- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 8, 2008 at 7:18 pm #622993
AnonymousInactiveCharlabob, I particularly like your last paragraph.
May 8, 2008 at 7:19 pm #622994
beachdrivegirlParticipantJenV funny story about your post. During the last election I voted for Bush. I voted for Bush not becaus I was a Republican or because i had followed the issues and thought he was the better canidate. I voted for Bush because I was young and naive and I had a roomate whos boyfriend was a pol.sci. major and said it was a good idea. I voted for him becuase of name recogition. i did not recognize the others name and figured that was a good thing that he must have more “experience” now four years later, and four years more mature (Not perfect i know. :) ) I am trying to follow everything much more closely and as much as i say if clinton beat obama in the primary i would vote for mccain. i wouldnt and i would guess alot of those being pulled wouldnt either. Take a look around our country it is at an all time low and the Republican canidate has no plans on how to change it and infact will prob. make it worse with his 100 years in Ira1….
May 8, 2008 at 7:19 pm #622995
HuindekmiParticipantI get confused. Which one is McDreamy, which one is McSteamy and which one is McSame?
May 8, 2008 at 7:23 pm #622996
JoBParticipantwhen are you elderly?
not when you receive your first packet from AARP…
not when you start qualifying for senior discounts.. though as the group grows the age gets older:)
not when you reach retirement age…
According the the women in my Crone discussion group.. women don’t really begin to think much until they reach their late 60s… so according to them.. they are just getting started at 70.
i think elderly in our society is really hard to define these days…
am i elderly? certainly not! I haven’t even hit 60 yet.. though i am oh so close…
will i be elderly at 80?
i don’t know.
But for the purposes of the survey sourced by Beachdrivegirl..
it was 75 and up…
May 8, 2008 at 7:25 pm #622997
AnonymousInactiveAlthough there are some issues I do not align with, almost all of my opinions, beliefs and ideas align with that of Republican beliefs.
I am not religious. I am conservative, but not completely on the right.
I don’t know if you are looking for more detail than that, which I would be happy to provide, but that’s my answer in a nutshell.
Before anyone wants to come down too hard on me and my Republican beliefs, do some research. Really know what the Republican beliefs are and what they stand for (believe it or not, it’s not just “bomb, bomb, bomb”).
Why, JenV, are you a Democrat?
May 8, 2008 at 7:33 pm #622998
charlabobParticipant1. Older white women have been lied to by the Clinton campaign — that’s why they’re afeared of Obama. Not elitism — simply true. It can be fixed. Depressing how easily I can predict responses. Ask me how many old white women have accused me of being a traitor to my <class|race|gender|age>? One is too many and it’s much more than one.
2. I meant for everyone to read, NR, what better way to make sure it happens. :-)
3. Sometime in the 70’s the Repug party started calling the Democratic Party the Democrat party. Apparently because they thought it was insulting. Possibly because they thought they, too, were democratic. It took us a very long time to come up with Repug — but, given the reaction, it was worth the time and effort.
4. I absolutely agree with JenV that no one but me can insult my intelligence. But these are phrases. I doubt that NR thinks she’s dumb if I say I think she is — which I don’t, by the way. Don’t say it — don’t think it. It’s pretty obvious that House (and most of you) don’t think he’s all of the names I’ve called him. :-)
The point is, they are all just words. Sometimes they seem to work. It’s too bad they work, but they do.
NR has said she’s afraid of what will happen if Barack is elected. I’m *terrified* of what will happen to the country and the world if we allow another 4 years of Repugnant Rule. That’s one of the many things upon NR and I agree — except for a slight implementation detail.
Sorry for the excessive windedness — I can’t always be terse.
May 8, 2008 at 7:38 pm #622999
JenVMemberI am a Liberal Democrat, and I am damn proud to be one. I am a Liberal Democrat because I believe in putting people over politics and profits. Because I love this country. Because I believe in the constitution. Because I believe the solution is not always to go to war. Because first and foremost I believe that not only the rich and powerful should have a voice in this great country.
hey BDG, don’t feel too bad. I voted for Nader in ’96- only because I knew Clinton would win. I wanted to send a message about the Two Party system. Fat lot of good that did me.
May 8, 2008 at 7:41 pm #623000
charlabobParticipantWhat JenV said! Especially the part about the constitution. I want mine back!
May 8, 2008 at 7:49 pm #623001
AnonymousInactiveSo, you feel that Republicans don’t want a constitution?
You feel that because the Republican’s have, only recently, taken a unilateralist stand regarding war and terror, that means we have thrown the constitution out?
May 8, 2008 at 7:52 pm #623002
AnonymousInactiveAlso, it’s funny that Dems will go on and on about how much they love our Country, yet, do you realize that Republicans make up over half of our armed forces?
If Democrats love this Country so much, how come more of them aren’t defending it?
