Don't take this as a smarmy question. It's not.

If I was American, I'd probably vote Republican too, but only because I'm pro-war. But a lot of you guys vote on moral issues and to me it's bizarre that you'd keep voting for guys who talk big and little else. See, Republicans run on a morality platform that they never really do anything about. Abortion is still there. Prayer in school is still a no-no. Religious rights are still iffy. A bunch of Socialist programs are still eating away at the heart of the American taxpayer. Ect... None of that is EVER gonna change. You're like the old ladies in Vegas plugging quarters into slot machines hoping to get that one candidate who won't be lying out of his ass.

See where I'm getting at? Bush is a conservative? HOW? What's he done that's sooooooooo conservative? He didn't fund stem cell research? Big deal. At the moment it's just a pseudo-science anyway. I have a hard time believing he could have done it so easily if it had cured cancer or something.

If you look at the ECONOMIC dealings of both Republicans and Democrats. They're identical, or almost. Morally the Democrats appeal only to rich liberals and very few people else. Morally the Republicans talk big but do little. So what's the appeal? Voting for the lesser evil? If you look at it in those purely selfish terms. The Democrats win. Forget about morality and war crap, just look at their "socialist agenda" and what it can do for you. You'll get more free crap from the Demmies than the Republicans. Not a LOT more, but more.

And don't go telling me about lower taxes... WHEN has Bush lowered taxes???

That's what I thought.

I mean, remember the post-WW2 utopia? A lot of that came about BECAUSE of the verysame iditotic socialist crap that the Dems are pushing for. Unions. Medicare. Ect.

So anyway... why do YOU vote Republican?

I dont, I have NEVER voted republican.

I feel Democrats and much more clear on what is going on in the World. For example this Iraq war, Seante majority leader Harry Reid has it right when he says it is worse that Vietnam. The House passed a non binding resolution to stop the advancement of troops, but fell 4 votes short in the Senate. Even Republicans are against this surge know how many dems voted in favor of this surge, 2.

Bush sits around and says, oh yeah Iraq going great, eh send some more troops, not my money, not my kids anyways. Did you know for every man women and child in this country, you could have given each person $800 dollars.

Not he wants to extend this and send 21,500 more troops over there.

Are you kidding me, he is already responibile for killing for than 3000 troops. I hope this guy burns in hell for this.

Now Bush wants to cut social security, cut medicaid/care programs, and more that will only hurt the middle class. Which by the way has shrunk 10%, over the past 6.5 years, the time Bush has been in office. This is due to the US trade policies which he fails to address.

For example Toyota can build a factory here and sell thier cars. However GM cant build a factory in China, because to sell in China, you must build what you sell there, or face high import fees.

Republicans, dont do anything but screw this country even more.

I will never in my life vote for one, ever. I dont care if it was the devil, or Bush, I'd still choose the devil.




- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new

I'm with Rob. After looking back at how the political swing has gone between republican and democrat and seeing what platforms each stand on and then seeing who comes through more I'd have to say that I'm sticking with the Dems. Even my fiancee (republican) finally came around and said she doesn't like Bush anymore. Her parents still like him so-so but I avoid talks with them over politics. Bush wouldn't be so bad if he hadn't started the war in Iraq. We started off fine in Afganistan (sp?) which made sense then somehow we decided WMDs in Iraq and now we screwed it up so bad we have to stay there and fix things or they'll go into civil war (which will probably happen when we leave anyway).


*****************************************************
*
* Student of the University of Oklahoma. Go Sooners!
*
*****************************************************

Don't just look at the last 8 years, keep going back to about the mid 60's.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Knoxfire wrote:

And don't go telling me about lower taxes... WHEN has Bush lowered taxes???

Are you serious? Bush has lowered Federal taxes substantially... so much so that he cut state funding so they raised taxes, errr well at least that's what Bob Taft told me.


You rant there is a little smarmy, a lot smarmy in fact.

Granted you're not to far off the mark, there still is abortion, etc. But why the hell would I vote for someone who professed the opposite.

Let's face it, neither party is productive.

Quote:

Now Bush wants to cut social security, cut medicaid/care programs, and more that will only hurt the middle class. Which by the way has shrunk 10%, over the past 6.5 years, the time Bush has been in office. This is due to the US trade policies which he fails to address.

You do realize that cutting Social Security, medicare, etc is a good thing for you right? By the time you can take advantage of it, it wont be there. Not cutting it now means you pay more into it.

I for one, would opt out of all government programs if possible.


