Definitely agree and my apologies to the democrats - see message
Posted By: just me on 2009-06-20
In Reply to: Dont bother with () - she's NUTS. - and as UN-democratic as they come.
Didn't mean to insult any by saying she was in the same group. I do know quite a few really good democrats with level heads and are trying to do better for the country (still wish Kucinich had made it further. I think he's a very decent person) - as are some good republicans too (Ron Paul and others) - its the left wing nuts and I always forget that not all democrats are like that. (and not all republicans are like the uber-conservatives in their parties.
So sorry democrats that I put her in the same group with you.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
You need to make NO apologies - your posts have been insightful - see message
I feel the same way you do. I can tell you how upsetting it is to my patooty off and what do I get for it, I don't get ahead, I get to pay more taxes. I work two jobs because I have to and I have nothing - let me repeat nothing, NADA - left over. In fact sometimes I don't have enough to cover everything.
The country is going down the tubes and what do I see...all the wealthy politicians on the talk shows on TV and they all talk with sh-eating grins on their faces as though this is a big joke for them. They have little respect for people like us.
So don't you apologize for any posts you made or any answers you post to others messages. We're all feeling just like you do.
Sick sick sick of it all.
Do you agree that Democrats had a chance...
to head this off in 2006 at John McCain's urging? That the situation we find ourselves in now was avoidable?
I agree thanks. - see message
I always love hearing other people's opinions as long as they don't attack me personally and you don't. That's what makes us a great country - freedom! I'm glad you did submit the link with the awful "decoration". I think there is a point where people go to far. It's one thing to express your opinions, a whole other issue when you set up displays. If it's halloween and you want to hang something, how bout a ghost or a pirate (like in the movie Pirates of the Carribean), not political figures that could be our next leader and VP. As for the fraternity hanging Obama that is quite distasteful and the dean should bring whoever did it into the ofce and explain to them what is wrong about it. As for the Obama one sitting in front of the skeleton, I couldn't quite figure out the meaning of it, but upon looking at it you could tell it was from someone who hates Obama, and I'm sure lots of others knew the meaning. She should take it down either way. I say at Halloween political figures should be off limits in being used as "decorations". I too would like to keep talking with you, and I knew there was no argument in what you were saying, just bringing something equally revolting to my attention and I thank you for that.
I agree with you. (no message below)
i agree with you - no message
x
I agree with you - see message
I posted above but I specifically wanted to reply to your message. There has been no racism. I've said it all along when democrats/liberals start losing an argument the next thing they do is scream at you that your a racist. They don't even know what nationality you are and they'll call you a racist simply because you didn't vote or agree with Obama.
On another note about your comment about Gov. Palin - the hatred is absolutely horrible and disgusting. I'm on this site and I see at least 20 to 30 posts bashing her and none of them are for issues of substance. None of them are because of choices or issues. It's all because of clothes, her hair, the way she looks, her glasses, all surface stuff - nothing of substance.
I am hoping this board would be for bring issues to the table and having a reasonable discussion. Not bashing someone because they don't vote or support who they do.
I agree too. No Message
x
I agree with you so much - see message
There were too many issues going on. One day I'd be supporting Obama, the next day I'd support McCain. It's not a matter of "bipolar" or whatever insulting remark a crat is trying to do, it's a matter of each candidate had good and no so good attributes. Not voting for McCain had nothing to do with his age at all. In fact I probably defended him on that issue more than others. I wanted someone who had experience, not someone who was inexperienced and didn't know what they were doing. It came down to the last day just closing my eyes and voting. I was not sold on the whole Obama thing, but I did not see the whole congress thing coming. Next I know the dems have control of everything and now it's just getting worse every day. And it's not from past administrations, it from actions that are going on today, yesterday, and what is going to be happening in the future. I'm sorry to say I voted the way I did, but I thought if everything is bad we need someone reasurring and not calling us "my friends" in every other sentence. McCain did not build a lot of confidence I had in the party, and if it was Ron Paul or Mit Romney that had won it would have been a whole different story and I would have been more solid in my choice. I just remember what my DH keeps telling me. Who we see giving the speeches are not the "real" ones in charge (who have the power).
I have probably more conservative values than liberal (except on religious, abortion, and gay issues - then I lean more liberal), but as for financial and security issues I am most definitely conservative. I guess I probably should not have voted for Obama, but then again if I didn't maybe my vote would have been the one that McCain would have won with. HA HA HA.
