Showing posts with label False Premise. Show all posts
Showing posts with label False Premise. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Republicans stuck on the "False Premise," Fictionalized Liberal Agenda. Absolute conservative nonsense.

One of the best comeback's for Republican attacks on liberals is to tell them they'er working from a "false premise." A false premise like job killing Democrats trying to turn Americans into dependent and obedient voters with unemployment and food stamps. A fiction to specifically counter their own radical and failed agenda that actually put people on unemployment and food stamps. Reality just won't do.
Now we have a list of false premises to counter back anytime a Republican teabilly opens their mouth:
WaPo-Ezra Klein: After the 2012 election, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal made a name for himself as the most eager and aggressive of the GOP’s self-flagellators. Republicans have to “stop being the stupid party,” he raged. Apparently, he’s changed his mind.

In Politico Tuesday … Jindal’s plan for victory! Which is, well, this:
“At some point, the American public is going to revolt against the nanny state and the leftward march of this president. I don’t know when the tipping point will come, but I believe it will come soon.

Why?

Because the left wants: The government to explode; to pay everyone; to hire everyone; they believe that money grows on trees; the earth is flat; the industrial age, factory-style government is a cool new thing; debts don’t have to be repaid; people of faith are ignorant and uneducated; unborn babies don’t matter; pornography is fine; traditional marriage is discriminatory; 32 oz. sodas are evil; red meat should be rationed; rich people are evil unless they are from Hollywood or are liberal Democrats; the Israelis are unreasonable; trans-fat must be stopped; kids trapped in failing schools should be patient; wild weather is a new thing; moral standards are passé; government run health care is high quality; the IRS should violate our constitutional rights; reporters should be spied on; Benghazi was handled well; the Second Amendment is outdated; and the First one has some problems too.”-Jindal
Without the false premise, Republicans would have nothing to argue, and no way to defend their platform. But it would force them to change into something that can govern in the 21st century. Like Klein writes:
The GOP’s problem isn’t that it insults the intelligence of the voters. It’s that it insults its own intelligence. It’s come up with a theory of liberal governance that has obviated the need for a theory of conservative governance. As Josh Barro writes at Business Insider, “So many of its members have a warped vision of what liberalism is. They think it’s something so mind-bendingly awful that they cannot fathom how voters could willingly choose it. It must be some mistake. And sooner or later, mistakes get fixed.”
It all makes perfect sense:
Instead of sitting back and waiting for the economy to win the election for Republicans, Jindal’s come up with a ridiculous caricature of liberalism and is assuming its failures will win the country back for conservatism. The upside of this theory is that it frees Jindal and the rest of the Republican Party from having to do the hard work of rethinking and renewing its own governing agenda. The downside of this theory is that it’s utter nonsense. 

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Without False Premises, Republicans have nothing.

I hate the right wings penchant for false premises.

Their arguments fall apart without the creation of these fake issues and talking points.

Which brings me to latest from columnist Chris Rickert:
WSJ: A Republican governor hell-bent on pleasing the activist fringe of his party, Democrats willing to abscond from the state for the cause of major campaign donors, recalls upon recalls and now this ludicrous kerfuffle over who gets to call themselves what on a primary election ballot.
Yes, it would be outrageous if the Democrats did leave the state to please their campaign donors, but the idea itself is ludicrous and a false premise that allows Rickert to make his other nonsensical point, that we shouldn’t even attempt to call into question possible election fraud.

How dare we ask?