Tech Tone Blog

Quote:

Let's face it, neither party is productive.

Finally....SOMEONE sees it.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

[quote=Keeper of the Light™]

Quote:

Let's face it, neither party is productive.

Finally....SOMEONE sees it.

Yeah, "non-binding resolutions". Wigga, please.

Democrats are letting me down.


---

Quote:

You do realize that cutting Social Security, medicare, etc is a good thing for you right? By the time you can take advantage of it, it wont be there. Not cutting it now means you pay more into it.

I for one, would opt out of all government programs if possible.

Good for me at the expense of all the retired people who NEED THAT TODAY. Yeah the social security system etc is currently broken and as such will not be there for me if it "stays the course," but we could... you know... FIX IT.

Quote:

run on a morality platform that they never really do anything about

The funny thing about that "morality platform" - and lets not kidd ourselves, that is really a "pseudo-Christian" morality platform - is that they really don't measure up. I'm not talking about the "Oxymoron" conservative talkshow host, not the whole Mark Foley thing(although funny that other key republicans knew and shielded him). What I'm talking about can be summarized by a several verses from the same "moral handbook" that the Conservatives falsely claim to represent. I'll just use one for now -

Quote:

Faith without deeds is dead.

Conservatives like to talk big about morality, and for the most part it is all talk. At least the Liberal lot don't pretend on this front, and in many cases are better than many conservatives. Conservatives may claim Christian values, yet do not try to care for "the meek of the Earth." Funny that the so called "God-less Liberals" have the edge there. They say "life is sacred" and then quickly jump to support (as long as a Democrat didn't start it) most any war(which no matter your reasons or how you slice it - that is very, very anti-life), and overwhelmingly support the death penalty(which I also support - but I'm no "pro-lifer"). Most all of the consevative politicians(and many of their supporters) cling to any rich man's nuts, yet does the Bible not preach against the over-accumulation of wealth? Does it not say what that this abundance should go toward the needy?

What are they really worried about(besides getting votes at any cost - but both parties are guilty there)? The "sancity" of marriage? Then why don't they actually go after the one thing that destroys that sanctity - DIVORCE. Hell I can go to Vegas right now, meet some street hooker, tie the knot, and get divorced - all in a matter of hours. And yet they're worried about the loving marriage of Adam and Steve? That isn't ruining the sancity of marriage, that is just kicking a dead horse. Even if you stop kicking that dead horse, the horse is still dead...

What else are they worried about? COMMUNISM and the so called Liberal "socialist agenda." News flash!! Communism failed, we won!! Now get over it!! Just what they are still so scared of... I don't know. They treat the possibility of a national healthcare system as "Satan's prescription plan." Canada has such healthcare, and guess what... not only is it very successful, but despite having such a thing - THEY STILL AREN'T COMMUNIST. So why the fear that we would become so?

Now I could say some stuff about Democrats too(a lessor evil is still an evil), but I'll save that for another time.




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

Quote:

What else are they worried about? COMMUNISM and the so called Liberal "socialist agenda." News flash!! Communism failed, we won!! Now get over it!! Just what they are still so scared of... I don't know. They treat the possibility of a national healthcare system as "Satan's prescription plan." Canada has such healthcare, and guess what... not only is it very successful, but despite having such a thing - THEY STILL AREN'T COMMUNIST. So why the fear that we would become so?

Yep, Communism fails in practice every time. In fact, it only really works in extremely poor societies and then only until they're back on their feet. As for health care in Canada, it's failing-ish... I can tell you this as a Canadian. #1 It's not free. I pay 400$ a year for medical insurance on my tax return and I also need a drug plan to pay for medecine. Granted it's not as expensive as you guys, but it's not "free" like people think. It's free for poor people and that's it. #2 The waiting times to go see a doctor have gotten insane. You wait months to go see your family doctor and 8+ hours at a near empty ER because there are no doctors. Not to mention that doctors are so overworked that they don't have time to check everything wrong with you and make a lot of stupid guesses about your health. One of my aunts went to see her doc for numbness in her left leg and he told her repeatedly that it was nothing. She went home and three hours later had a stroke. She went to the ER and THEY MADE HER WAIT... the woman's drooling, barely coherent and can't move her left side and they're telling her to wait her turn. It's insane man, I'm telling you. Maybe it's just my area, but I'm starting to get sick of being jacked around by doctors. I'm not the only one either. There's a big push to turn our health care system into a two-system one. For it the poor it would still be free, but you'd have to deal with the flawed system in place and anyone who could pay for quicker care would have that option. I think that's the best solution.

