
So the point stands that she was savaged then and a hero now for going after Trump. Thanks for playing. If you can find some tweets from me in 1990 knock yourself out
Surely Dukakis was a liberal.
Not by today's definition. Nor would Carter or Mondale be.
I've never denied being a democrat. Some folks here don't believe it so thanks for the back up
Now back to the left praising the woman they once savage. Are you done dodging and weaving?
I don't need to duck. I've always loved Barbara.
And Dukakis would be a liberal at any time you and I have been alive.
Not today
People forget that Bill was the guy that changed the sentencing that filled our prisons with corner boys, or super predators as Hillary called them. Not exactly a hero of the left today
And many in the left hated Bubba's triangulating in the 90's He's was still far left of today's GOP on taxes and the initial run at Hillarycare.
I hated (and still do) his fucking guts for being a degenerate, but loved me those balanced budgets in hindsight. Bubba did have the easiest fiscal situation to deal with of any modern era POTUS- i.e., Cold War peace, dividend, booming economy and boomers not yet getting to retirement. If he would have gotten Bin Laden in 1998 I'd forgive him for the intern BJs.
He was smart enough to let Hillary go down in flames on the health care and never tried again
He was Trump on illegals. Look up the youtube vids.
He listened to Newt and the two of them worked together.
Bill was never far left of anyone. He even started a wing of the democrats to distance himself from the looming lunatics in the left wing
He is not popular among the AOC crowd. I voted for him twice
What I'm hearing here and in this thread and that people love them some reasonable Centrists.
Race and his band of Trump Warriors hate the far left, but many among them have democratic roots.
I think what distinguishes Trump from those centrist Democrats is his carelessness with the rhetoric, and his wanton fanning of the flames of the far right. I assume the Warrior Centrists of the Tug dislike the far right as much as they dislike the far left.
Time for creepy confessions in the Tug.
What the fuck is the "far right"? A centrist Republican is just a pussy looking to get along with RATS...LIKE BUSH
Great. Thanks for that thought-provoking contribution.
What is the difference between someone on the "far-right" and a conservative?
I'm sure you'd get different answers from different people. It's been my experience and observation that people always fall somewhere on a political spectrum. They are all just labels at the end of the day, and even within the categories that those labels purport to identify, it's almost never clean. I've known conservatives that are anti-big government who, in my estimation, are not nearly suspicious enough of government intrusion on civil rights. I've known liberals who want the government to solve all of life's issues but who are hawks on government over-reach on privacy matters.
I myself and not a neat and clean ideologue. I would label myself a moderate conservative, but can be all over the map on issues, and fancy myself a progressive on some, a staunch conservative on others. I'm a blend. I'm a moderate Republican.
Far right? Same as the far left. People who find appeal in dogma and identity of belief. The far right, or at least one branch of it, tends to have a religious element to it that matches the zeal with which the far left believes in their own fantasies. They are both guilty of a zero/sum game approach to things. As an empirical matter, I find more xenophobes on the far right than I do on the far left, but as you and others point out, the far left has made the white male (me) an object of xenophobia, so there's that. Also as an empirical matter, I find people on both extremes to fall into their stereotype more cleanly. Right wing people tend to want to adhere to tradition and resist change; left wing people tend to want to deconstruct everything. At the extreme, both ideologies are silly. These are gross generalizations, but you have to start with some idea or there's no making sense of any of it and we're just a bunch people who believe a bunch of different shit.
Still, I don't get too caught up in nomenclature. It's a fool's study. People can point out that Republicans freed the slaves and that white Democrats in the south wanted to keep them. Those are names. The nature of the people, their philosophies and what they want/wanted what is the thing for me.
Sure, the philosophy and the view that drove brave people to challenge the social norm of the pre-civil rights era south are my kind of progressive, and the people (there) who wanted it kept the way it was are not my kind of conservative. And on some level, as the father of daughters, I also support (in degrees) the progress of women in society and I'm able to see the bullshit when I see it.
You liberals were always very disrespectful of Barbara, Race.
She always was the best of the bunch.
Bullshit
Compelling argument.
Your a shitty liar
Always have been
You whooshed here. You haven't always been the morally straight, upstanding and totally sane Trumpanzee you now embody.
I guess that made sense to you when you wrote it
But a professor!
That's called an example that proves my point. You have google same as I do
If you want to keep pretending she wasn't savaged you are welcome to your own personal narrative. This is a safe space
I'm more interested in your apparent claim you weren't a fucking liberal when the jokes about the President being married to his mother were actually circulating. That's a changed story.
Bill Clinton isn't a liberal. I was the same democrat then that I was when I voted for Trump.
So the point stands that she was savaged then and a hero now for going after Trump. Thanks for playing. If you can find some tweets from me in 1990 knock yourself out
Surely Dukakis was a liberal.
Not by today's definition. Nor would Carter or Mondale be.
I've never denied being a democrat. Some folks here don't believe it so thanks for the back up
Now back to the left praising the woman they once savage. Are you done dodging and weaving?
I don't need to duck. I've always loved Barbara.
And Dukakis would be a liberal at any time you and I have been alive.
Not today
People forget that Bill was the guy that changed the sentencing that filled our prisons with corner boys, or super predators as Hillary called them. Not exactly a hero of the left today
And many in the left hated Bubba's triangulating in the 90's He's was still far left of today's GOP on taxes and the initial run at Hillarycare.
