Re: The Bigger, Badder, Even More Serious Thread [3]

[David H]

Just looking at the roll call on the farm bill vote. It's interesting in how many states the Republican vote split close to 50/50.  I don't remember that kind of division in a very long time.  I wonder if the crack between the fiscal conservatives and the social conservatives is opening a bit wider.   

You have a very different breed of Republican over there Eldo and Halfy. What do you think it says that they can't pass a simple farm bill? Do you think they still have the power to pass anything? Do you think they're prepared for a backlash from within their own party?

[Eldorion]

I've been wondering if the Republican Party is going to fragment since the election.  I still think it's an unlikely scenario, but the coalition of moderate libertarians/fiscal conservatives, the Christian right, and internationally-minded Neoliberals that has existed since the Reagan era is fraught with contradictions and hypocrisy.  If they don't win in 2016, then I think the stress of losing three Presidential elections in a row might be too much for the already fragile bonds that tie the party together.

[David H]

It's going to be interesting to watch, isn't it? 

Out west here, I'd slice them a little differently.  I'm not sure for example how you differentiate a Neoliberal from a fiscal conservative (is Ayn Rand a litmus test?).

We have a lot of Libertarians who vote Democrat for pragmatic reasons.  And what you call the Christian right I believe is here just the subset of social conservatives who get their politics from the pulpit rather than the AM radio. 

And do you see any Neoconservatives around at all anymore, or have they all shed their skins and taken on new colors after the Bush experiment? 

It's really impressive how many different creatures Reagan was able to put in the same ark, isn't it?

[Eldorion]

Out west here, I'd slice them a little differently.  I'm not sure for example how you differentiate a Neoliberal from a fiscal conservative (is Ayn Rand a litmus test?).

I was thinking about this when I made my earlier post. You could certainly classify Neoliberals as fiscal conservatives, but in my experience there's a divide between those who want the US to scale back its international involvement and shrink government across the board (these people tend to be influenced by libertarianism) and those who embrace the United States' role in the international order (mainly referring to our military ventures here) but still want deregulation and free trade.

We have a lot of Libertarians who vote Democrat for pragmatic reasons.  And what you call the Christian right I believe is here just the subset of social conservatives who get their politics from the pulpit rather than the AM radio.

Fair enough. I think the fiscal vs. social conservative split is definitely the biggest one in the GOP.

And do you see any Neoconservatives around at all anymore, or have they all shed their skins and taken on new colors after the Bush experiment? 

I was wondering the same thing. The last time I recall hearing the term neoconservative in the news was when someone asked Herman Cain if he knew what the word meant and Cain claimed not to (he was such a troll, I almost miss him ). I think neoconservatism was an attempt to fuse the political, economic, and cultural conservative elements of the Republican Party, but it's been discredited. The fiscal conservatives realized during the Bush years that neocons don't actually want a small government, and the Tea Party increased tension between the GOP leadership and the base.

[David H]

I bet Dick Cheney knows where all the neo-cons are hiding!  It wouldn't be a bad idea for somebody to keep an eye on them....

[Eldorion]

Berlusconi sentenced to 7 years in prostitution case.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/berlusconi-sex-trial-verdict-convicted_n_3490210.html

Does anyone think the conviction will actually be upheld on appeal?

[Mrs Figg]

it depends how many judges he can bribe before the appeal. and then there is another trial after that. it could take another 10 years. the worry is that it could blow this gvt apart, and its a shame because Letta is ok, and seems to be doing a good job unfortunately he relies on this coalition to remain in power.

[Pettytyrant101]

This sort of thing makes me really crabbit-

The West should have tried talking to the Taliban a decade ago after they had just been toppled from power, the UK's top general in Afghanistan has said.
Gen Nick Carter said it would have been much easier to find a political solution when they were on the run.
A major conference on the future of Afghanistan held in Bonn, Germany, over a decade ago did not include the defeated Taliban former government of Afghanistan.
Gen Carter, deputy commander of the Nato-led coalition, acknowledged it was easy to be wise with the benefit of hindsight- BBC


And only recently I was listening to Blair going on about needing hindsight over Iraq and the imaginary Weapons of Mass Invention.


Neiher of these things required the ability to see into the future- in the case of Iraq a million peple marched on London saying exactly the sort of the things Blair now claims you needed hindsight for- no you just had to bloody listen to something other than the voices in your head Blair!  

And as for the Taliban- I was saying about negotating with them at th start of the conflict and Im a drunken armchair observer- you cant tell me someone more involved (and more sober) didnt think of it- I mean we had examples- we only got peace in Northern Ireland when we tried talking to the IRA instead of just shooting at them.

There seems to be an attempt to rewrite history going on here - where things that were bloody obvious even to a casual observer are now apprently things only to be known with hindsight.

And whilst Im crabbit ranting- on the subject of rewriting history- occording to the UK government yesterday, in true Orwellian fashion, the double dip recession the UK entered last year now offiially never happened at all and the government have the figures to prove it. They will be telling us the choco ration wasnt cut next.

[halfwise]

there was Chocolate rationing in the UK during the recession?   Or are you going all historical on us?

Dave and Eldo: the $%#'s a "neo-liberal" when applied to the Republican party? Never heard of that before.

[halfwise]

Oh, looked it up (thanks wikipedia!). It's a European term.  No wonder I didn't recognize it in an American context.

[Orwell]

New Liberal? New Conservative? What claptrap.

[Pettytyrant101]

choco rationing was a refrence to Orwell's 1984 Halfy- they reduce the amount then a few days later proclaim the new reduced amount is in fact an increase.