However, our system is better in one major respect. For all my griping, it's cheaper than the one presently used in the United-States. Then again, you get what you pay for. Still, I think the US could learn from our system and we could learn from yours.

AGuSTiN wrote:Democrats are letting me down.

They aren't letting me down(and I suspect the same for KOTL), since I din't expect anything good out of them. I expected only one thing - to throw a monkey-wrench into the Republican's overly effective and efficient "screw-over-america" machine. And since the Republicans are a majority, and the Democrats aren't a big enough majority, America may finally be safe from any further harm, for now...

I feel that there is only one thing worse than a Liberal-dominated America... a Conservative-dominated America. (note that I'm not including moderates on either side, mainly the radicals on both side... which do tend to dominate)




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

me wrote:And since the Republicans are a majority, and the Democrats aren't a big enough majority, America may finally be safe from any further harm, for now...

oops I should proof-read more. I mean since Republicans AREN'T a majority.




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

Knoxfire wrote:Don't take this as a smarmy question. It's not.

If I was American, I'd probably vote Republican too, but only because I'm pro-war. But a lot of you guys vote on moral issues and to me it's bizarre that you'd keep voting for guys who talk big and little else. See, Republicans run on a morality platform that they never really do anything about. Abortion is still there. Prayer in school is still a no-no. Religious rights are still iffy. A bunch of Socialist programs are still eating away at the heart of the American taxpayer. Ect... None of that is EVER gonna change. You're like the old ladies in Vegas plugging quarters into slot machines hoping to get that one candidate who won't be lying out of his ass.

See where I'm getting at? Bush is a conservative? HOW? What's he done that's sooooooooo conservative? He didn't fund stem cell research? Big deal. At the moment it's just a pseudo-science anyway. I have a hard time believing he could have done it so easily if it had cured cancer or something.

If you look at the ECONOMIC dealings of both Republicans and Democrats. They're identical, or almost. Morally the Democrats appeal only to rich liberals and very few people else. Morally the Republicans talk big but do little. So what's the appeal? Voting for the lesser evil? If you look at it in those purely selfish terms. The Democrats win. Forget about morality and war crap, just look at their "socialist agenda" and what it can do for you. You'll get more free crap from the Demmies than the Republicans. Not a LOT more, but more.

And don't go telling me about lower taxes... WHEN has Bush lowered taxes???

That's what I thought.

I mean, remember the post-WW2 utopia? A lot of that came about BECAUSE of the verysame iditotic socialist crap that the Dems are pushing for. Unions. Medicare. Ect.

So anyway... why do YOU vote Republican?

I have homework to do tonight so I cant make this long and detailed but I will give you my reasons and a few responses to what you said.

First your statement about Bush not being conservative. I dont know if you exactly know what most people mean by conservative. Conservative does not mean that you have to be completely conservative about every political view you have. Conservative is more about they way you handle youself when in office. For example every time that there is a huge new article saying somthing about Bush, whether good or bad, you dont see him on the news the next day agreeing or disproving anything that was said. He is conservative about himself, he doesnt attempt to make himself the center of attention. Where as you look at clinton, whos name I wont capitalize because he should be erased from history in my opinion, during the Monica scandal was constantly on the news discrediting witnesses who said they knew he was with Monica, then the next day he would come back on the news and say "ok, yeah I was with her but didnt do anything" and then the next day....... you get the point. If that happened with Bush for some reason, he wouldnt be out in the media constantly. That is a conservative point. And you definatly dont see Bush trying to explain his decisions every day, like most democrats do. He makes his decisions, tells the public why he did so, and then you dont hear about it for quite a while. Its a conservative thing to do. Same reason why exit polls are generally showing that the democrats are winning when I think it is more than 70% of the time they show that, the republicans are actually winning. Because conservative people dont express thier political views nearly as much in public, they are conservative in thier views and keep them to themselves.

I cant dissagree with you on economic policy, and actually, democrats and republicans have the same agenda when it comes to economic policy. They dont go about it in the same way but they want the same thing.

Bush lowered taxes. simple, how do you disagree with that? Everyone at my company got a raise because of it. He didnt lower the taxes for the poor or middle class, but the upper class that recieved tax cuts should be using it in a proper way, just like my boss did, gave everyone a raise because he had fewer taxes to pay.