Last thought is... I am helping my families who are unemployed and need money for food. Why would I want to give it to the people I don't know who refused to work for the handouts the liberals have promised them. If I want to support them it should be my decision and who, not forced on me. I don't depend on others to help me and they should not depend on us for their handout. I know that even a lot of people who supported Obama feel the same way. So at least I consider myself in good company. It's the kool-aid drinkers that give them a bad name.
And Mrs. B's attitude? She can keep it.
I do agree with you - see message
I do agree with you. Here are some of my points I'll try to explain why I'm mad... Superbowl party? Who cares everyone has them and yes I can see hot dogs, etc there. However, what makes me upset is that this is not a good time to be having weekly parties using taxpayers money to be funding the parties, and if he has a budget the same goes (but from the articles I'm reading, it's funded by taxpayers dollars). He needs to cut back on spending. Weekly parties for staff is unnecessary spending. I understand the necessity for entertaining, but he should have enough sense to know this is not the ideal time to be having weekly parties. And also to show some respect for the WH. It's heartbreaking to know our founding fathers sacrificed to make this country great and the white house is supposed to be a symbol of respect, but it's not anymore.
Entertaining to a certain degree is one thing, excessive unnecessary spending and partying while the country is going down the tubes is another. Reminds me of that commercial...
Cost to have high-priced entertainers weekly at the WH - $25,000
Dinner per plate for each person - $5,000
unnecessary spending while the country goes down the tubes - Priceless
I don't agree - see message
There is not just 2 sides (pro or anti). It's more than just "for or against" him. There are many of us in between. There are many who were (past tense) for him. Liked his ideas on the campaign trail, etc. (and voted for him). Since coming into power he has not kept his promises. He instituted programs he never talked about on the campaign trail (probably cos he knew he would not get elected if he told us ahead of time that he would increase taxes on the middle income, send more jobs overseas, triple our deficit, take away or right to bear arms, destroy the constitution, and all the other things he's doing now) - how many people do you think would have really voted for him if they knew ahead of time the destruction he would bring to the country? Also, printing money as if it's monopoly money, he's made the country less safe, embarrassed us by bowing to his leader, apologizing to other countries for how "ignorant and selfish" we are, brought into his cabinet tax cheats and people who are not qualified to fill the positions they hold, has the crats pitted against pubs (not the unity that he professed he would be the only one who could bring both sides together). He fell back against his word of making things more transparent, giving the people a chance to look through things before approving, flip/flop, flip/flop, one day it's this then the next day he goes back on his word, he is taxing the middle income higher than we have seen since Clinton (we have to pay for all those programs he's giving away). He went back on his word about bringing troops home, increased our deficit triple (no, it's not Bush's fault, it's President Soetoro's fault).
Now, with that said I think Barry is a very nice person in person. If I went out to dinner with him and Michelle and their kids I'm sure I'd have a great time and would want them as friends to hang out with. However, I don't like the decisions he (or should I say the people running the country) are making.
People can like him (I do) but not like the policies the administration is putting in place (we have to remember, he is not the one making the decisions - he is just the messenger).
As for if Michelle is pretty or not, I've never seen any posts here talking about that (I did see talk of what she wears, but that goes along with being a first lady and Laura Bush got the same criticism, as did other first ladies before her), but I haven't seen posts asking if she's pretty or not), but you know what...who cares. That's the argument I get into with my mom all the time because she bases her decisions on what someone looks like. I told her it's all a matter of personal opinion. Besides there are many people who are not "good looking" but they have a heart of gold and are a good person on the inside, and there are those who are the pretty on the outside but they have an evil/nasty personality to them.
I fully agree with you - see message
Three months is definitely enough time for a mother to decide whether or not to have the baby. After that I say no way. After that time there is always a practice called adoption.
What I take offense to is someone who claims they know what God's intentions are, and then claims that someone who mows down a person in cold blood is a messenger of god and doing his work and this is what god wants, blah, blah, blah.
I think people should think before they write. When someone professes to know exactly what god wants (and considers killing someone in cold blood an act of god) then its time for some serious medication.
I say if you agree or don't agree that's one thing, but to get on and say "oh yeah, that's what god wanted" (for someone to be mowed down in front of family and friends).
