Perish the thought!!
If not Iraq, then some ME country awfully damn close, and maybe more dangerous. A ME conflict is/was bound to happen sooner than later, no matter the party in charge. I don’t agree with why we’re in Iraq, now that the truths appear to be out, but I think it was a festering scab that we would have eventually picked.
duffer, you’re completely wrong. There are real differences between the Repubs and the Dems. Overall, the Dems are considerably less corrupt than the Repubs, though they are still corrupt.
But the really telling point is this: if we had elected Al Gore in 2000 and then 9/11 had happened, he would have invaded Afghanistan, just like Bush did, because that’s where the Taliban and Al-qaeda were. But you know what? Gore would NEVER have invaded Iraq. The PNAC didn’t have his ear, like they had Bush’s, and Gore doesn’t have Bush’s weird “daddy” thing going wrt Iraq.
And since Gore wouldn’t have INVADED Iraq, we wouldn 't be STUCK in Iraq.
It really does make a difference whether you elect Democrats or Republicans.
You are completely, utterly wrong here.
Well, now that we have that cleared up. :rolleyes:
At times like this, I pause to wonder: is it worth it? To endure months of slander and abuse at the hands of our political enemies…the putrid innuendos about our loyalty and patriotism, the self-righteous blather, the lies…only to watch as they roll about on the floor, pissing and moaning about the Gucci jackboots of an itty-bitty Italian granny, gnashing their teeth and barking impotent threats of vengeance…can it possibly be worth it?
Oh, yeah. Totally.
So you think that just because the government is likely to be corrupt to some extent no matter who is in power, that makes the Bush administration’s behaviour acceptable? :rolleyes:
Then you must have been very happy with the way America was run during the past four years.
I don’t see how that can be so, but from what you say, it must be so.
Yup, unless you think the President is in any way in control of how Congress acts. :rolleyes:
And of course, you show that your hatred for Bush is in no way indicitive of your clear-headed opinion of what Congress does.
More! More! Man, this is a hoot! Do the Sandy Berger stuff!
(…flicks Bic, waves overhead…)
Gee don’t think it’s just a US thing. All 2 party political systems worldwide produce the same sort of sectarian “thinking” that isn’t all that far removed from non-democratic sectarianism except for the method of enforcing it. In our societies you have the rule of law and rich backroom boys - no need for open warfare. Here in Australia we have the same mentality - if the Liberals say “white” Labor says “black”.
Nearly everyone I know is a Labor party supporter. During the last decade or more the party has been a joke. It has no coherent policies, it has had ineffective leadership, the internal politics of the party are far from democratic and they will happily reverse their philosophy on any given subject to culture votes. Even the Labor party supporters I know recognise these things…but they still vote for them because they aren’t the Liberals.
Because 2 party politics necessarily ends up with “sides” to be on I’m pretty sure that bi-partisanship is just a dream and non-partisanship is the only hope. Every man and woman their own political party. But how to impliment it? Draw representatives names from a hat? Have referendums for major decisions?
I’m still looking for *your * quotes from actual Congressional *Democrats * actually *making * the promise you claim they are breaking. You do have some, don’t you? Right? :dubious:
*My * hatred, you say? A Freudian would call that projection.
As your very own new House *minority * leader puts it:
That is not your conclusion but your premise. :rolleyes:
Payback is a bitch.
1: Probably, and without a corresponding tax cut to keep the economy going. SPENDING is the problem, and neither side can stop doing that.
2: Probably not. Would this be good or bad? I dunno, I can see it either way.
3: I don’t know what you mean here. Before we had no Rx plan. This is better than that. MOST things that government do are generally fucked up. A Democratic plan would no doubt be different, but it would also undoubtedly be just as fucked up. I’m not even completely sure that this plan is a total fuck up, because most people seem to think “Hey, this plan doesn’t pay for 100% of anything I want”= “Fucked up”. I don’t buy that line of reasoning.
4: Definitely. The faults in NO lie mostly with the primary and secondary responders, in this case the city and state. I find it hard to imagine that even the most spendthrift Democrat could pour more money into that black hole than this administration has.
Well, that’s what everyone expected. I was referring to the bullshit the Dem’s were peddling regarding “bridge-building” and “reconcilliation”.
Be it GOP or Dems, the attrition is expected. It’s a given.
Regardless who won, the same is expected. Partisanship. Rhetoric that the opposition is out to kill babies and kick puppies.
The GOP used the same tactics the Dems have and now will use. It’s a game of one-upsmanship. One party uses what the previous used when in the minority.
The GOP used what the Dems used against them for 40 years. The Dems now use what was used against them for the past 12 years.
If you think any of them are looking out for you, have at it.
BTW,
I’m curious why Reagan, with a Dem Congress was blamed for massive deficits, yet Clinton, with a GOP Congress was credited with surplusses?
The Congress writes the bills and budget.
:dubious:
By going this far without a cite I have to agree with **Elvis1ives ** that you are bullshitting.
I would not be surprised some democrats said something like that, but looking at the overall campain I think your position here is mostly a big straw man.
Yup. I made it all up. It was all a figment of imagination. Good to see you were paying attention to the “campain”. Good to see someone such as yourself was paying attention.
So, are we still waiting around for duffer to provide some of the supporting evidence for any of his claims? Or are we just laughing at him, since he’s probably not planning on doing so (especially since the vast majority of his claims would require seeing far into the future)?
If the Dems pull all the bullshit the Republicans pulled, maybe then you’d have a point duffer. But so far, the best you can manage to do is some lame overblown PR from Republicans about how they are going to lose votes on the main agenda instead of being able to derail it right off the bat with a hundreds votes on whether Jesus should be given the Congressional medal of honor, or putting riders like “pedophilia is awesome!” on campaign finance reform bills.
Thank you.
I thought it was topical. 