[azriel]

I agree with you Petty, Gvnt are saying our economy is happily on the up, & quickly to ???!!! EH ? so, the shops boarded up, people STILL losing jobs, Charity Food distribution is rising higher than a popes todger is fiction ? Who exactly is the Gvnt trying to charm ? Over seas investers ? The chinese market ? The Americans ? Cos we aint falling for it ! And no matter how many figures & surveys you produce, people on the street are the REAL ones suffering, & can tell you the hard hitting truth. Polititions know full well whats going on & whats to come for years ahead, all thats interesting them now is...how long can I keep in the game ? keeping in daily contact with their accountants, (one honest,one not!) & trying to hop,skip & jump thru the booby trapped mine field that is politics today. To me its a clear case of "watching your own back & to hell with all & sundry", has been for years ! & Gvnt have the brass balls to talk of corruption in other countries ?! Carry on like this & even the Italians will hold us in awe, (Russians will take longer! much longer )

[Pettytyrant101]

Yes this coalition Government is starting to worry me. Its getting very Orwellian.
They preach that we are all in it together- they preach this notion of the 'Big Society'- when inpractice they have quite delibretly been setting one section of society against the other. Its doublethink at its best (or worst)
They have been attacking the poorest- calling them scroungers and lazy, claiing they are cheats- despite the truth being most of those on benefits are IN work- its just so poorly paid they require tax credits and child benefits ect just to make ends meet.
They tell the middle classes its the poor that are the reason for the squeeze on them- using all the money on the benefits- yet the entire benifits bill could be paid seveal times over by simply not renewing Trident, or striding round the world interfering militarily in other peoples internal affairs.
Hell they are even having a go at pensioners as being a burden on the rest of society.
The MP's steal and rip off the country through their allowances and when they get caught nothing happens to them- if I did that with expenses for care work I would not only be sacked Id be in court for fraud.
The bankers collapse our ecnomy and since then the top percent of rich in this country have got even richer- no recession for them.

All in this together? Like fuck we are- this is a delibrate attempt to blame those in society who can least respond to the charge and to deflect attention away from the real criminals here- the political and ruling class.

What really frighten me is that it seems to be working. People are believing this version of events which never actualy happened- and thats scary.

[David H]

Dave and Eldo: the $%#'s a "neo-liberal" when applied to the Republican party?  Never heard of that before.

New Liberal? New Conservative? What claptrap.

That's exactly why I was asking. From this far away it looks like it's still the same people at the party. They just keep switching name tags to confuse us  

[Mrs Figg]

what do you think of this new law that immigrants must be able to speak and write English before they can get benefits?

[Pettytyrant101]

It seems unfair when Osbourne in his last round of s[pending cuts slashed the funding to programs teaching english to immigrants.
Leading me to think its just a means to prevent new immigrants claiming benefits- I can see that been challenged in the European courts.
But the whole attitude to the benefits shake up seems to be a blame game on the poor.
He is switching payments form fortnightly to monthly on the basis most people get paid monthly- most people who are working however get more money than those on dole and making that last 4 weeks for many people will be difficult- and if some unexpected expense crops up half way through a month what do you do for the rest of the month? Sit in the dark and eat dust?

He is also increasing the amount of time you have to be out of work before you can make a claim from 3 to 7 days- what he doesnt tell you is that it now takes about 4 weeks between making a claim and actually getting anything- so he has effectivel increased that period by anextra week on the basis poor people just arent trying hard enough to find work when they are made redundant by Osbournes policies- when in fact there simply isnt the work to go round and with him cutting anther 11.5 billion from public spending there will be even fewer jobs- and this fantasy that the private sector will replace all these lost jobs in the pubic sector is just that, fantasy.

What is actually happening is that there are fewer and fewer full time jobs out there, and more and more part time jobs- meaning you still have to claim benefits even when you find a job just to get by.

I find it ridiculous we have a minimum wage and that its so low even when you get full time work on it you still need to claim benefit to get up to an amount its possible to live on. An then the government turns round and labels you a scrounger and part of the problem.

[Eldorion]

Oh, looked it up (thanks wikipedia!).  It's a European term.  No wonder I didn't recognize it in an American context.  

I don't know how European it is, but I've come across the term a number of times in the course of my studies. The term "liberal" has a ton of contradictory meanings but I've found "neoliberal" to be a convenient term for internationally-minded laissez-faire policies.

[Ally]

what do you think of this new law that immigrants must be able to speak and write English before they can get benefits?

Just a thought: does 'no benefits unless you speak English' break EU law? If given to UK citizen, has to be given to EU national...

[Eldorion]

what do you think of this new law that immigrants must be able to speak and write English before they can get benefits?

I think it's absurd.

[Mrs Figg]

just to see the other side of the argument. They are saying if you cant speak English, how are you supposed to get a job? If I didnt speak a word of Italian I would be reduced to the very worst menial jobs out there, I dont think its unreasonable to expect people to learn the Language of the host country.

[Pettytyrant101]

I dont think its unreasonable to ask them to learn- I think its unreasonable to punish them until they do when the government has taken away the means by which they could have learned.
They cant both cut the programs set up to help immigrants speak the language and say they will be excluded if they dont learn the language.
Its a ruse to cut the number of immigrants claiming benefits. Its just politics and therefore unfair.

[Mrs Figg]

its definately a ruse, they dont want people to bring over hundreds of relatives from the subcontinent.

[Pettytyrant101]

Thing is most modern immigration is from places like Poland.

[CC12 35]