Your saying I will get more free stuff from the democrats? Yeah true if you a single mother that made a horrible choice to have sex with a douchbag guy and got pregnant. Or if you live off wellfare and dont try to do anything about it. Or if you live in the inner city and deal drugs. Sorry, but the democrats policies on giving stuff to people who dont deserve it, and even worse, taking it out of the pockets of people who work hard and do good thing for thier lives, its just wrong in every way. It is unfortunate that some people are born into @!#$ty situations, but us that are lucky or worked for what we have dont owe anything to the people who may be unfortunate. I know it sounds selfish but there is no reason for me to have to pay for others poverty, thats a communits idea and I am proud to live in democracy.

I dont know what you were getting at about the post WWII "utopia". The unions, medicare.. etc. Back then it worked extremely well to have those things. Now... not nearly so, actually the unions are hurting what we once had. They are demading higher wages, forcing companies to raise prices to insane levels because of thier outragous wages and causing a huge inflation epidemic that looks nearly impossable to get out of. Simply put, paying someone $20 per hour to bolt on a peice of sheet metal is exactly why jobs are being outsourced. Lower their wages to the levels they should be at, about $12 per hour and make then pay for medical insurance like normal people do, now you have American made products that are a LOT cheaper and many more people will buy them. Best case senario we completely abolished unions and we would all but elimnate outsourcing because American people would now be willing to spend a little bit more on American made goods. Instead of like it is today where we pay double what we could be without unions. And guess what party Unions affiliate themselves with... you guessed it... the @!#$ demmies. The communis party that wants to give everyone free @!#$ and make everyone equal. This is one of the biggest reasons I vote republican. Its insane for anyone to support a union, INSANE.

I leave the pro-choice vs. pro-life, religion in politics, gay rights, and that kind of this to peoples opinions. But when it comes to being a demmie, your partial communist, support unions who destroy our society and economics, and try to stop people from enjoying life leisures like snowmobiling, driving my car, and anything else that they try to claim causes global warming. Where global warming has been pretty much proven wrong but the democrats own so much media that they keep lying to the people. Thats why I am republican. And thats why I vote republican.

Emor8t: You do know that Social Security has always been a Legacy Debt right? It's been traditionally used as a cash cow, but now, it's used for retirees' benefits, injured vets benefits, Main bread winner death benefits... Social Security ain't broke... don't "fix" it by opting out or gutting it. It's there for a purpose, and with the reform (proposed under Clinton, go figure) of it from a holding fund, to a money making fund means it will be there for a LONG time later. There's a reason both Democrats and Republicans voted down the changes.

Bush cut federal taxes, in a time of war... and this not only drove up the debt, but also created the most massive deficits in history (even accounting for WWII) and nothing lasting has been accomplished. Let's also not forget that the amount of corporate welfare has almost doubled in the last 6 years. (Corporations don't pay as much tax, individuals pay less due to legislation, there's going to be deficits.)

RRC:
As for the tax cuts, if you got a raise, you're lucky. Most corporations didn't do that, they kept their gigantic tax cuts to fatten up their bottom line and kept salaries as low as possible in most cases not even keeping up with inflation. The problem with cuts like this is that:
1: not sustainable, meaning there will be an inevitable rebound in taxes.
2: don't always stimulate economic growth.
3: necessitate other cuts or require Deficit Budgets... meaning you're mortgaging long-term economic stability for temporary minor bumps in economy.
4: they fly in the face of 300 years of common sense, you have to fund war somehow, gutting your treasury isn't too S-M-R-T

Seriously, you're running a deficit that will not be paid off at present funding levels EVER. Sounds great until you figure out that it will collapse your economy in 15 -25 years... when money is owed, interest accrues, and Bush-o-nomics doesn't have provisions to pay off the interest, let alone the principle of what is owed. How is this a good idea? The only way the Government can bring in money is through Taxes, and at this point, corporations (which make over 90% of the money in the US economy) pay less than $0.08 of every tax dollar, average Americans are stuck with the rest of the dollar, and at some point, that money is going to have to be paid. Unless you cut programs (which if you're a beneficiary of a program it's not a good solution) you have to up taxes. Unions are a small part of the problem... the bigger part is corporations who have reduced tax bills and reduced responsibilities to their employers... If they don't have to employ an American and can employ a foreigner for 1/3 the cost, AND they keep prices you pay for the goods or services at the same rate, where exactly are you making out fat and happy? You aren't getting dick from them, and they're taking your money for whatever goods or services it is that you buy... how are you not hooped?