May 8, 2008 at 7:53 pm #623003
JenVMemberA unilateralist stand regarding “terror”? Terror is an emotion. One more way they get the little dig in- make us feel “terror” and then they can make us feel safe- at whatever cost. And yeah, when they can take me away for any statement I make against the government and call me “enemy combatent” and take away my right for a trial? I would most definitely call that “throwning the constitution out”
May 8, 2008 at 7:56 pm #623004
AnonymousInactiveJenV – You haven’t done a lot of research. That’s fine, it’s your prerogative to only see what you want to see.
I think you know I meant “terrorism”. I feel like I am in a classroom today.
May 8, 2008 at 8:06 pm #623005
JenVMemberno NR, the goverment uses that phrase quite frequently. I am not getting on your case about semantics.
You try doing some research too, it might change your mind. That is the Republican answer to all charges that Bush’s government has done a lot of things outside the constitution- pat us on the head and tell us we don’t know what we’re talking about.
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,†Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!â€
May 8, 2008 at 8:11 pm #623006
JenVMemberDon’t you worry your pretty little heads about your constitution…here! have a stimulus check!
May 8, 2008 at 8:19 pm #623007
JenVMemberAmendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
…..but they can, and do- monitor the phone calls and emails of innocent citizens – all in the name of “Homeland Security”
May 8, 2008 at 8:52 pm #623008
rs261MemberI’m assuming you’re talking about the Patriot act JenV…
For the original Patriot act
Senate Republicans Voting Yea: 100%
Senate Democrats Voting Yea: 96%
Senate Total Voting Yea: 98%
House Republicans Voting Yea: 96%
House Democrats Voting Yea: 69%
House Total Voting Yea: 83%
For the renewal of the act.
Forty-four Democrats joined 207 Republicans in voting to renew key provisions of the act, with some modifications, for four years. Eighteen Republicans, 155 Democrats and one independent voted against it.
For the senate it was 89 voting yea (80% of dems) and 10 voting against (all dems)
A detailed list can be found
http://www.lifeandliberty.gov/subs/detailed_vote_2001.htm
http://www.lifeandliberty.gov/subs/detailed_vote_2005.htm
So as you see, dems havent really opposed to much of that.
May 8, 2008 at 9:00 pm #623009
JenVMember…because they would have been branded “anti-american” had they not. Imagine that. There’s no way to win, and I am done arguing with repugs. It’s like beating your head against a wall, but not as much fun.
May 8, 2008 at 9:04 pm #623010
AnonymousInactivers261 – Thank you for that information.
I do notice in the quote, JenV, that you have *interpreted* to constitution as such to try and support your argument. That is the Democratic way, of course.
As for the Bush quote you found, it’s no good. No sane American would agree or be proud of our President making that statement, obviously.
Ask yourself, though, do we really want to go searching for quotes that embarrass and degrade our candidate?
I can find a heck of a lot of damning quotes from Obama and his acquaintances, not to mention his wife.
May 8, 2008 at 9:06 pm #623011
AnonymousInactiveToo bad you’re done. It was getting interesting (especially with others chiming in).
So I guess I am done arguing with Dumbocratics.
May 8, 2008 at 9:08 pm #623012
AnonymousInactiveI guess it should be Dumbocrats. Sorry. Look who’s dumb now! (Sorry to steal your line, whoever you are that used that before!)
May 8, 2008 at 9:10 pm #623013
WSMomParticipantNewRes, could you please provide more info about what the Republican Party stands for today, because I am curious. Your answer on pg. 2 was vague and I’d like to understand your position better.
May 8, 2008 at 9:12 pm #623014
ErikParticipantAs the resident Loosertarian it’s good to see my man Ron Paul voted ‘No’ in both 01′ and 05′. And it’s not really about being perceived as anti-american so much as anti a certain powerful Middle-eastern PAC.
May 8, 2008 at 9:14 pm #623015
AnonymousInactiveBecause I am not eloquent enough to put into words every belief the Republican party stands for, I would refer you to any search tool on the internet that will explain it fully. Wikipedia is a pretty good place to start.
I don’t know, in your question, if you are asking me to explain what I take from the Republican beliefs as my own, or in general what Reps stand for. I’m assuming the latter from the way you phrase your question, but if not, let me know.
May 8, 2008 at 9:31 pm #623016
beachdrivegirlParticipantDoes it bother McCain supporters outthere that McCain was quoted saying he still needed to be educted on economics?
It sure has me scared s**tless. It baffles me that individuals would actual elect someone who knows nothing about economics and has no plan for our country into office when they have a choice right now.
May 8, 2008 at 9:37 pm #623017
rs261MemberI dont think that having a major in economics helps the president that much, thats mainly for the federal reserver, monetary comittee, etc to decide. If people wanted to elect a businessman into office they would have gave Ross perot a chance.
Granted, when you know nothing you can always throw away 145 billion dollars on a tax rebate to people. (That way you can cover up the fact that you never knew something like 70% of the money americans spend is on foreign products and doesnt really help our economy any…but it does help foreign ones!)
I dont think any president is truly going to be making economic decisions…the advisors they appoint will.
Oh, but I do like seeing people squirm due to a lack of knowledge…and would love to see McCain somehow shift the conversation away from the economy during debates.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.