McCain Wieghs in on O's Big Bird Ad

[steveh_131]

My point in originally posting this was that if current republican leadership isn't even willing to cut whack big bird, how can we expect them to get behind any meaningful cuts to those programs and departments that make up the lion's share of our budget?

We can't. Not even Romney.

 

[mrjarrell]

My point in originally posting this was that if current republican leadership isn't even willing to cut whack big bird, how can we expect them to get behind any meaningful cuts to those programs and departments that make up the lion's share of our budget?

So called "conservatives" have been going after PBS for decades and it's still there eating it's paltry meal of tax dollars. There is no will to go after PBS, it's just a "conservative" talking point and that's all it ever was or will be. Obamney isn't going to cut anything substantial that needs it. Neither is Obama. They all talk a good game, but when it comes time to take out the knife and start cutting they don't have the guts. It's easier for them to increase spending on their pet projects, instead or reduce spending increases by a minuscule amount. At the end of the day dems and repubs are gutless.

 

[TRWXXA]

To me, it wasn't the amount of budget that we will save by axing PBS. It represents an attitude that if it is valuable, needed and viable, it should stand on it's own in the market place, PBS or other government subsidized programs like it.

Refreshing to my ears!

+1

It's not about dropping public funding for PBS. It's about dropping funding for all publicly funded entities that should stand on their own -- PBS, NPR, NEA, etc.

"Artists" shouldn't go running to the government with their hands out so they can fund their "free expression". They should go out and get a job. Michelangelo didn't paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel because he was aching to express his feelings about man's relationship with his creator and his aloneness in the universe. THE POPE PAID HIM TO DO IT. It was a contracted job.

Big Bird gets enough money from marketing and private endowments that he should stand on his own two goofy feet, without wetting his beak in the funding pool of the American taxpayer.

 

[netsecurity]

Once again you choose to attack Romney over an issue that makes no sense. This post if anything is about McCain and Obama. We know your so called libertarian views won't allow you to accept Romney, but criticizing him for cutting the budget is as lame as the ad.

Yea, I'm sick of libertarian types attacking Romney in every single thread.

Johnson is at 1% in the polls, but if they can just steal another 4% from Romney by bashing him online 24 hours a day, and thereby attempt to help Obama win, they think they will have established a three party system. Good luck with that! Libertarians here have actually turned me from mostly Libertarian ideology to a Libertarian hater.

 

[netsecurity]

So called "conservatives" have been going after PBS for decades and it's still there eating it's paltry meal of tax dollars. There is no will to go after PBS, it's just a "conservative" talking point and that's all it ever was or will be. Obamney isn't going to cut anything substantial that needs it. Neither is Obama. They all talk a good game, but when it comes time to take out the knife and start cutting they don't have the guts. It's easier for them to increase spending on their pet projects, instead or reduce spending increases by a minuscule amount. At the end of the day dems and repubs are gutless.

I would tend to agree with your assessment historically, but this is ROMNEY, not Obamney. He bought big companies and trimmed the fat to make them profitable as a profession for decades, and earned himself (and others) hundreds of millions in profit from doing so. I expect him to cut frivolous funding in a heartbeat. Big bird can survive without our tax money, so why keep giving it away?

 

[steveh_131]

Yea, I'm sick of libertarian types attacking Romney in every single thread.

Johnson is at 1% in the polls, but if they can just steal another 4% from Romney by bashing him online 24 hours a day, and thereby attempt to help Obama win, they think they will have established a three party system. Good luck with that! Libertarians here have actually turned me from mostly Libertarian ideology to a Libertarian hater.

your ideology has changed based on the personalities of people on the internet?

 

[mrjarrell]

I would tend to agree with your assessment historically, but this is ROMNEY, not Obamney. He bought big companies and trimmed the fat to make them profitable as a profession for decades, and earned himself (and others) hundreds of millions in profit from doing so. I expect him to cut frivolous funding in a heartbeat. Big bird can survive without our tax money, so why keep giving it away?

He bought companies, gutted them, fired the employees and sold off the pieces. There's a difference. Obamney is not going to make any substantial cuts to any budget. He's as big a coward as the rest. Hell, even his partners so called plan is a farce. You people chose poorly.

 

[netsecurity]

He bought companies, gutted them, fired the employees and sold off the pieces. There's a difference. Obamney is not going to make any substantial cuts to any budget. He's as big a coward as the rest. Hell, even his partners so called plan is a farce. You people chose poorly.

