I saw no interest in Democrats uniting behind Bush....
Posted By: sam on 2008-11-05
In Reply to: What it tells me is that you are interested in - continuing with election politics
and why on earth would I change my concern about Obama just because he won the election??
I cannot trust a man who says one thing to one person and something else to another. He goes to Israel and tells the Palestinians that Israel should just give the country back. Then he meets with Israelis and backs off of it. He tells one thing to Pennsylvanians and other thing to San franciscans ABOUT Pennsylvanians. He distances himself from Richard Daley and then brings a crony onto staff. Sorry, but I have no interest in backing someone I do not trust. What difference does it make? Nothing I say matters anyway; so just let me have my say and go on about your business aligning yourself behind O the adored. Don't even bother to act like if the election had gone the other way you would be aligning yourself behind McCain and Palin. a bit hypocritical aren't we? lol.
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
All the DEMOCRATS that voted with Bush for war
nm
Wrong. Democrats are responsible for the mortgage meltdown, not Bush....
McCain tried to tell them in 2005...Dems blocked the regulation he begged for for Fannie/Freddie. But the Dems were too deep in the pockets...Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, James Johnson, Timothy Howard...all democrats, all walked away from fannie Mae with golden parachutes of millions...and we are left holding the bag. Fannie contributed more to Chris Dodd, Democratic head of Banking and COmmerce committe than any other senator in the past 20 years...followed closely by Barack Obama, who has only been IN the senate for 2 years...you do the math and follow the money. Democrats largely responsible for this. ANd you want to put one in the white house. Who wants to raise taxes in this financial crisis. What part of collapse of the economy don't you...and Mr. Obama...understand?
My only interest in
posting this was BECAUSE it came from someone on the ground in Iraq, an American soldier. I also said the war seems to affect ONLY those directly involved and you and your husband and family fall into that category. Most Americans do not. I'm sorry you see this as leftist arrogance, but it is how I feel. I did not feel this way about Bush 41 either (this is in reference to Clinton and Somalia) and I think that is because both of them had a plan, listened to those more knowledgeable, had a plan B and C, as the military is wont and got in and got out. It is the arrogance of this administration that angers the left so. At this point Iraq is not ours to win or lose; it is theirs - the Iraqis - and if we had done in the beginning, as recommended by THE MILITARY who know a bit more than the CEOs in office, we would probably be out of there. The US cut a deal with the Ba'athists to calm Anbar province which was totally out of control a few weeks ago and it worked. As I understand it the Ba'athists, altho the old Iraqi army, are not Sunni or Shi'ite bound. They are more like mercenaries than an I-do-not-know-how-many-thousand-year-religious-land conflict that has and will probably go on forever between the Sunnis and Shi'ites. If we had sent in more troops (recommended by military) and had gotten the Ba'athists to cooperate with us earlier; then maybe we would be out of there or at least on our way out. The arrogance I see is the stubborn, petulant refusal of this administration to do anything differently ever, no matter what. Stubborness is not a foreign policy. My feeling also is that because **that is the way we have always done it** is not a reason to keep doing it that way (reference to flag lowering).
This might interest you.
This is only one of a bunch of things he's rushing through so they can't be repaired easily once he's gone (IF he goes).
Here's part of it. The rest of the article can be found at: http://www.truthout.org/110708K
Washington - In the next few weeks, the Bush administration is expected to relax environmental-protection rules on power plants near national parks, uranium mining near the Grand Canyon and more mountaintop-removal coal mining in Appalachia.
The administration is widely expected to try to get some of the rules into final form by the week before Thanksgiving because, in some cases, there's a 60-day delay before new regulations take effect. And once the rules are in place, undoing them generally would be a more time-consuming job for the next Congress and administration.
Of interest, Iraq and oil
"The invasion of Iraq plays a crucial role in the agenda of the neoconservatives. Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world. It could replace, in case of need, other producers such as Saudi Arabia, a fragile ally of the United States. The control of oil production and prices gives the United States potential power to pressure consumer states such as Russia, China, and many in Western Europe."
This is by the former French ambassador to Tunisia, now a journalist. I guess I hadn't realized that Iraq was that oil-rich.
