The Republican Debate - Surprised by Sin!! - 2

A largely overlooked fact is that Democratic funding is much wider based and a lot of it comes from middle class individuals and small donor events while republican fund raising comes from large corporate houses (which send in much smaller donations to the Democrats - just in case, you know) and rich individuals and religious organisations. Which automatically force the republicans toward pork-barrel economics.
Part 2


Links to subsequent parts
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10

Thompson: "Well, in a dynamic economy, there are jobs lost and there are jobs gained. And so far, there have been more jobs gained. To put up barriers and say that so-and-so cannot lose a job would be the wrong thing to do in a free-market economy that's been so well for us. It's made us the most prosperous nation in the history of the world."...
"...The manufacturing industry is, in large part, an international industry nowadays, which means prices are set internationally. Manufacturers cannot do much about that but they get hit with cost domestically. We can do a lot about their cost, in terms of taxes and regulation..."

i.e. he will not intervene to help Americans keep jobs but he will intervene to help big business keep competing by artificially helping them keep afloat against fair trade
This is pretty symptomatic of the thinking of most republicans. Isn't the point of governance people?

They're not worried about 700 billion dollars in military spending - a neat 1/4th of a 3 point something trillion dollar budget but all of them keep repeating the litany "We're going to have to fix health care. We're going to have to fix Social Security." McCain differed though with "we got to tell them that we will not spend $2 billion on an aircraft tanker, which I was able to stop and save the taxpayers $2 billion, because of this incredible extravagant waste in defense spending today, which is the biggest part of our budget."

You can also see the republicans struggle with illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants make eminent economic sense. They might use public works.. but you're already spending on it you dumbfucks. They pay taxes on consumption, bring prices down, do jobs that Americans don't, and live in filth and fear to provide rich idiots with sun-kissed oranges and whiter than white linen in your around-the-corner Four Seasons. What do they get for that? Starring roles in american pornography. But Republicans are also torn between economic sense and their inherent xenophobia and racism. Sorry... forget the "torn" part.. they simply choose to be xenophobic because economic conservatism is just an excuse for them to cover up their pork-barell economics.

Romney claims eminence among all presidential hopefuls in business sense. "if we agree to sit down with China, I understand that if we don't get real careful and protect patents and designs and technology, that what we tend to sell the most of, those kinds of things, intellectual property, is going to get stolen by the Chinese or by others, that we have to recognize agreements have to be in our benefit, not just in their benefit." Is that an idiot exhibiting plain naiveté or cynical misleading of the public in how trade is conducted?

In fact to a trained economic ear Guiliani made the best economic sense during the whole debate

Rep. Hunter came across as the worst of them when it comes to economics. His take on "Good Business deals" sounds good superficially but makes for funny reading for anyone with the least amount of intelligence and idea of trade and economics.
Now who is Sen. Paul. He impressed me with his idea of domestic and foreign policy. His view of personal liberty seemed very anti-republican, he actually supports personal liberty!

I'm also surprised that most of them know their Sunnis from their Shias!! :D.. Dubya certainly didn't nor did Cheney or Rumsfeld before they blundered on with their divide and conquer idea so catastrophically backfired on them. I mean I was 23 years old and knew even before the war started what the dumbfucks were going to do and how it was going to end for them!!

Idiots that they are when it comes to policy making, they all come into their own when they talk about their toys. Centrifuges, preemptive, narrow-window, hot pursuit, strategic attack on weaponry are all terms and words that roll easily off the tongue. Except for sen. Paul. Sen. Paul (of Texas!!) comes across as deeply insightful and intelligent. So how come he attends the Republican debate? :D


Work in Progress :D