BTW, Welfare is the single best crime deterrent there is. Crime is committed for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only: Need and Greed. If you can sate need, you can focus on greed. You want more crime, cut welfare.





Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

I vote Republican mainly because of prior experiences.

Being in the military, and seeing married E-5's with one or two kids being below the poverty level sickens me, and Democrats have a history of wanting to cut (or in 98, when those serving in the military didn't get paid for 2 weeks), or not approving the defense budget. I got ill watching these men and women having to bring their 2 year old children on board a Navy ship to eat... a place they certainly should not have been. Also, cutting the defense budget takes away from a lot of programs for military members, such as housing and base improvements.

There's also a lot of people these days that are concerned with collateral damage during wartime. We need to spend money on technological improvements to help reduce the number of civilian casualties. On top of that, I believe we need to start being concerned with coastal defense measures as well. I watched an interesting program over the weekend (Future Weapons, I think it was). They had an interesting bit talking about EMP, and how easy it would be to detonate a simple EMP device, and take out much of the Northeast (think D.C., New York and it's stock exchanges, some of the larger Naval bases) with ease. To me, that is very scary. What if a terrorist organization were to get a hold of an EMP device, and detonate one over Three Mile Island, and another over Palo Verde Nuclear Generating station just outside of Phoenix?

To me, America's self-defense and military are a higher priority to me than other things, like gay marriage and such. Now, let's say 10 years down the road, if the middle east calms down (yeah... I don't think it will either), and our country is a little bit better fortified, I'll start concerning myself with those other things.




Desert Tuners

“When you come across a big kettle of crazy, it’s best not to stir it.”

Quote:

And guess what party Unions affiliate themselves with... you guessed it... the @!#$ demmies. The communis party that wants to give everyone free @!#$ and make everyone equal. This is one of the biggest reasons I vote republican. Its insane for anyone to support a union, INSANE.

I guess you've never worked for a company or been in a Union huh? Lemme explain to you how it works. The company is like a bunch of crooked cops that wants to shake you down and the unions are like the mob who want protection money. I agree that Unions are low, stupid and just want your money, but because the amount of money they make depends on the amount of money YOU make, you can pit them against your bosses while you only lose a little bit to the unions. Because any company that's smart wants to pay you the least amount of money possible. In Quebec, where I work, security jobs are unionized and pay about 15$ an hour. In Ontario they're paid 8$ an hour (minimum wage), but they have no Union. Economically, Ontario is doing the right thing. But do I want to suffer for my province's well being? HELL NO. It's everyone for himself and I'd rather have my extra 700$ a month in pay thank you. Personally, I think it's a good idea to lower minimum wage to whatever a company is willing to pay and remove all health care benefits and never give anyone a raise. A free market economy is what's going to save us from China taking over as the number one economical power in the world.

Quote:

Bush lowered taxes. simple, how do you disagree with that? Everyone at my company got a raise because of it. He didnt lower the taxes for the poor or middle class, but the upper class that recieved tax cuts should be using it in a proper way, just like my boss did, gave everyone a raise because he had fewer taxes to pay.

Just because your boss gave you some guilt money doesn't mean that somehow this tax money was partly yours. It was your bosses. HIS, not yours. He didn't have to give you anything. It was charity on his part and that was all it was. No one has to give anyone anything. You know why a lot of companies come to Canada despite the fact that we're insanely Union? It's not just because of tax incentives and exchange rate. It's because in Canada it is NOT standard for a boss to give employees a bonus or a raise. You know how much money that saves a company to have to pay everyone the same salary and never give any one guy more just because he works "well"? Just in accounting simplicity it's thousands of hours saved and the money they save on paying anyone extra speaks for itself.

And about Welfare. It doesn't cost anything, and I can prove it.

Let's say state tax is 7% and your welfare bums get paid 500$ a month okay? Well, where's anyone gonna go with 500$? They gotta spend it all right? No one's "saving up" with that piddling amount. So let's just cut to the chase and assume that it's all spent on the first day (It's not, but by the tenth of fifteenth it is and it makes no difference really in my graph.)

Here's what happens

Day 1 Welfare bum spends all his money on rent, booze, chips and cable: 500$ the government takes 7% of that so they get back 35$ Which leaves 465$ flying around to spend.
Day 2 The companies that Bummy spent all his money at need to restock or pay their employees. So they take the 465$ that's left and spend it. Government takes another 7% bite. 32.55$ That leaves 432.45$ lying around.
Day 3 Same cycle as above. People gotta eat, people spend: Government takes home another 30.27$ Leaving 402.18$ out there.