Whiners are of no interest. Got more
nm
Tell me....if Obama said it was in your best interest....
to do a swan dive off the statue of liberty, which of you would get to the top the fastest?
Thought this might be of interest s/m
seems to be a pretty unbiased report.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081102/candidates_business.html
There was interest, as they were being read...
This might interest you.......at least somebody CARES!!
This is from NumbersUSA.com
You can sign up with them; they will keep you up to date on EVERYTHING and you can fax your politicians directly from their site! It is a great way to go !!
The unemployment numbers for May were recently released and are truly disheartening. More than 345,000 Americans lost their jobs last month and unemployment rocketed to 9.4% (the highest since August, 1983). Clearly, it is time for Congress to reduce or suspend most immigration. However, the Congressional leadership is pushing for a mass amnesty!
This push for Comprehensive Amnesty is happening because the White House is holding an immigration summit this week -- the purpose of which is to pave the way for various amnesties (AgJOBS, the DREAM Act, and comprehensive amnesty).
Please fax your Members of Congress and urge them to oppose any attempts by open borders and pro-illegal alien lawmakers to foist an amnesty on the American people. Any amnesty, no matter how small, would have a devastating impact on America's 14 million unemployed workers.
Click here to read a Los Angeles Times article on Congress' push for amnesty and President Obama's immigration summit.
Do you want more or less information?
As a NumbersUSA subscriber, you will receive occasional emails about immigration-related opportunities. If you want to increase or reduce the frequency of these emails, click here and choose from Total Activism, Moderate Activism, or Limited Activism at the bottom of your registration form: http://www.numbersusa.com/user
NumbersUSA - relies upon individuals like you to reach its goal of an environmentally sustainable and economically just America.
More info on this, plus other items of interest
Check out this website:
factcheck.org
It's part of the Annenberg Foundation (don't know anything about that group). Anyway this seems to be a fairly nonpartisan website (even gives statistics backing that up). It provides great coverage of the claims made by both candidates and where the truth actually lay. Not surprisingly it appeared that overall Bush had a bigger problem with manipulating the truth than Kerry.
The site is not limited to just the candidates from the last election - I check it periodically out of general interest. As I said, I want the truth, even if it's painful sometimes.
Of interest, but probably of limited significance
FACT......Those who have never seen battle personally are usually cowards and the first ones to want war, who preach for war.....and will send your kids and keep their kids home...
Do We See A Pattern Here?
10-20-4
Democrats
* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received #311.
* Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.
Republicans
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon! Kyl: did not serve
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for U.S.
Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty.
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making movies.
* B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
* John M. McHugh: did not serve.
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem," although continued in NFL for 8 years.
* Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
* John Engler: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.
Pundits & Preachers
* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael Savage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* John Wayne: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
* Ralph Reed: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.
* Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
* Ted Nugent: did not serve. (He only shoots at things that don't shoot back.)
I have no interest in addressing your name calling, but
I will just say here that, once again, Peggy Noonan is spot-on. If you read the Conservative board with any regularity at all, it should come as no surprise that conservatives often disagree with GWB's spending; this is one of the two principal areas of disagreement that have been discussed over the past couple of years on the board. The other is border control.
At present, as Ms. Noonan says, he is better than the last alternative. He's also the only game in town as of right now, but he does need to be cautious about being too laissez-faire about alienating the conservative base.
IMHO, unless the Republicans come up with a candidate who is truly a fiscal conservative and is willing to prioritize and cut spending, he is setting Republicans up for another 1992 - a third party candidate siphoning off conservative votes and handing the election to the Democrats. Also IMHO (this will come as no surprise), that would not be a good thing.
Back to the Conservative board....sorry to intrude here, but I can't resist Peggy Noonan.
Hmm...in the interest of full disclosure...
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/07/where_in_the_world_is_obamas_m.html
Don't care where Waldo is, but would like to know where the thesis is...and also the rest of the missing Columbia records. If people are so concerned about where what the #2 on the other ticket did in Wasilla, Alaska, and how many colleges she went to, I would like to know what the #1 on the Democratic ticket was doing during his Columbia years. After all...he IS running for the #1 slot.
