GOP debate

[Razgovory]

This is Raz we're talking about here. 

Unfortunately, we know Republicans are partisan, hostile, and obstructionist without using impeachments as a barometer.  And yes, there has been a single theme in loyal opposition GOP strategy between the Clinton and Obama Administrations, and that is reinforcing and maintaining an appearance of illigitimacy. 
Whether it's impeachment or implying the President isn't a US citizen, Republitards sincerely believe a Democrat should not be in the White House.

I see.  So now the two useful proxies for partisanship, hostility and obstructionism are (a) impeachments not related to Watergate, and (b) birthers at the fringe of one's party.

We can allow all impeachments related to Watergate.  Every President impeached because of his or her involvement in Watergate is fair game.

[Admiral Yi]

It's not the only, one but it dwarfs any other.  I understand it why you don't like it.  It makes your guys look terrible.

The principle reason I don't like it is because it's willfull ignorance.  Just as it's willfull ignorance to say that Clinton was impeached over a blowjob.  If you think that lying under oath and obstructing an investigation was not an impeachable offense, go ahead and make that case, but don't pretend it was about a blowjob.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left in this country wasn't howling for Bush's head from day one over his "stolen election."  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left didn't try to bludgeon Bush with Iraq and then stop caring after we had won.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that Gitmo was the most heinous crime known to man until Obama continued it.

If people claim to have principles, defend those principles, wherever the chips fall.  Otherwise your just another tribalist whose opinion has zero meaning.

[Razgovory]

What were they investigating?

[Razgovory]

It's not the only, one but it dwarfs any other.  I understand it why you don't like it.  It makes your guys look terrible.

The principle reason I don't like it is because it's willfull ignorance.  Just as it's willfull ignorance to say that Clinton was impeached over a blowjob.  If you think that lying under oath and obstructing an investigation was not an impeachable offense, go ahead and make that case, but don't pretend it was about a blowjob.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left in this country wasn't howling for Bush's head from day one over his "stolen election."  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left didn't try to bludgeon Bush with Iraq and then stop caring after we had won.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that Gitmo was the most heinous crime known to man until Obama continued it.

If people claim to have principles, defend those principles, wherever the chips fall.  Otherwise your just another tribalist whose opinion has zero meaning.

This is deceptive.  You can say "the left".  Who exactly, how many?  By using vague statements you can imply everyone on the left did this which is not true.  When I point to the impeachment I can point to an extraordinary action done by Republicans and exactly who voted for it.  But if you want, we can use vague statements.  For instance I say that "the Right" encouraged people to shoot at federal officers during the Clinton presidency.  A fairly popular radio show host did just that.  Of course not all members of "The Right" did this, but we can't tell how many agreed with it but said nothing.  I could say this, but it would be, in my opinion, dishonest.

[Eddie Teach]

There were several members of Congress who attempted to block Bush's inauguration.

[DGuller]

You have to admit that 2000 elections were an extremely unfortunate affair, and if there ever was a non-fraudulent election that would fail at giving the winner legitimacy, that one would be it.

[Neil]

Americans don't give a shit about showing the world we're not racist. Or anything else for that matter. Damn furriners. 

Obama won because the economy sucked and Bush got the blame for it.

Americans care about showing themselves that they're not racist.

[Siege]

Americans don't give a shit about showing the world we're not racist. Or anything else for that matter. Damn furriners. 

Obama won because the economy sucked and Bush got the blame for it.

Americans care about showing themselves that they're not racist.

Exactly.

[Razgovory]

There were several members of Congress who attempted to block Bush's inauguration.

Did so such a bill pass?

[Eddie Teach]

Americans care about showing themselves that they're not racist.

This is true to an extent. Also true that a certain amount of casual racism is unavoidable. I think these factors tended to balance each other out.

[derspiess]

siegy, I still want to hear from you why you think obama is an extreme leftist rather than the centrist his policies would suggest?

He's only centrist from your European perspective.  Foreign policy aside, of course.

[dps]

I see.  So now the two useful proxies for partisanship, hostility and obstructionism are (a) impeachments not related to Watergate, and (b) birthers at the fringe of one's party.

I seem to recall that the "fringe" of the Republicans that didn't believe Obama was born in the US was something like 40% of those surveyed.  Pretty big fringe.

I still wonder who the hell they surveyed for that.  I don't know anybody who believed that crap.

[Razgovory]

siegy, I still want to hear from you why you think obama is an extreme leftist rather than the centrist his policies would suggest?

He's only centrist from your European perspective.  Foreign policy aside, of course.

Obama is an extremist because he is an impediment to Republican control of the White House.  He could be Reagan-come-again, and so long as he was Democrat he'd be an extremist.

[Ideologue]

It's not the only, one but it dwarfs any other.  I understand it why you don't like it.  It makes your guys look terrible.

The principle reason I don't like it is because it's willfull ignorance.  Just as it's willfull ignorance to say that Clinton was impeached over a blowjob.  If you think that lying under oath and obstructing an investigation was not an impeachable offense, go ahead and make that case, but don't pretend it was about a blowjob.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left in this country wasn't howling for Bush's head from day one over his "stolen election."  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left didn't try to bludgeon Bush with Iraq and then stop caring after we had won.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that Gitmo was the most heinous crime known to man until Obama continued it.

Actual question--Obama did stop torture at Gitmo, right?  I forget.

[Berkut]

It's not the only, one but it dwarfs any other.  I understand it why you don't like it.  It makes your guys look terrible.

The principle reason I don't like it is because it's willfull ignorance.  Just as it's willfull ignorance to say that Clinton was impeached over a blowjob.  If you think that lying under oath and obstructing an investigation was not an impeachable offense, go ahead and make that case, but don't pretend it was about a blowjob.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left in this country wasn't howling for Bush's head from day one over his "stolen election."  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that the left didn't try to bludgeon Bush with Iraq and then stop caring after we had won.  It's willfull ignorance to pretend that Gitmo was the most heinous crime known to man until Obama continued it.

Actual question--Obama did stop torture at Gitmo, right?  I forget.

No, he did not.