Difference in political parties

• Difference in political parties - Just me

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

The Libertarian Party has nominated former Congressman Bob Barr, the Constitution Party has nominated pastor and radio talk show host Chuck Baldwin, and the Green Party has nominated former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. Ralph Nader declined to seek the Green Party nomination and is running as an independent candidate.  That is in addition to the Ron Paul fans as well as McCain and Obama.

What did we get out of the debate last night?  That same ole crap Obama and McCain have been throwing around since the get go.  Imagine what that would be like with all these other people thrown in the debate as well. 

President Kennedy  http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/The+Kennedy+White+House+Parties.htm

President Clinton  http://mediamatters.org/items/200502190003

President Bush  http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/12/13/letter_ed3__5.php

And I found many, many more hits - just too many to post!

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/04/14/jacobs_democrats_tea_parties/

There is considerable reason for ardent supporters of both parties to be increasingly concerned about the direction the country is being taken (shoved!) by the Obama-Pelosi-Reid troika, which has already shown that it is far more radical in its liberal agenda, in its contempt for states' rights, its palpable fear of conservatives, and in its "globalism" than many Democrats can stomach.  The pendulum has swung too far, and now it threatens to come off its hinge entirely.  It must be swung back toward the middle before it is too late.

Can it ever become too late?  History says "yes" - and the tipping point can be reached with astonishing speed and little warning.  I never cease to be amazed that so many Americans seem to be so ignorant of history that they have no real appreciation of how little it takes to destroy even the mightiest of nations, or how many seem to believe that "something" would never let this happen to America. They cannot imagine a world in which there is no America or, what is more likely, an America that becomes an extension of the socioeconomically incompetent system of "government uber alles"  that now literally stinks up Europe. 

Here's a very disturbing oxymoron about the "troika" that the mainstream press has not bothered to look into:  Given that the world is quite obviously becoming more dangerous rather than less so, and given an administration that believes so strongly that big government spending is the solution to the current recession with massive increases to almost every government agency, how is it that the Department of Defense is the only skeleton at the feast?  With extraordinary ineptitude, the day after North Korea defied the world and launched its intercontinental ballistic missile, the Obama administration announced defense cuts, including the missile defense program - which has shown that it works.

Now we have a grave situation developing with respect to illegal immigration.  Not only are the labor unions beginning to collude with the illegals, but the number of "anchor babies" born in the US to illegals has nearly doubled from 2.7 million per year in 2003 to over 4 million in 2008.  Is there anyone on this forum who understands what is happening here?

I know that Americans of most political persuasions, including independents, are becoming very alarmed, as well they should.  What concerns me now is that we might already be past the tipping point.  We must restore two-party government to Washington in 2010, or I believe there will be no turning back from this calamitous course.

All this controversy over the number in attendance af last week's tea parties, and who was there!  I would think over a quarter-million participants would rank right up there as far as demonstration statistics go.

There was another demonstration in 1995 which planned to attact a million demonstators.  Wikipedia has this:

......... Finally, within the first twenty-four hours following the March a conflict between March organizers and Park Service officials erupted over crowd size estimates. Initially, the National Park Service issued an estimate of about 400,000 attendees; a number significantly lower than March organizers had hoped for. After a heated exchange between leaders of the March and Park Services the estimate was raised to 850,000*  but still fell short of the organizers’ estimate of over 1 million. The controversy over the number of men who actually participated in the March has yet to be firmly resolved.  *[guess they were getting the 2 for 1 special?] 

Even back then, folks were hollering 'recount,'  I don't recall seeing any female or white faces in that crowd, either. I think that was pretty sexist and racist.  The point is, you hang with like-minded individuals.  Nobody put out the 'whites only' sign at the tea parties.  It was equal opportunity, and if you were a hard-working black business owner you might have been there.

Arlen Specter, who has always been the weirdest "Republican" senator, has decided to switch to the Democrats, saying "I now find my political philosophy more in line with the Democrats than the Republicans". 

You're just discovering this, are you Arlen?  The rest of the world has known this for years.  You should read a newspaper now and then. 