Opinions like that just tend to irritate me a bit.
I agree to a certain extent - see message
I too could care less who has affairs nowadays. Doesn't make me think any less or more of them. However - my little however :-) - He was not the President of the US - Clinton was. Clinton should have been removed from office (although then Gore would have been in charge, so I take that back now) :-) Anyway...it was the fact that Clinton had an affair that got him in trouble, it was the lies, manipulation, lies, and all the other illegal stuff he did that went along with it.
I don't particularly think they are being any less or more hard/lenient on this guy than they had with others who did the same thing. Remember John Edwards? The democrat who WAS running for VP? My point is more that you can't say "this guy was a republican that might have possibly run for VP the next election, and that's why its so bad", when you don't bring up Edwards who DID run for VP.
I feel this way...if it's a republican who is caught having an affair the liberals are sure dragging them through the mud, and if it's a democrat who is caught having an affair the conservatives drag him through the mud. I don't feel either side gets a free pass when it comes to being raked through the coals. I'm sick to death of hearing about this republican who had an affair about as sick as I was hearing about that NY guy, and Edwards, and that guy who got caught in the bathroom at some airport, etc, etc., but your making it sound like only the democrats getting picked on and that's just not true.
P.S. - We really don't need Biden to have an affair to have a field day with him, every time he opens his mouth and speaks he does a doozy on himself. HA HA HA
I totally agree with you - see message
II fee the exact way as you. If people don't agree with them they scream "racist", when they have no clue what a racist is (they use it in the form of a threat). There are plenty of racists on both sides. Voting for someone just because they are black is as bad as not voting for them because they are black. I also see that when republicans and independents talk about issues regarding not agreeing with certain issues or policies they get blasted with "your a racist" - still can't figure out that one. I'll tell you something - Martin Luther King would be ashamed of the lot of them. What I learned about Dr. King was that he was for equality for ALL people regardless of race or anything. He wanted equality to whites (not less, not more - equality). "ALL men are created equal" is what he used to say in his speeches. I hear too many times the crats something think that MLK would be a democrat, blah, blah, blah, speaking as if they knew him personally. They just so happen to like to skip over that one little truth that Dr. Martin Luther King was a registered REPUBLICAN. Whether or not he would have changed parties NOBODY knows because he is not here any longer, although I highly doubt he would have but again, NOBODY, knows. All we know is that he was a republican when he was alive. How I wish he was still here though because I believe he would tell them a thing or two. But the plain truth is they simply do not know what MLK would have done in today's time since times have changed so drastically as have the people in each party. And you're right...they don't care. They throw his name around like it's some sort of a threat. Even Chris Rock talked about that in one of his comedy routines (I think the messenger routine he does).
I would like to see more topics being discussed instead of coming here reading posts starting in with "you this or you that" calling people names and blasting anyone that does not agree with them. It's all childish rhetoric.
I'm also tired of hearing people jump on the "glee wagon" and get pure enjoyment out of seeing someones life destroyed when they are a republican, but when a democrat has been caught doing something equally (if not worse) bad then nobody is supposed to say anything.
So, like you I am sick to death of it.
I'd like to hear about issues, not that someone had an affair, but how about issues that are going to affect our individual lives, like the wasteful spending the crats keep doing, the taxes, growing govt, etc, etc. There is plenty wrong going on.
And since it was okay to bash Bush and cut him down on every single thing he did, they better quit their whining when the bad about their lord comes out. As some on this board said "Payback is a byatch". They sure don't like it when it happens to their guy.
I agree with a couple things you say - see message
I stopped coming to the board for awhile for a couple reasons. First, I got way behind on my work (shame on me). Second because I keep going back between voting for JM, then BO, then JM, then BO, etc. Everytime I hear something new about one or the other I decide to switch, so rather than look the fool and write good or bad on one thing I just stopped. I do not believe people hate Obama. It's more like we are afraid of what will happen to the country if he gets in. And yes we are also concerned what will happen if JM gets in too, but more afraid of BO (BTW - I think I will be voting for the constitutional party). I don't like either choice and I think they are both bad for the country.
