Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

GOP spent thousands on luxury jets, adult clubFollow

#77gbaji, Posted: Apr 01 2010 at 4:05 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Sure. It's like a twofer for liberal spin in that regard. And yet, I seem to recall references to how Republicans were supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility.
#78 Apr 01 2010 at 4:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
My point is that this is somewhat irrelevant from a broader point of view. It's like arguing about who's going to pick up the tab for dinner while the restaurant is burning down.

You're spending a fair bit of effort on something so unimportant. Why not let us all giggle and remain silent if it matter so little? Smiley: smile

Quote:
Are you going to try to claim that the article (and the purpose for posting it on this forum) wasn't about trying to paint Conservatives as being hypocritical when opposing Democrat spending?

Of course it wasn't, you dolt. It was about the continued issues Republicans are having with Steele. It was probably posted here just to giggle at the Republicans but the issues people are having with the spending has jack-all to do with how it compares to Democrats.

Quote:
Cause I thought it was pretty obvious that this was the entire point here.

That's because you assume everything in the media is some attack on your precious ideology and so will insist that it's true regardless of the facts.

Quote:
The most relevant point is that the spending by the RNC highlighted in that article is private donor money, while the spending by the Democrat party which conservatives complain about is public money

What a completely meaningless statement. Any money spent by either party at a government level is "public money".

Medicare: Public money. Military: Public money. Dept. of Interior surveys of coal deposits: Public money. Abstinence programs: Public money. Art grants: Public money. Opening a new courthouse: Public money. Closing a naval base: Public money. Auto Bailouts: Public money. Bank Bailouts: Public money. Farm Subsidies: Public money. Billion dollar checks to corporations that protect kidnapping gang-rapists: Public money.

Oh noes! Democrats spend "public money"!! Are you reduced to just making fluff statements now?

Edited, Apr 1st 2010 5:16pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#79gbaji, Posted: Apr 01 2010 at 5:25 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Fluff is arguing that since Republicans spend private money in ways some of their own constituents don't agree with that they can't criticize how Democrats spend public money. Yet that is *exactly* the "fiscal responsibility" argument being made here. Stop being dense. The entire point of these sorts of articles isn't because the writers at sfgate care about the financial health of the RNC. It's so that they can distract from the massive spending and corruption evident in the Democrat controlled congress and white house by suggesting that the GOP is no better.
#80 Apr 01 2010 at 8:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Do I need to spell out to you that how a political party spends their own money has no bearing at all on the larger issue of how our government spends the public's money?

Everyone here gets it. We also all understand that this thread is tlaking about RNC money. That's the part you don't want to talk about, proclaiming that we all need to stop talking about it because you think government spending is a much more worthy topic.

Quote:
Do you get it now? Geez!

I think the only one who doesn't "get it" is you. Everyone knows the difference, you just don't want to admit that everyone knows the difference because that doesn't work for your little side track.

Quote:
Fluff is arguing that since Republicans spend private money in ways some of their own constituents don't agree with that they can't criticize how Democrats spend public money.

I suppose it's easier to write three or four paragraphs based on the arguments in your head than to write one intelligent paragraph based on the topic in the thread. Good show.

Edited, Apr 1st 2010 9:09pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#81 Apr 01 2010 at 10:41 PM Rating: Good
Gbaji wrote:
Yet that is *exactly* the "fiscal responsibility" argument being made here.


This is not a fiscal responsibility thread. This is a thread about hypocritical RNC members. DO I HAVE TO SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU?!?!!!
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#82 Apr 02 2010 at 7:50 AM Rating: Decent
Jophed,

Quote:
You're spending a fair bit of effort on something so unimportant. Why not let us all giggle and remain silent if it matter so little?


Because unlike liberal democrats conservative republicans expect more of their leadership. If they f*ck up like this they need to be fired and get some people in there who reflect our traditional values.

What's maddening is watching the same liberals, who just re-distributed trillions, act as though a couple of private jets and a ***** strip show is somehow worse.

I said Steele was a bad choice to lead the rnc.
#83 Apr 02 2010 at 8:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Because unlike liberal democrats conservative republicans expect more of their leadership.

Obviously not since none of you have acted even a little upset about the RNC and have instead spent the entire thread circling the wagons and chanting "Democrats bad! Democrats bad!"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84 Apr 02 2010 at 8:22 AM Rating: Good
Jophiel wrote:
Obviously not since none of you have acted even a little upset about the RNC and have instead spent the entire thread circling the wagons and chanting "Democrats bad! Democrats bad!"

Excuse me?
#85 Apr 02 2010 at 8:25 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Obviously not since none of you have acted even a little upset about the RNC and have instead spent the entire thread circling the wagons and chanting "Democrats bad! Democrats bad!"