You must be talking about our shared interest
resource bases, pride in our candidate, his vision for America and our confidence he will be the "chosen one" come November.
Lack of interest was the point.
Focks Noise is rarely relevant. I am retired and as grown as I can get. Resorting to name calling when someone doesn't agree with you does not exactly imply a great deal of maturity.
As long as you pay them with penalty interest
Just like he did.
Geitner did pay all interest and penalties
Geitner did not pay all his interest and penalties...the IRS forgave the interest and penalties for 2003 and 2004. They wouldn't do that for me or you.
Geitner did pay all interest and penalties
Geitner did not pay all his interest and penalties...the IRS forgave the interest and penalties for 2003 and 2004. They wouldn't do that for me or you.
I don't think that we're losing interest...(sm)
The govt in Iran has really been cracking down on communications. From what I understand (from news last night) they are confiscating computers, cell phones, etc. Because of this, there just simply isn't as much news coming out of Iran.
From some acconts from yesterday it has been said that they started yielding axes (of all things) along with the clubs and tear gas, and threw at least one protester off a bridge.
However, there are still postings on YouTube daily of the brutality going on.
They can reduce the interest to normal levels...
and wipe out whatever they are in arrears, and readjust payments. There is NO NEED to reduce principal. That is just another gimme. And if they can't make the payments on reduced interest they will lose the house ANYWAY. I do not understand this penchant for rewarding irresponsibility ... on the part of the buyers AND the lenders AND the government officials who encouraged the doofus process....can we all say FRANK and DODD???
Higher taxes are not my interest, neither is giving.
@
Just in the interest of full disclosure, other members of the Carlyle Group....
They include among others, John Major, former British Prime Minister; Fidel Ramos, former Philippines President; Park Tae Joon, former South Korean Prime Minister; Saudi Prince Al-Walid; Colin Powell, former Secretary of State; James Baker III, former Secretary of State; Caspar Weinberger, former Defense Secretary; Richard Darman, former White House Budget Director; the billionaire George Soros, and even some bin Laden family members. You can add Alice Albright, daughter of Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State; Arthur Lewitt, former SEC head; William Kennard, former head of the FCC, to this list. Finally, add in the Europeans: Karl Otto Poehl, former Bundesbank president; the now-deceased Henri Martre, who was president of Aerospatiale; and Etienne Davignon, former president of the Belgian Generale Holding Company.
I never knew George Soros was a member. I never bothered to check. Now THAT is interesting.
Also, in the interest of putting it all out there...the bin Laden family disowned Osama years before 9-11.
Fitzgerald renews interest in Rezko-Obama deal...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=83760
possible topics of conversation besides bashing our very popular president in the interest of preven
http://www.npr.org/
The 2008 credit has to be paid back (no interest), but not the 2009 credit.
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.
One wishes the Democrats who are...
Christians and live in rural areas would abandon the party that has created the kind of mentality that posts like this, so as not to be identified with such condescencion and intolerance. The Democratic party as it once existed is dead, and this is what rose from the ashes. Certainly something to be proud of...not so much.
Me too! My parents both Democrats....
the Zell Miller kind. THAT Democratic party is no more.
Because they are Democrats....and toeing....
the party line (congressmen) or Republicans who hate McCain. Not a one among them, I would be willing to bet, if you hooked them to a lie detector, would not get past the do you really think he would be a good President...lol Don't really think congressmen are the best judges...their approval rating is lower than Bush's. NO offense...just sayin.
Democrats are not responsible
for the mess we are in. It's the republicans and all their deregulation, for one thing. How about the war in Iraq and the huge deficit we now have? And then there are the corporate tax breaks. All of those things have contributed to the mess we are in. The money didn't trickle down, did it? It only made the top 1% of the people in this country better off. Those aren't things the democrats have done.
The republicans made this mess and then they have the gall to turn around and blame the democrats. Do you know why? Because there are those out there who don't know better and will believe them. That's what they are relying on. The republicans got into office with lies and misleading the public and they are still trying the same tactics. Hopefully enough people will not buy into it this time.
|