I do agree with you that I feel like I'm in school again with people fighting with you but not offering any solutions. And you know what - it's more of the Obama supporters that are bashing the McCain supporters. I know people don't want to hear that because I find more people who are democrats live their life in the "victim state" and like to always blame the republicans for everything bad that's happened and will never look to their own party. I truly believe it is Franks, Cox, & Dodd who are a lot to blame for what has happened economically, but it is easier to bash Bush because it happened while he was in office, but honestly this is not his fault whether you want to believe that or not. Also it isn't McCains fault either because he warned everyone 2 years ago. Also, I haven't read any of the posts, but I found out yesterday that Franks was boyfriend to one of the top people at FMFM that got a big kickback.
So, at this point I'm getting to the point where I don't care who is president. Whether it is McCain or Obama I will continue to get up each day, brush my teeth and work (hopefully).
But you know what is ugly to me on this board is the people who defend McCain are being bashed by the Obama supporters and then they turn around and say they are being picked on (again their stuck there in the victim mode).
Everyone is allowed their opinions, but don't bash the other side and then say poor me, we're being picked on and then call the other side intolerant and ugly.
I agree totally with you. A very negative message. nm
.
Hey JTBB - I agree with you for once in a long time - see message
Too many posts to reply to so I'll reply here - I read the article. This is not a once in awhile family gathering, BBQ or picnic. This is weekly business meeting. Yes, that's right - business. Religion is a business. If you just had a few people every once in awhile coming to your house that would be one thing, but the article stated they have regular meetings in the home. I think the person who wrote the article did a little bit of "fibbing" with saying they were asked if they say "praise the lord" and if they pray. Could have happened, but I highly doubt it (again that's JMO). The concern the county has is that the home is being used as a business without a business permit. What they are doing is something that should be held in churches - which by the way ALL churches should be taxed seeing as they are all businesses.
I do agree very much with your assessment that these are the same people trying to take away the rights of the LGBT community. It does seem to be a one-way avenue. For the most part all the communities I have lived in the Christians want their rights, but they are also the first to want to remove the rights of other groups if they don't coincide with their beliefs.
If religious people want to have a small gathering in their home that's fine, but bringing a congregation of people into your home is a business, especially if it is on a regular basis.
People have bible meetings all the time in their own homes, but they don't have them on a regular basis and they don't have large groups making them stand out. They should keep their religious assemblies where it belongs - in the churches - and because its a business it should be taxed.
One other note is that the article mentioned what about tupperware parties or baseball games. Well those are not regular business meeetings going on.
I am sick of the hypocracy they have. I'm tired of hearing about "poor us, we can't pray, we can't do this, we can't do that, their trying to take away our rights". Yet everytime when I hear what is really going on I find the story has been exagerated to fit the "poor us" philosophy. Good example is this story. It started out with "poor us, we can pray in our own homes", when the truth comes out they are holding regular business meetings with their congregation meeting at their home residence. Two entirely different things.
My apologies to you.....I'm so used to dem
//
my apologies ... sm
This gentleman wrote a very insightful article about, not only obama, but observations of America in general. Thought is was very interesting (whether or not you are pro or con obama). Sorry I wasted your time.
'post' above yours, again, apologies :)
s
My apologies, Kaydie.
I read your post quickly in between jobs and did not read it properly. I apologize.
Hey JTBB my apologies to you too
Boy, talk about getting slapped into reality (more like smacked) by Just Curious.
After 10 seconds I turned Olberman off and looked for an article to read. Got the same message but without the painful anguished look on Olberman's face. HA HA.
You are right - I can't find this story in any of the conservative web pages.
Do I believe what we have in the office right now are neocons? Most and absolutely yes!!!! Do I believe what we have coming in is the Nazi regime. Most definitely yes!!! I don't know whether I like that or not because basically I do not see a difference. Only time will tell. I hope Obama will do a good job, I really really really do. This country is just in shambles. Am I worried - oh my gosh yes because of who he has been picking to fill his cabinet. Correct me if I'm wrong, because I may certainly be wrong, but I don't see him picking any conservatives in his cabinet, but yet when he was campaigning he was saying he was the only candidate who can bring the two sides together and he will choose both liberals and conservatives for his positions, yet I have yet to see any conservatives. I most certainly do not want more of the same, but I know there are a lot of conservatives who could do a good job, but to me I feel like he is just pushing them aside, which I feel is going to lead to such a division in the country. I still don't know what it is the Clinton have over him, but for him to pick her - oh my gosh!!!!!