Excuse me?
I think he excludes you from Varus, gbaji and Thiefx because you're not insane, just a cnut.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#86 Apr 02 2010 at 8:32 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Excuse me?

Sorry, Hoss. I wasn't counting you into the Usual Suspects. Would you like to be included from now on?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#87 Apr 02 2010 at 8:36 AM Rating: Good
Jophiel wrote:
Sorry, Hoss. I wasn't counting you into the Usual Suspects. Would you like to be included from now on?

I just want a reach around occasionally. That'd pretty much do it.
#88 Apr 02 2010 at 9:06 AM Rating: Decent
Jophed,

Quote:
Obviously not since none of you have acted even a little upset about the RNC and have instead spent the entire thread circling the wagons and chanting "Democrats bad! Democrats bad!"


Circling the wagons? Are you insane? Just because I don't agree with a strip show, I don't even care about the private jets considering how dems in congress get private jets whenever they like, being funded by the gop doesn't mean i'm ready to ignore the fact that he democrats just spent the US into bankruptcy. Can you see a difference? Perhaps if the Democrats weren't crying about this so much I would have been able to focus more on getting Steele out of there. He was a horrible pc choice and the gop is paying for it right now.

Again this is such small potatoes considering what the Democrat congress and the president have just done.

#89 Apr 02 2010 at 9:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Perhaps if the Democrats weren't crying about this...

Who? Again, you're mistaking giggling for crying or screaming or ranting or whatever word you want to use to try to make the other side look insane so you can focus on that instead of your own party's failings.

Quote:
...so much I would have been able to focus more on getting Steele out of there.

Hahahahahahahaha!!!!

"If you guys didn't notice the stuff we do wrong, we could fix the stuff we do wrong but you noticed it so now we can't! It's all your fault!!!"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#90 Apr 02 2010 at 9:41 AM Rating: Decent
Jophed,

If this is the best the democrats can do to regain some semblence of respectability I say go for it. They're going to need all the help they can get when the average persons health insurance doesn't go down 2500$ by the end of the year. Or when unemployment is still 10%. Not to mention the tax increases that are going to be caused by obamacare.
#91 Apr 02 2010 at 9:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
knoxxsouthy wrote:
If this is the best the democrats can do...

The Democrats aren't doing anything regarding this. The RNC is doing it to themselves.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#92 Apr 02 2010 at 10:00 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
The Feb. 4 expenditure of $1,946 at Voyeur West Hollywood is listed as "meals" on the RNC disclosure form


I really like that lesbian voyeur bondage is counted as a meal.

...

I'm perfectly fine with the DNC (or the RNC for that matter) holding fund raising meetings at strip clubs or whatever if that is the best way for them to reach their donors. It certainly sounds like a better venue to get some groups of people to open their wallets than a stuffy 20k/plate fund-raising dinner and speech.

But it's still pretty funny.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#93 Apr 02 2010 at 1:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Jophiel wrote:
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Perhaps if the Democrats weren't crying about this...

Who? Again, you're mistaking giggling for crying or screaming or ranting or whatever word you want to use to try to make the other side look insane so you can focus on that instead of your own party's failings.

Quote:
...so much I would have been able to focus more on getting Steele out of there.

Hahahahahahahaha!!!!

"If you guys didn't notice the stuff we do wrong, we could fix the stuff we do wrong but you noticed it so now we can't! It's all your fault!!!"


I suppose it's good that he didn't compare criticism to the Holocaust.



____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#94 Apr 02 2010 at 2:01 PM Rating: Decent
Jophed,

Quote:
The Democrats aren't doing anything regarding this. The RNC is doing it to themselves.


Except speaking about it every time a reporter shoves a mic in their face that is.

http://www.slate.com/id/2249308/?from=rss

Quote:
Second, the "sex club" angle is overstated. Voyeur appears to be less of a strip club (let alone sex club) than a risqué celebrity hangout. The dancers are "scantily clad" but there's no nudity.


#95 Apr 02 2010 at 3:02 PM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Quote:

Quote:
Second, the "sex club" angle is overstated. Voyeur appears to be less of a strip club (let alone sex club) than a risqué celebrity hangout. The dancers are "scantily clad" but there's no nudity.


Not according to what a simple Google search brought up. I personally don't give two cents on where they meet at as long as they have the balls to admit to it. Constantly throwing mud back and forth just makes people look like a bunch of damn monkeys that took some laxatives.
#96 Apr 02 2010 at 3:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Slate's comment was linked to a NYT article which had this blurb:
Quote:
“We are most certainly not a strip club,” said Sarah Waldman, the director of special events at Voyeur, where all was quiet Monday afternoon but for a few random fellows who said they were the owner and managers — young, good-looking and a little cranky — lolling on a velvet couch. “We cater to a high-end, A-list clientele with live art installations with a voyeuristic theme.”