*SNIP*

Okay, so I'm massively simplifying how this works and speeding up the timeline, but see how much of that money goes right back to Uncle Sam's wallet? Welfare subsidises liquor stores and low rent housing. Otherwise we'd be like calcutta and have poor people living in shantytowns all over the place. That's why welfare was invented in the first place. To keep the poor from organizing gangs and whatall.

I look at it like this:

"Conservatives" will try to shove Christianity down your throat.
"LIberals" will shove every other religion down you throat.

"Liberals" will try to make it so that in the pledge, "Under God" is as forbidden as gang-raping a 5-year old Downs syndrome quadraplegic.
"Conservatives" will try to make yiou say "Under God" no matter what.

"Liberals" will cut all defense spending
"Conservatives" will start a war just to justify defense spending

"Conservatives" will try to keep only WASPS employed at the good jobs
"Liberals" will give jobs to underqualified people under the pretense of "equal opportunity"

"Conservatives" will try to ban Hardcore Rap or Heavy Metal Music because the lyrics are "morally wrong"
"Liberals" will try to ban Hardcore Rap and Heavy Metal music because the lyrics offend someone.

Opposite sides to the same coin, and really, monkeys and apes throw @!#$ better than Liberals and Conservatives.



Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

^^ Absolutely, positively, could not of put it any better.


---

Freq: I understand what you're saying, but there hasn't been a pay upgrade for the military (at least if what I've read is correct) since 1999, or under the Clinton administration. Bush waited 6 years before bumping the military's congressionally approved budget, but only for R&D.

I'm more of the mind that first and foremost, wars shouldn't be started if it can be helped... I'm not gloating, I'm being dead serious. The 1998 pay snafu was part and parcel of republicans not approving the military budget, and arguing on how to best squander the peace dividend.

As far as the military goes though, you and I can probably agree you don't get into the military for the money, if you have kids and are at the low pay grades, you already know there's going to be a tight squeeze for money.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Rollinredcavi wrote:
First your statement about Bush not being conservative. I dont know if you exactly know what most people mean by conservative. Conservative does not mean that you have to be completely conservative about every political view you have. Conservative is more about they way you handle youself when in office. For example every time that there is a huge new article saying somthing about Bush, whether good or bad, you dont see him on the news the next day agreeing or disproving anything that was said. He is conservative about himself, he doesnt attempt to make himself the center of attention. Where as you look at clinton, whos name I wont capitalize because he should be erased from history in my opinion, during the Monica scandal was constantly on the news discrediting witnesses who said they knew he was with Monica, then the next day he would come back on the news and say "ok, yeah I was with her but didnt do anything" and then the next day....... you get the point. If that happened with Bush for some reason, he wouldnt be out in the media constantly. That is a conservative point. And you definatly dont see Bush trying to explain his decisions every day, like most democrats do. He makes his decisions, tells the public why he did so, and then you dont hear about it for quite a while. Its a conservative thing to do. Same reason why exit polls are generally showing that the democrats are winning when I think it is more than 70% of the time they show that, the republicans are actually winning. Because conservative people dont express thier political views nearly as much in public, they are conservative in thier views and keep them to themselves.

I cant dissagree with you on economic policy, and actually, democrats and republicans have the same agenda when it comes to economic policy. They dont go about it in the same way but they want the same thing.

Bush lowered taxes. simple, how do you disagree with that? Everyone at my company got a raise because of it. He didnt lower the taxes for the poor or middle class, but the upper class that recieved tax cuts should be using it in a proper way, just like my boss did, gave everyone a raise because he had fewer taxes to pay.

Your saying I will get more free stuff from the democrats? Yeah true if you a single mother that made a horrible choice to have sex with a douchbag guy and got pregnant. Or if you live off wellfare and dont try to do anything about it. Or if you live in the inner city and deal drugs. Sorry, but the democrats policies on giving stuff to people who dont deserve it, and even worse, taking it out of the pockets of people who work hard and do good thing for thier lives, its just wrong in every way. It is unfortunate that some people are born into @!#$ty situations, but us that are lucky or worked for what we have dont owe anything to the people who may be unfortunate. I know it sounds selfish but there is no reason for me to have to pay for others poverty, thats a communits idea and I am proud to live in democracy.