I think I just take offense (even though I'm not conservative - I'm an independent with some conservative viewpoints and some liberal viewpoints) but I take offense when one side is called "the enemy" and people lump everyone into one group.
I do hope he does good. I hope he can get some jobs created and the economy back on track.
My apologies..... you DO get it..... finally, someone
99
I can see apologies have no effect on the likes of you. SM
Thank you for demonstrating that. It's funny, because several times liberals have mistakenly posted on the conservative board and then apologized and we never attacked. A good example between the two mindsets, I would say.
My apologies... I thought you were responding to
I usually don't read her posts, so by the time I checked to see if you were responding to her or me, it was too late. Sorry about the hasty reply, but I what I wrote still stands, just in case anyone DOES mis-quote me.
Anyway, a great big OOOPS!
:-/
my apologies about that link below, here is a good one
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4476649n
my apologies to you - I probably did sound rude - nm
x
Anyone else sick and tired of all the apologies
from corporations and our representatives? Are we supposed to always forgive them like their cronies do?
Thain just apologized for spending $1 million on remodeling his office but did not apologize for all the millions in bonsues he took when he left the company after 3 weeks.
Last night during the hearing for Geithner, Dodd spent so long talking, not about Geithner, but lecturing against Bush. I didn't even listen to Harry Reid. He's another one.
Barney Fife recieved $12 million from FM/FM. Sickening (haven't researched that yet, but heard it on the news).
Oh, and how about the $50 million corporate jet that was just ordered by one company, yet are asking for another $20 million from TARP. They SAY they are not using taxpayer's money for this jet. So, if not, how come they needed, and need, TARP money? Bull.
I'm sick of all the greed and coruption, not only in our government but also corporate.
Apologies and we're to forgive them? I don't think so. Why can't we get all this crap cleaned up? Is everyone in everyone else's pockets?
Okay. I'm done venting for now....................I think.
good grief to you, these are not apologies...nm...........nm
nm
Sincere apologies, wrong board. NM
...
Yes, sincere apologies, wrong board. So what? NM
go democrats..go
Are they? Where I live I go house to house to get people to sign up as democrats and frankly many are signing on as democrats and I hear anger and distrust and concern about Bush and his policies..So, dont know where you are from but I see the actual opposite..I also see many minorities, Blacks and Latinos signing on to the democratic party. From your posts, IMHO you are a republican plant and so your posts mean nothing to me. You are either a couch political potato who never goes out there and works the grass roots or you are a republican trying to put seeds of discontent in the democratic party. Gotta tell ya, the democratic party is doing just fine and each time bush screws up, which has been many over the past five years, the democrats do even better..Yeehaww!!
Democrats
...and I sure DO NOT appreciate union busters. This country has gone beyond "dog eat dog." Bush wanted to spend $$$$ for research on Mars?! I'm all for new discoveries and learning new things, but come on...let's do ALL that we can for the problems here on earth and her inhabitants first.
The democrats did not cause
this mess. And it was not caused by the people who were extended credit. Here is part of what caused it:
Banks issued subprime mortgages to people at a rate they could initially afford but which would increase to an inflated rate after a period of time. Those banks then immediately sold those mortgages at the inflated rates to other banks. These adjustable rate loans were misrepresented to a lot of homebuyers, especially first-time homebuyers. A lot of them didn’t realize, for example, they could not refinance for a period of time without huge penalties. Then the market started to decline and many of those homeowners found themselves upside down on their loans and could not refinance. Their interest rates had ballooned to rates they could no longer afford. The banks who were sold the loans at inflated prices could not afford to lower the rates for the homebuyers because they had bought the loans based on the inflated interest rates and would lose money if they did. People lost their homes and the banks lost the amount of the loans they had bought. But the banks (and the CEOs) that initiated those loans walked away with a great deal of money.
It was because of greed. And the deregulation that the republicans have passed over the years allowed it to happen.
Here are some other facts:
Since 1960 the nation's deficit has risen during every republican administration and dropped during every democratic administration.
The standard of living and income has improved for everyone in the country during every democratic administration since 1960, EVEN for the top 1% of the country. It has gotten worse for everyone in the country during every republican administration EXCEPT the top 1%.
Please tell me how you think the democrats...sm
contributed to the economy diving in the last 2 years. Specifics please. The economy takes way longer than that to do anything. No economic bills have been passed. The last 8 years of the Bush presidency has put us into the tank. Stop parroting the party line. Lets be honest here. John McCain offers nothing better.
