100 Ways Republicans and Democrats Are The Same

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

It's quite the read, but very informative, IMO.

 

http://ivn.us/2012/11/06/100-ways-republicans-are-just-like-democrats/

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Some of these are weird and repetitive. They mention the Fed like 5 times and in some ways imply its existence is somehow a bad thing?

 

And then they mention where both parties agree on things that aren't really political issues. It's like saying 2 people aren't different because they're both Americans or something.

 

60. There was strong bipartisan agreement that the NFL lockout should end

 

I just got to this one and lol'd. Are libertarians in favor of NFL lockouts?

 

72. There has been bipartisan congressional support of filibuster reform.

 

Damn those Republicans and Democrats for trying to end the fundamentally anti-democratic and accidentally created filibuster!

Edited December 13, 2012 by Phailadelphia

[OSUViking 505]

Filibusters are terrible, but only imagine what would happen to the minority if the filibuster is removed and a certain party takes complete dominance.

[Guest Phailadelphia]

That's how it's supposed to be. A bill passes if a majority of the members vote yes on it. Allowing a minority to undermine that democratic process is wrong.

[GA_Eagle 595]

I just got to this one and lol'd. Are libertarians in favor of NFL lockouts?

 

I got to your comment and half smiled. Does Congress have more important things to do than interfere with work stoppages of a private business during the worst recession since the 30's?

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Congress didn't (and really, can't) interfere with it though, which is why I found it funny. It's basically saying "these guys are alike because they like to watch football." Well...yeah. They probably like basketball and hamburgers and beer too. Who doesn't?

[GA_Eagle 595]

Congress didn't (and really, can't) interfere with it though, which is why I found it funny. It's basically saying "these guys are alike because they like to watch football." Well...yeah. They probably like basketball and hamburgers and beer too. Who doesn't?

 

They actually CAN interfere through anti-trust exemptions. They can put pressure on the NFL to end lockouts etc, by threatening to review or revoke the privileges. I do realize what you're saying but that's why its not really funny. If its a pointless vote why are they talking about it at all during official business of Congress?

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Because Congress is comprised primarily of idiots?

 

Look, I'm not going to debate the merits of congressional intervention into the NFL lockout. The one bill introduced on the dispute was pigeon-holed relatively quickly. The OP article doesn't provide insight into any of that. It just says "these guys want the lockout to end," which is a silly thing to put on a list of political similarities.

[GA_Eagle 595]

Because Congress is comprised primarily of idiots?

 

Look, I'm not going to debate the merits of congressional intervention into the NFL lockout. The one bill introduced on the dispute was pigeon-holed relatively quickly. The OP article doesn't provide insight into any of that. It just says "these guys want the lockout to end," which is a silly thing to put on a list of political similarities.

 

eh sorta... I think the underlying point was the one I made, despite it not being spelled out in the article. That's why it got included, imo.

[Thanatos 2,847]

That's how it's supposed to be. A bill passes if a majority of the members vote yes on it. Allowing a minority to undermine that democratic process is wrong.

 

Except with a two-party system and with the terrible political results of gerrymandering, it really isn't a "democratic process" anymore. If you get rid of FPTP, (first past the post), voting and swap to the alternative vote, then the representatives that are elected might actually reflect the people's wishes, and then you would have a democratic process. Until then, leave filibustering in.