You are a bitter person. Bain bought companies that were under performing, or failing, and saved jobs by making the company profitable again, then selling it. I'm sure people got laid off in the process, and who would be happy about that, but I suppose you would rather the company was allowed to fail, and all employees lose their jobs instead.

What a perfect comparison to the situation our whole country is in. Should we save our ship by pulling it out of debt, or just maintain the status quo so that no one has to make the hard choices like throwing Big bird overboard? It is easy to keep writing checks to buy votes, but it is twice as bad when the checks bounce, just look at Greece.

Would Johnson cut Big Bird? Who the hell knows or cares.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

[STRIKE]He[/STRIKE]Bain bought companies, [STRIKE]gutted[/STRIKE] restructured them, fired [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] unneccesary employees and [STRIKE]sold off the pieces[/STRIKE] returned most of them to profitability.

FTFY.

You're welcome!

 

[hooky]

Would Johnson cut Big Bird? Who the hell knows or cares.

 

[buckstopshere]

Libertarians here have actually turned me from mostly Libertarian ideology to a Libertarian hater.

This is exactly how I feel about the GOP. I used to believe that the GOP gave a damn about liberty but their actions showed me otherwise. Patriot Act, NDAA (John McCain), and TARP were all GOP policies.

So, now I'm a hater too who regrets voting GOP every single election.

Of course on this forum libertarians are gonna bust up on Romney. He deserves it. BHO is horrible and would be trashed equally if more people would start threads with "Make a wise choice, vote for Obama" but that's not what happens on this forum.

Voting for Johnson is not a way of getting bama elected. That's just dumb. If I wanted Obama elected, I would vote for him. Since I want Johnson to win, I'll vote for him.

If you want to vote for Romney because you agree with and believe in him, I think that's great. If you're voting for him because he's the lesser evil, I think more soul searching and thought should be put into what you want, not what's popular.

 

[indiucky]

Romney blew the Tea Party dog whistle by mentioning PBS. That one really gets the far right wingers riled up for some reason.

Yes conservatives get riled up when they go to Toys R Us and pay $30 for a "made in china" Elmo or Big Bird and think, "Wow, it seems Big Bird should be paying for himself by now yet here we are paying for it?"

There is something about subsidizing far left programming that aggravates people on the right. Apparently there is something about not subsidizing far left dogma that really chaps the libs.

It seems to me by the lefts response that the dog whistle was only heard by the left. We say "Let PBS pay for itself" and the lefty loons hear "The right hates Big Bird."

Accept the fact that PBS is a giant Super Pac for far left loons (George Soros anyone? Arthur Vining Davis foundation? Bill Moyers?) and then maybe you will understand where the right is coming from on the PBS issue.

 

[gungirl65]

Another funny cartoon brought to you today by the letter O.

 

[gungirl65]

 

[88GT]

Like our previous discussion on public libraries, this should be on the bottom of the list of things to address.

That's ridiculous. All frivolous spending should be addressed. And at least defense is an allowable expense.

your ideology has changed based on the personalities of people on the internet?

Not my ideology, but the label I use to define myself. If the libertarian movement as a whole nationwide is represented by the same kind of vitriol and hatred presented here in INGO, 1% of the vote is a gift.

He bought companies, gutted them, fired the employees and sold off the pieces. There's a difference. Obamney is not going to make any substantial cuts to any budget. He's as big a coward as the rest. Hell, even his partners so called plan is a farce. You people chose poorly.

Who let the Dem shill in here?

Of course on this forum libertarians are gonna bust up on Romney. He deserves it. BHO is horrible and would be trashed equally if more people would start threads with "Make a wise choice, vote for Obama" but that's not what happens on this forum.

Liar. He's defended by the libertarians.

If you want to vote for Romney because you agree with and believe in him, I think that's great. If you're voting for him because he's the lesser evil, I think more soul searching and thought should be put into what you want, not what's popular.

SOB, we've been down this farking road before. I have never met a more disingenuous, hypocritical group of people than the cadre of libertarians on this forum.

 

[jbombelli]

Yea, I'm sick of libertarian types attacking Romney in every single thread.

Johnson is at 1% in the polls, but if they can just steal another 4% from Romney by bashing him online 24 hours a day, and thereby attempt to help Obama win, they think they will have established a three party system. Good luck with that! Libertarians here have actually turned me from mostly Libertarian ideology to a Libertarian hater.

You were never anything but.

What's really funny is how many of you Republicans were bashing Romney all through the primaries, and how drastically your tunes changed as soon as he got the nomination. And WE'RE called disingenuous and hypocritical???