I dont know what you were getting at about the post WWII "utopia". The unions, medicare.. etc. Back then it worked extremely well to have those things. Now... not nearly so, actually the unions are hurting what we once had. They are demading higher wages, forcing companies to raise prices to insane levels because of thier outragous wages and causing a huge inflation epidemic that looks nearly impossable to get out of. Simply put, paying someone $20 per hour to bolt on a peice of sheet metal is exactly why jobs are being outsourced. Lower their wages to the levels they should be at, about $12 per hour and make then pay for medical insurance like normal people do, now you have American made products that are a LOT cheaper and many more people will buy them. Best case senario we completely abolished unions and we would all but elimnate outsourcing because American people would now be willing to spend a little bit more on American made goods. Instead of like it is today where we pay double what we could be without unions. And guess what party Unions affiliate themselves with... you guessed it... the @!#$ demmies. The communis party that wants to give everyone free @!#$ and make everyone equal. This is one of the biggest reasons I vote republican. Its insane for anyone to support a union, INSANE.

I leave the pro-choice vs. pro-life, religion in politics, gay rights, and that kind of this to peoples opinions. But when it comes to being a demmie, your partial communist, support unions who destroy our society and economics, and try to stop people from enjoying life leisures like snowmobiling, driving my car, and anything else that they try to claim causes global warming. Where global warming has been pretty much proven wrong but the democrats own so much media that they keep lying to the people. Thats why I am republican. And thats why I vote republican.

That first paragraph made me chuckle...no, it nearly brought me to tears. I'm really not even sure how to respond. I'm pretty sure you have no idea what you're talking about. I've yet to meet a conservative who wasn't more than willing to tell me how wrong I was about everything, and just exactly how they felt about politics. Being a conservative in today's politics has nothing to do with the general definition of conservative. The only reason good ole' Bushie isn't on the television defending himself everyday is because democrats have lacked a backbone for quite some time and never challenged, and if they did it was with a whisper.

Now on to your foolish ideas on welfare. I love how people like you automatically associate people on welfare with the scum of the country. Sure, welfare is abused day in and day out by criminals and lazy people, but I assure that for every person that abuses welfare there are at least two who couldn't survive without. And it's not because some woman made a horrible choice and got knocked up by some "douche bag." Not everyone makes a horrible decision to have a child. Mistakes happen, condoms break, guys realize their girlfriends are pregnant and split. Some women are even raped. *gasp* Some people don't believe in abortion. Not everyone has family to help them. Not everyone is born into a middle class family who can provide for them. But you already said you didn't care. You're selfish. Why should you, a hard working American who by the luck of the draw was born into a family that could provide for you and maybe get you through college and into a decent paying job, have a percentage of the taxes you are going to pay EITHER WAY to help out people who weren't as lucky as you? I mean, really, who cares about them? You don't know that single mother who is trying to provide for her child, but can only get a job paying $8 an hour at Wal-Mart or some other job that will only pay minimum wage? And in any case, a large part of the need for welfare is due to how low wages are. If you didn't go to college, the chance of you making more than $10 an hour is extremely unlikely. Tell me exactly how one survives on ten dollars an hour? It's really not possible. And if you have a kid, give me a break. Oh, and outsourcing has nothing to do with wages being driven to high by unions. Sure, unions can be a problem, but the fact is the minimum wage in this country is ridiculous. Companies don't want to pay their employees anything these days. Thus, they begin outsourcing because they can get people in India and China and other places to work for nothing. If our government actually tried to protect Americans and kept jobs here then people might actually make enough money to live.

You're pretty lucky that you have a nice boss who decided to share the tax cut he received. However, 90% of the companies who received tax cuts never gave a dime to their employees. And by the way, the people you should be attacking are the millionaires getting HUGE tax breaks. The middle class is being destroyed by the president and republicans alike. Its disturbing, really. Hopefully in 2008 someone will take office that will do something to save this country. With the spending that Bush has done and the insanely large deficit, it's hard to see a promising future for this country. One day, China is going to want to collect on some of the money we owe them.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Wednesday, February 21, 2007 1:40 AM

^^^Don't hold your breath, if there's a orifice for the public, the republicans with rape it with a jackhammer, and the democrats will rape it with a battery drill.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

Rob S wrote:

I feel Democrats and much more clear on what is going on in the World. For example this Iraq war, Seante majority leader Harry Reid has it right when he says it is worse that Vietnam...

Are you kidding me, he is already responibile for killing for than 3000 troops. I hope this guy burns in hell for this.