I hated (and still do) his fucking guts for being a degenerate, but loved me those balanced budgets in hindsight. Bubba did have the easiest fiscal situation to deal with of any modern era POTUS- i.e., Cold War peace, dividend, booming economy and boomers not yet getting to retirement. If he would have gotten Bin Laden in 1998 I'd forgive him for the intern BJs.
He was smart enough to let Hillary go down in flames on the health care and never tried again
He was Trump on illegals. Look up the youtube vids.
He listened to Newt and the two of them worked together.
Bill was never far left of anyone. He even started a wing of the democrats to distance himself from the looming lunatics in the left wing
He is not popular among the AOC crowd. I voted for him twice
What I'm hearing here and in this thread and that people love them some reasonable Centrists.
Race and his band of Trump Warriors hate the far left, but many among them have democratic roots.
I think what distinguishes Trump from those centrist Democrats is his carelessness with the rhetoric, and his wanton fanning of the flames of the far right. I assume the Warrior Centrists of the Tug dislike the far right as much as they dislike the far left.
Time for creepy confessions in the Tug.
What the fuck is the "far right"? A centrist Republican is just a pussy looking to get along with RATS...LIKE BUSH
Great. Thanks for that thought-provoking contribution.
What is the difference between someone on the "far-right" and a conservative?
I'm sure you'd get different answers from different people. It's been my experience and observation that people always fall somewhere on a political spectrum. They are all just labels at the end of the day, and even within the categories that those labels purport to identify, it's almost never clean. I've known conservatives that are anti-big government who, in my estimation, are not nearly suspicious enough of government intrusion on civil rights. I've known liberals who want the government to solve all of life's issues but who are hawks on government over-reach on privacy matters.
I myself and not a neat and clean ideologue. I would label myself a moderate conservative, but can be all over the map on issues, and fancy myself a progressive on some, a staunch conservative on others. I'm a blend. I'm a moderate Republican.
Far right? Same as the far left. People who find appeal in dogma and identity of belief. The far right, or at least one branch of it, tends to have a religious element to it that matches the zeal with which the far left believes in their own fantasies. They are both guilty of a zero/sum game approach to things. As an empirical matter, I find more xenophobes on the far right than I do on the far left, but as you and others point out, the far left has made the white male (me) an object of xenophobia, so there's that. Also as an empirical matter, I find people on both extremes to fall into their stereotype more cleanly. Right wing people tend to want to adhere to tradition and resist change; left wing people tend to want to deconstruct everything. At the extreme, both ideologies are silly. These are gross generalizations, but you have to start with some idea or there's no making sense of any of it and we're just a bunch people who believe a bunch of different shit.
Still, I don't get too caught up in nomenclature. It's a fool's study. People can point out that Republicans freed the slaves and that white Democrats in the south wanted to keep them. Those are names. The nature of the people, their philosophies and what they want/wanted what is the thing for me.
Sure, the philosophy and the view that drove brave people to challenge the social norm of the pre-civil rights era south are my kind of progressive, and the people (there) who wanted it kept the way it was are not my kind of conservative. And on some level, as the father of daughters, I also support (in degrees) the progress of women in society and I'm able to see the bullshit when I see it.
Comments
Tell us what this chart has to do with your "point"?
Cue the Kunt act.
Welfare spending excluding Medicaid, which is welfare increased by over $25 Billion during Clinton's eight years in office. If you were to include the spending on Medicaid that spending figure would be much greater.
This increase in Welfare spending came about despite the fact that millions of people left the welfare rolls after welfare reform was enacted and because the Gingrich economy was booming setting what was at the time historical low rates of unemployment.
Fewer people on welfare and yet welfare spending increased by $25 Billion from when Clinton took office. Yeah they "gutted" it.
Now tell us what your chart says Kunt.
Bob, tell me what happens when the economy grows and there's more people in the country. Have you heard of inflation? The chart I posted takes inflation into account and clearly shows the relative decline in welfare spending.
My 13 year old child understands that concept. I'm not surprised that you don't.
So Bob didn't lie, you are talking relative he is talking real numbers
Did it increase 25 billion?
No chart needed, its a yes or no question
What context do I need?
Real spending on welfare increased by $25 Billion dollars. It wasn't "cut" and it wasn't "gutted" and this increase in welfare spending came at a time when millions were leaving the welfare rolls.
You chart doesn't show any decline in welfare spending. It shows a decline in spending as a percentage of GDP but if you have a larger GDP that might mean that real spending in terms of dollars has increased.
Why didn't you provide that "context" you hypocritical and pathological lying piece of shit?
Welfare reform set forth the expectation that welfare was never meant to be a permanent way of life. And despite all of the fear mongering that we heard from liberals about how people were going to be starving in the streets, after it was passed, real income for people formally on welfare increased and the poverty level dropped.
Simply telling people that there was an expectation that they work for a living caused the welfare rolls to plummet.
Cut taxes and revenues go up but what about the percentage of GDP??? I wonder if increased growth increases the GDP
So my "lie" that Welfare spending increased by $25 billion dollars is really a fact and as always, the only person who has been shown to have lied is you and HC.