Yes, well, those would be democrats as well
--
Democrats
 Obama, if elected the next President of the US, will change how other peoples look at the Americans: He will restore respect and admiration for the American people that was lost during these last 8 years. And the world will see that the American people do not discriminate (at least not the Democrats).
Can't think of anything that would help democrats more
Skip the landslide. It would be an avalanche.
Obviously so do Democrats. nm
*
Like the democrats
don't do the same thing. When are people going to realize that both parties are just as crooked as the other here? When the dems had control of congress during Bush's presidency, did the dems do anything positive for our economy then. Of course they didn't.....why.....because they would hate to do something good during Bush's presidency because he might get credit for it. This goes both ways and your post is very one sided. We all need to wake up and realize that the only people we can trust is ourselves and stop putting so much faith in either party. Government as a whole has screwed us over and I am sick and tired of putting all the blame on one party. They all had their greedy little hands in the cookie jar and that is the reason we are in the mess we are in.
democrats and
Pace your rage. It has only been 100 days.
LOL, who lies, not democrats
That is what dems say? LOL. I ask you to check out one of the top posts, i.e., Rush and Olbermann..Reality check starts attacking the poster, Olbermann, MSNBC, saying they lie, even though the transcript is on the web, also printed in his article, and on video..yet they are lying right?? and its the dems that always scream that people are lying, right? I thought up a new name for neocons after reading about that Xtian..NOT..Robertson stating Chavez should be eliminated. Neocons are the American Taliban. You are just as bad. If everyone does not think, act, believe, live like you, then they are wrong and lying..You guys are ridiculous..
Democrats/Liberals
Amen,sm! I noticed that you used one word in one of your responses that is the tell-tale sign distingishing conservatives from liberals, that word being logic. Liberals have no logic and cannot reason, else why would they support Bill Clinton going to war in Bosnia/Yugoslavia when no attack at all had been made on our country and deploy our troops all over the world for no good reason, then pounce on President Bush who is only engaging us in this war on terror to protect all of us here at home, as well as those of our loved ones who have to travel the world over for companies they work for or those who serve our government in various capacities all over the world? Prior to 911, we had been attacked 19 times by terrorists over a period of 20 years or so and not one single president but Ronald Reagan and finally George W. Bush had the gumption to be a real leader and respond, with very noticeable results I might add. Does anyone remember Moamar Kadafi and how his terrorism stopped after President Reagan took care of him?? Bin Ladin and his terrorist organization had attacked us so many times without any response that he called the United States a paper tiger, believing his dreams of total destruction of our country were an inevitable event. I suppose the liberals prefer having our schools, supermarkets, shopping malls, sports arenas, etc., etc., be the targets for terrorists rather than following the advice of every top military general I can think of (save Wesley Clark who obviously has political ambitions)and fight the terrorists where they are amassed rather than fighting them here. To say that Saddam Hussein had no connection to terrorist organizations is nonsense. He hated us with the same vitreolic hatred Bin Ladin had for us and would have loved nothing better than to see us go down. In addition, he was paying a $25,000 reward for each Israeli killed in a terrorist attack. He was a WMD himself, just as Adolph Hitler was. You don't have to possess WMDs to be a WMD; the result is the same. Immediately after the 9-11 attack, 27 Al Qaeda terrorists were rounded up in the very small community in which I live (makes one wonder how many were in the larger cities and communities), and believe me, I feel a lot better knowing that they, along with their terrorist network, have been put out of commission under President Bush's leadership. As of today, our military has brilliantly performed the task of reducing the entire terorrist organization to about 17,000 in number. Quite a feat!! God bless them all!! I recently heard that a letter from a top terrorist leader was intercepted and stated, We are losing the war. I have much more I could say, but I'll save it for another time as it is getting late.
Psychotic democrats.
Well I guess that is better then a psychotic democrat.