Forget about the fundamental ethical problem here - i.e., the betrayal of the voters' trust  that any legislator commits when he runs under one party and then switches horses afterward.  I say "forget about it" because this is only one of the multitude of deceptions that legislators like Specter engage in throughout their careers.  One more ripple in this maelstrom of representational malfeasance is scarcely noticeable any more.  Even a used car salesman is prohibited from pulling bait-and-switch tricks on the public, but then whoever said a Congressman should have as much integrity as a used car salesman?

And, this won't make much difference during the current term either, because Specter was a pretty reliable vote for Obama's socialist programs anyway.  He was one of the three Republicans who broke ranks and cleared the way for the "emergency" (quick - before the voters read it!) funding package and like everyone else who voted for it he did so without reading most of it.

Where this could make a difference (unless Democrat voters in Pennsylvania find Specter's duplicity as disgusting as anyone with moral sense should) is that this boosts his chances of reelection.  As things were shaping up, he was not going to get any support from Republicans or Democrats next time out.  Now, he hopes the Democrats will vote for him - and he'll undoubtedly get a lot of money from Democratic party headquarters that he would never have had from the Republican side because they're sick of him..

Let's really get a clear understanding of what we're talking about here, which is a senator taking the moral low road for the sole purpose of preserving his own position.  It is a raw, naked, and some might even say desperate effort to keep power within his clutches and get himself reelected at any cost, no matter what his actions do to further disgrace Congress - a body that has already lost most of the esteem that Americans once had for it.

Specter will be running for his 6th term and now becomes the best argument - the poster child, in fact  -  for term limits.  Again I say (and would say this regardless of which way Specter was switching) - we MUST get control of the subversion of the political process by people who will do anything - including betraying their own voters - to accumulate and retain power for themselves, and the ONLY way to do this is to impose term limits.

Rudolph and Osama bin Laden is that one is Christian and one is Muslim.  Other than that, there is no limit to their hatred.

To say that clinic workers at an abortion clinic are just as guilty as Rudolph is, at its best, INSANE.  Those clinic workers broke no laws.  Rudolph not only broke the law, he violated the "Thall shalt not kill" commandment that you all claim to believe in.

But, as with Bush in Iraq, it's okay if people kill, as long as they're the people you worship.  I truly don't understand people like you, and I don't wish to.  Frankly, you all frighten me, and I won't be reading your posts any more because I find them too disturbing.

 is between free speech and slander/libel. Everyone has a right to an opinion and to voicing that opinion as long as one does not libel and/or slander a particular individual(s). Since the widows were named and The ***WTC victims*** were not, one is free speech, albeit lunatic fringe free speech,  and one is not. 

To weigh in on the subject of Coulter; she makes her living saying and writing outrageous stuff. She is a shock jock. If she started writing books like William Safire does, no one would read them and she would not be on every talk show on the airwaves. It is her job to be repugnant and she does it quite well.  I don't listen to her, don't read her books. I don't listen to Howard Stern either; nor Rush, nor Grover, nor anyone who makes my blood boil. It is an exercise in futility to try to change anyone's mind on the stuff these people say. You love them or hate them and so I just avoid them.

Within 24 hours of taping?  I reiterate the point I made above. And when you buy things from a private company unless they state it outright they might turn around sell your information to other advertisers.  Unless you can produce where you signed a waiver of privacy, like you do at a doctor's office, you are not guaranteed that your information will be kept private.

I guess any good consumer could elect not to have phone service.  That's one way to keep your conversations private.  It's a bummer when it comes to communcation, but unless your plotting something illegal you really shouldn't have a problem should you?

It's okay for President Bush to get political but it's not okay for his employers (the American citizens) to do the same thing?  That would be the norm in a fascist government ruled by a dictator like Iran.  Is that where we're heading in America today?

Grandma's comment regarding the number of American troops killed in Iraq approaching the number of civilians killed on 9/11 was a very relevant comment, considering Bush himself exploited 9/11 in order to justify invading and occupying Iraq when it turns out Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with it.