At least WE stick to our principles. We don't sell out our beliefs for the sake of beating the other guy. If MY sticking to MY principles results in somebody I won't vote for getting beaten by somebody else I won't vote for... well that's the way it goes.

 

[steveh_131]

That's ridiculous. All frivolous spending should be addressed. And at least defense is an allowable expense.

Out of the billions and billions of dollars of waste, he brought up the most easily mocked idea that anyone could possibly think of. Is he wrong? No. Was it a good plan? No.

Not my ideology, but the label I use to define myself. If the libertarian movement as a whole nationwide is represented by the same kind of vitriol and hatred presented here in INGO, 1% of the vote is a gift.

This is politics. Every side thinks they are right and has the same attitude towards those they disagree with. This is, as always, a generalization and there are many exceptions. I have certainly not found libertarians to be any worse for this than republicans or democrats.

Liar. He's defended by the libertarians.

Please provide examples of this and we can discuss them.

 

[indiucky]

CEO of PBS seems to be doing pretty well....

Presidential debate 101: How much would US save by cutting off Big Bird? - CSMonitor.com

 

[KJQ6945]

That's ridiculous. All frivolous spending should be addressed. And at least defense is an allowable expense.


Not my ideology, but the label I use to define myself. If the libertarian movement as a whole nationwide is represented by the same kind of vitriol and hatred presented here in INGO, 1% of the vote is a gift.


Who let the Dem shill in here?



Liar. He's defended by the libertarians.




SOB, we've been down this farking road before. I have never met a more disingenuous, hypocritical group of people than the cadre of libertarians on this forum.

^^^^ This sums it all up!!!! Very well said!

 

[88GT]

You were never anything but.

What's really funny is how many of you Republicans were bashing Romney all through the primaries, and how drastically your tunes changed as soon as he got the nomination. And WE'RE called disingenuous and hypocritical???

At least WE stick to our principles. We don't sell out our beliefs for the sake of beating the other guy. If MY sticking to MY principles results in somebody I won't vote for getting beaten by somebody else I won't vote for... well that's the way it goes.

Absolutely.

Your entire post is a perfect example. Disingenuous for presenting the false dichotomy that one can't prefer someone over Romney in the primaries and still prefer Romney over Obama in the general.

Disingenuous for presenting yourself as some morally superior individual because you claim you've stuck to your principles by voting for Johnson while those who vote for Romney have not. A vote is political capital and just like all other capital it's buying power comes with trade-offs. YOU choose to spend all of yours on the purist pipe dream. Others, like myself, weigh the likelihood of outcomes and choose to spend ours in other ways. In no way have I abandoned my principles.



Hypocritical for claiming to be the standard-bearer of freedom and criticizing others for exercising it as they see fit. The reality is that you only want people to exercise their freedom of franchise if they vote YOUR way. How was it you phrased it? At least I have never condemned the libertarians for the vote choice.

Hypocritical because you tell us time and again that if Romney can't EARN the votes from the electorate, that's his fault. But IIRC it was YOU specifically who whined like a school girl blaming the voters for not voting for Johnson. What ever happened to having to earn those votes? (My sincerest apologies in advance if you were not one of those. There have been two, mrjarrel was the other, and I admit to not remembering for sure who the other individual was. But I remember thinking that it was out of character for the other individual and for some reason I am associating your name with that thought.)

Disingenuous in the criticism of Romney. You'd have us believe it was because his policies are atrocious (which they are), but the truth is that it's just a bunch of bitter, angry people who, some by their own admission, feel guilty. And instead of owning their choice and simply saying, "Won't do that again", have resorted to blaming others. And anybody and everybody even remotely association with it. In short, you've condemned every member of one particular party (except the Messiah) with a blanket judgment. And yet there's always the complaint when stereotypes are made of the liberterians. Boo hoo. :cry:

Disingenuous in the criticism of Romney. Yeah, I know it sounds like I'm repeating myself, but to your credit, you get a lot of mileage out of this one. Time and again we here how utterly awful he's going to be. Time and again we hear how absolutely identical Romney is to Obama. And yet, somehow, someway, someone manages to pull this little gem out of his ass: "Obama isn't that bad. I'm still waiting for the Armageddon and complete destruction of this nation that was supposed to come from his administration." Well, tell me, how is it that Romney is going to ruin this nation and Obama isn't when they're both supposed to be the same? (Maybe this belongs in the hypocritical column too.)

And considering Johnson won't win, I find it funny that anyone voting for him with can say with a straight face that their vote is somehow going to change things as a response to those who are hoping a Romney win will improve things over an Obama administration.

So, yeah, disingenuous and hypocritical. And I think I'm being generous.