I believe the Democrats will take the House
and pick up seats in the Senate enough to make it very even. When Lieberman is elected as an Independent, I predict he will change his party to Democrat when he gets into the Senate, a direct slam at the Democrats who failed to support him. Lieberman, the only Democrat with a spine, will be the big winner. I am not gnashing my teeth about any of this. Democrats are the one who do the teeth gnashing. They have been gnashing since Bush won the first election and their bitterness and sore loser attitudes have eaten away like a cancer all these years. Democrats have no plan for keeping America safe, or winning the war against the fanatics. They have opposed most of the Bush administration’s domestic surveillance methods. They have opposed aggressive interrogation tactics designed to get information to protect us, including opposition to the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where detainees are treated better than they could expect if they were detained in their homelands... The terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere don’t speak of timetables for withdrawal or bringing their fighters home. They’re in it for the long haul. They believe we are not. A victory by Democrats will validate their view and encourage them to fight harder. Republicans have been far from perfect in this war. They have barely approached mediocrity in their handling of domestic issues. But to change horses and leaders mid-war is a prescription for a longer engagement, because this is a confrontation that will end only in victory or defeat for one side or the other. That’s why the Republicans need to keep their majority and conservatives need to keep the pressure on them to get back to the original GOP principles that brought them that majority. That’s a better strategy than Republicans acting like Democrat-lite. Unfortunately, I think it is too late this time around. But there is always next time. God Bless our troops.
Democrats vs Republicans...
I agree that problems occur on both sides of the aisle...obviously. What I find troubling, and I am being serious here, is that Democrats seem much less likely to own up to it when they do something wrong, even when caught, and the entire party seems to rally around them and somehow want to twist the wrong into a right or rationalize the wrong (he only lied about sex for example. He committed felony perjury, doesn't matter what the lie was about. If it was no big deal, why didn't he just tell the truth? I guess that depends on what the meaning of truth is?). Republicans generally fall on the sword when caught. There just seems to be something skewed about the Democratic party as a whole and their vision of what is wrong or right and it seems to be directly correlated to whether one of their party is guilty or the other party is guilty. This is just an observation. I am not a registered Republican nor Democrat. I am conservative, I am registered Independent but vote for whoever most closely follows my belief system, though they as a rule don't do as they say...and I mean ALL politicians. I just keep hoping for an honest one. Bush did what he said he would do for a long time, but I see him waffling now, and I am not sure that is a good thing. As I look at the two major parties in this country, it just seems to me that on the Democratic side they are more likely to support each other and try to spin wrongdoing even when caught at it, rarely if ever admitting to wrongdoing. I do not see that so much on the Republican side. I suppose now I should go back to the conservative side and let the process continue. I thought the boards were about opinion and discussion and debate. How can you expect to change any minds if you only talk to the like-minded? Thanks for your time, Lurker. I do enjoy talking to you.
This is old news...and yet the Democrats in...
congress voted to give the President the use of force in Iraq. They knew all this then. But they voted to use force. So I do not understand why it is being brought up again now like it was some big secret. Yes, 20 years ago the US did try to deal with Saddam. And you saw what his word was worth. Zip, nada, nothing. Much like the word of the Democratic Congress that sold South Viet Nam down the river to the North...broke the promises that were made to end the war. If you want to point fingers at something dispicable that should be HIGH on your list.
I see it with Democrats and Republicans. sm
Where are all the progressives and antiwar people?
WELL there are certainly NO liberal Democrats
running for president...
Sick of it too, but the Democrats are no different. sm
Of the main candidates, our choices are a socialist, a Marxist, and a fascist. Which one do you think is not going to tax our eyeballs out, or force us further and further into a control grid? Obama sounds like the least harmful, but the only thing he is going to change is his mind. My vote goes to NOTA (none of the above).
Democrats vs Republicans
1. My research on the black liberation movement of which Obama's church is a part tells me all I need to know about whether or not I want to see him in office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_liberation_theology
2. If McCain is elected I believe we will face a great depression which will make the depression of the 30s look like a Sunday School picnic. People already losing homes, jobs, exploding deficit (and the piper will be paid sooner or later), cost-of-living getting so people can hardly afford to live. McCain's judgement is questionable in his choice of a running mate. Totally reckless to name someone he has only met once but then there's oil in Alaska.
I will not support or vote for either of them as were doomed either way.
The rich ARE the democrats
Look back over time. Who benefitted from tax breaks Clintons 2% of the richest people. Everyone makes it sound as though only republicans are rich. The democrat party has some of the richest people and they aren't paying their fair share. With the Democrats I've always had to pay more taxes. With the republicans I received refunds every year.
|
