Amen.
Here’s what I tell my children when they slink off and sulk over some grave injustice in the world, like me not allowing them to play computer games until their homework is done.
“You can choose to sulk if you like, but realize that in the end, the only person who has suffered is you. Why you’d deliberately choose to be miserable is beyond me, but it’s certainly your choice.”
Strange. You’d think y’all could have made some sort of move toward doing that in the FIRST four years of Bush II.
Y’all planning on coming up with those ideas any time soon?
Cuz, like, there’s this place called “Iraq” that your boy has kinda made a mess of.
And our economy.
And our educational system.
And our global standing…
etc…
But please, find out these workable ideas that’ll improve the country.
You’ve had four years to think of 'em, bring 'em out already.
Gee, Bill, is that your idea of a more inclusive future? I feel all warm and fuzzy.
Stoid wrote
As I’ve pointed out elsewhere: inclusion means expanding and widening, accepting the views of those in the center of the left. And I mean every word of that. If you know my views, you know I’m pretty left wing for a Republican, and in general, I’m very inclusive in my philosophy.
Inclusion doesn’t mean pandering to the intolerant and to the extreme left. It doesn’t mean coddling, or even putting up with those that call me an idiot and a liar on a regular basis simply because my views don’t meet their own.
The next Republican that offers me the hand of Christian reconciliation is going to pull back a bloody stump.
Organize, Organize, Organize!!!
Yeah, you go Rock that Vote. 
Dumbasses.
So I guess this boils down to “Hey I’m all for accepting views I agree with, coz I’m really tolerant. But if you disagree, you get the jackboot.” :rolleyes:
It would be nice if the **current ** president were a conservative; *that * I could live with.
AMEN!
I was a conservative until Bush spent the last 4 years convincing me that there’s no such thing anymore.
Yes, I really am that biased. They are all drooling idiots. :rolleyes:
(By which I mean fiscally conservative. I’ve never been socially conservative, except on gun control I guess.)
Yeah, cuz the OP set the gentle, tender tone of the thread. :rolleyes:
Exactly the point. It was an obvious rant, and yet there were people who couldn’t just let it be - they had to come stir more shit.
Oh, and my original post was for Bill H., who had been calling for unity and inclusiveness. Apparently this only goes for those on the other side of the issues.
Sooo…the Pit is for people to post a rant and nobody is allowed to respond? Got it. Though this might take awhile to get used to.
And I know your post was for Bill H. I just saw a little irony considering the post you said it in.
THREAD, dammit, thread. :smack:
What we (of all political persuasions) need in 2008 is a candidate who is more liberal than Pubs yet more socially conservative than Dems (just a little!! For example, I think abortion rights should be preserved, except for in the third trimester, when it seems that the little one is more or less viable with modern medicine…I think guns should be kept away from domestic violence perps and other idiots, but otherwise the right to bear arms seems pretty practical… etc. It seems that having extremist views on such issues keeps out some voters who would otherwise choose the Democrat because of fiscal issues). I wouldn’t care which party, or which third party, he/she came from, I’d vote for someone like that. And a lot of my friends, who are disillusioned with the stark divides in so many issues between the parties, would do the same. I’m not saying that Democrats should necessarily change at all; maybe if Republicans would chill on some of the social issues and quit sleeping with Big Business they would become a sane alternative (I doubt it). More possible is Democrat modification, or a third party that could combine sensible centrist views (and mobilize a base within the next four years) of all those who are disenfranchised by the modern conservative platform, yet hesitant to vote Democrat for fear of radical social changes.
Or not. :smack:
There’s a difference between responding and baiting. Anyone who hopes to see the divisiveness of the country (and of these boards) decrease should surely be expected to live up to what he expects of others.