US Troop Death Toll in Vietnam (over 16 years) = 57,000 [give or take a few hundred]

Us Troop Death Toll in Iraq (over 5 years) = 3,000 [give or take about 20]

You do the math...

57,000/16=3,562.5 deaths/year in vietnam

3000/5=600 deaths/ year


As bad as vietnam? Damn thats some good @!#$ they were smoking.

Not only has US troop death not even been close to what it was in vietnam, but the number of deaths per year in iraq was what we were losing at its height in a week! I think everyone needs to grip reality here. Besides, our reason for being in vietnam wasn't very good either...

Rob S wrote:
For example Toyota can build a factory here and sell thier cars. However GM cant build a factory in China, because to sell in China, you must build what you sell there, or face high import fees.

It's called playing by there rules, China is going to be a big market in just a few more years, so they want to get in before they close the door...its all big business. I forget who said it but I remember a quote saying something to the effect of

Quote:

And were gonna bend over and take it in the ass, becuase were America, and thats what we do

I feel Democrats and much more clear on what is going on in the World.

Hehe...no offense but that's exactly what they want you to think. They take both sides of an argument so they are never wrong...lol...

And about the welfare issue i generally agree with Tristan, however, i feel that as a whole Americans are lazy, dont want to work, want everythign handed to them, and really dont care about anything but themselves. It is just unfortunate that some people genuinely need assisstance and there are those taking such gross abuses of the system. If we had more regulation of these kinds of people we could all pay less and the people that need the assisstance could recieve more.
I dunno, looks nice on paper i guess...

Rollinredcavi wrote:
First your statement about Bush not being conservative. I dont know if you exactly know what most people mean by conservative. Conservative does not mean tha

Seriously, bro, seriously....are you serious? You can't be serious, seriously.


---

Smus: The point I think that was being made is that Vietnam was at least in pursuit of pushing back communism... The war on terrorism is not as definite, not as uniformed, and is no where near as clear cut, ideologically. The people behind communism weren't afraid to fly a banner... they used uniforms when they could.

Terrorism is a quintessential celled, hit and fade tactic. They're NOT uniformed, they are fairly well trained, and are VERY well funded.

The problem is that they have had 20 some-odd years of fanaticism, war, poverty, and religious fervour to foam up the oceans (as it were). The lower on the totem pole are wholly or partially illiterate, incapable of more than basic math... The middle are weaponsmiths, managers... the uppers are usually offensively wealthy, and have a disconnect from the rest. What's the difference? The lower are wholesale lambs to the slaughter, the middle are respectable, and have other things that make them less suspect, and the top have the cushion of money.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

The lower on the totem pole are wholly or partially illiterate, incapable of more than basic math... The middle are weaponsmiths, managers... the uppers are usually offensively wealthy, and have a disconnect from the rest. What's the difference? The lower are wholesale lambs to the slaughter, the middle are respectable, and have other things that make them less suspect, and the top have the cushion of money.

This is almost entirely wrong as far as terrorism goes. Im not cutting on you, just letting you know terrorist regimes are a top down, pyramid structure. The top being the commanders, second level being the "cadre" or actual terrorists, the third level being the active supporters which are those who support fully knowing what they are doing, and then the bottom are the passive supporters, those who support regimes but dont know they are doing it. It just so happenes that in some cases, such as Osama Bin Laden, that the commander could be an active supporter and generate boatloads of funding. You were right about one thing which is the disconnect. This lies in the fact that terrorist regime's are governed not by an overarching authority, but a set or ideals and goals. I just wanted to agree with you on that so you didnt think i was flaming or making a cut about the other stuff.

The point is i have studied alot about this kinda stuff and there is a WHOLE lot more organization and determination than people believe. I dont believe that this is exactly on the same plane as the Vietnam War...well it is but it isnt. The vietnam war was, no matter what your feelings about the actual war, based around military troops and was fought overseas. Add to this the finite length. This whole issue of terrorism has the ability to reach us and our families at home...civilians. This makes it potentially much more threatning considering the fact that though we havent been hit hard, other than september 11th which i say isnt hard because of what COULD possibly happen, especially when one factors in the length that the religious wave of terror still has left on its clock. Four waves of terror starting with the anti colonial, moving to the anarchis, then to the left wing wave of the days surrounding vietnam war, and now to the religious wave. All previous waves lasted roughly 40 years. With this estimate the religious wave still has another 20 left to run. That is alot of time to potentially gain power and resources and get new tactics.

Oh and politicians dont care about anyone but themselves and their public opinion. Just thought id put that out there...