It seems the owners are more offended by calling it a "strip club" then saying it doesn't feature nudity. A brief survey of Yalp reviews (the ones pre-dating the RNC 'scandal') back this up:
Quote:
Since there are topless women all throughout the club, there is a strict no photo policy, even if you're taking pictures of your friends and the go-go dancers are nowhere in view of your camera.
[...]
I think this is one of the hottest places that I've been to in my many years in LA. The half naked models and topless dancers alone is worth the price of admission.
[...]
very unique place, their models kinda reminded me of lady gaga except topless, kinda got caught off guard at first lol
[...]
The layout of the club is terrible, and decor is not that inspiring... but Naked chicks + live **** + celebs. What more could a girl ask for??
[...]
The half naked women rolling around in next, teasing in a box, or dancing on stage do not really take away from the nightlife experience. It's become a sort of Cheers bar for anyone in whose lived in LA long enough to know what a good venue is.


Edited, Apr 2nd 2010 4:53pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#97 Apr 02 2010 at 7:51 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
Yet that is *exactly* the "fiscal responsibility" argument being made here.


This is not a fiscal responsibility thread. This is a thread about hypocritical RNC members. DO I HAVE TO SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU?!?!!!


Um... Hypocritical on the issue of fiscal responsibility, right?

Seriously. Read the title of the thread and then spell it out for yourself. Note the reference to "GOP" (not RNC). Note the focus on spending, with "adult clubs" just one added bonus on the end. Maybe liberals really don't know that they're being played like puppets, but they sure do consistently pick up the implied message in stories like this and pass it on in unimplied form...


We've had this discussion before. If you read a story and assume it means X, then X was likely the exact meaning the guy writing the story meant for you to think it meant. The story was written to get people to associate the Republican Party as a whole with "bad spending practices". Trying to argue that it isn't, or that it doesn't, when there are several examples of posters on the first page of this thread (and in the title) repeating that very assumption is a bit silly, don't you think?

Edited, Apr 2nd 2010 6:52pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#98 Apr 02 2010 at 8:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Christ, if I had to guess author intent based on how often you fuck up and miss the point of an article, it'd be like living in a world of Mad Libs.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#99 Apr 02 2010 at 9:55 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Christ, if I had to guess author intent based on how often you fuck up and miss the point of an article, it'd be like living in a world of Mad Libs.


Ok. What was the intent then? You can't have it both ways Joph. Either the article is supposed to be interpreted to mean nothing more than that the RNC has been mishandling money, with no implications with regard to GOP fiscal responsibility or policy, or it's intended to be interpreted as the GOP as a whole being bad with money.

If the former, then several people (including the OP title) got it wrong, didn't they? I'm therefore correct to point out that they should not interpret the article that way.

If the latter, then I'm correct to point out that this is exactly what is going on.


Look. I wasn't the one who read that article and then wrote "GOP spent thousands on luxury jets, adult club". I wasn't the one who made a comment about "Aren't Republicans supposed to be fiscally responsible?". Those things happened before I first posted on this thread. I was not the first person to interpret the author's intent. In fact, I only commented to point out that others had already done this. So if that's wrong, why didn't you point that out? Funny how you always try to pull this "you can't assume that's what was meant" crap after I point out that several people already did exactly that...


You seem to be perfectly happy letting liberals do exactly the sort of interpretation I'm talking about, and then get pissed off when I point out that this is going on. Amazing!

Edited, Apr 2nd 2010 8:56pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#100 Apr 02 2010 at 11:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
If the former, then several people (including the OP title) got it wrong, didn't they? I'm therefore correct to point out that they should not interpret the article that way.

Yeah, see your problem (among many) is that you take this shit way too seriously and if someone takes an article and says "Tee-hee!" and post it to get a rise, you immediately jump up like a well trained puppy and start yapping. It's entirely possible that people don't take the article as an indictment upon the entire Republican party and everything that conservatives hold sacred and are instead posting it to needle morons like yourself because they know you'll begin howling about it in paragraph form for pages on end. They might even admit to it with the first four words of their post.

Quote:
You seem to be perfectly happy letting liberals do exactly the sort of interpretation I'm talking about, and then get pissed off when I point out that this is going on. Amazing!

Hahahaha.... "pissed off"? Seriously? Amused, maybe. Nothing in this thread has inspired me to be mildly annoyed, much less pissed off. But then, I'm not feeling all hyperdefensive either so that might explain our differences in perspective.

Well played, though. Maybe later Locke can get you to jump through a little hoop and dance on your hind legs.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 181 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (181)