I don’t know if you’re joking but I think it’s a winner. I’d punch it up a little:
TRUTH.
JUSTICE.
AMERICA.
(Try imagining it on a black background, can’t fill it here.)
It’s better without connectors. “Truth, Justice and the American Way” or “Truth and Justice for Americans” are more fluid. But the impact is greater if it’s simple stops after each word. Imagine a crowd shouting it.
“Tomorrow Belongs To Me”? 
Would you describe their words and actions over the last six months as generally optimistic, or something closer to the opposite?
The word that comes to mind is “delusional”.
Why, yes! Gotta look at it the right way! Sure, the glass is half-full of warm pee, but the other half is empty!
…And Republicans too, right?
Yeah, I think many / most Republicans are on board with the idea that we should be nice to handicapped people and gays. If you had to pick a party that emphasizes that particular message, I suspect we’d agree it’s something more at the forefront of the minds of Democrats than Republicans, right?
Strictly from a legislative perspective, that appears to be the case. But I don’t know why that should be. Surely Republicans have the same exposure on a daily basis to handicapped people, minorities, gays, etc.
Why the difference between the two?
Different priorities?
There are lots of issues like this. For example:
Surely Democrats have the same exposure on a daily basis to members of our military, but they generally don’t seem as enthused about giving them the resources they need to do their jobs properly. Why the difference?
Surely Democrats have the same exposure on a daily basis to small business owners, but they generally don’t seem as enthused about rolling back regulations that hamper small businesses. Why the difference?
Etc.
You think Democrats have been “delusional” for the last six months? OK.
You’re right. It’s a question of different priorities.
Republicans seem to feel the wealthiest among us are in desperate need of tax relief. Democrats seem to think the money would be better spent on Medicaid.
***Not ***entirely without merit? Please elaborate.
Let *him *say it out loud, then.
I don’t think my use of “yet” is really worth the level of analysis you put into it, but since you seem enthusiastic about it, here you go:
Those are the same ‘many folks’ who say that Lynch approved Veselnitskaya’s visa and that Obama isn’t really an American citizen. But just wait until the investigators get back from Hawaii!
Still waiting…
and waiting…
and…
Patriotic, to Republicans, appears to be ‘willing to roll over to our demands.’
Let me add anecdotal data to that. (Of course, I’m not a liberal, but that’s beside the point.)
I’m fucking ashamed that I live in a country that’s collectively stupid enough to elevate an ignorant crumb and criminal to the highest office in the land, if not the world. (Until Nov. 8, I would’ve said unequivocally that it was the highest office in the world. Now it’s more likely German Chancellor, or to the cynical, Russian President.)
LOL. That sounds like it’d be good fodder for a hilarious joke thread.
I’m curious, what political / idealogical affiliation, if any, do you self-identify with?
These are bullshit characterizations. Both parties want to give resources to the military necessary for them to do their jobs, and want to roll back harmful and useless regulations; they just disagree on what resources are necessary to do the job of the military, and which regulations are harmful and useless.
I didn’t want to start a big debate about military spending or pro- vs anti-business positions of the respective parties. I picked two common stereotypes to make a quick point. If you can’t see that generally, Republicans are more eager to fund the military and at higher levels than Democrats, and generally, Republicans are more eager to roll back regulations on businesses than Democrats, then I don’t want to argue about it with you today. Your point about “disagree on what resources are necessary to do the job of the military, and which regulations are harmful and useless” is a valid one, and certainly adds some nuance and depth to those short-hand descriptions of the respective parties’ positions. Can we leave it at that, at least for this thread?
I defy classification. I’m a registered Democrat who agrees with some views of conservatives, more with liberals, and even more with (little ‘l’) libertarians. Of course, there are areas of overlap, primarily between the latter two. I’m an independent in the true sense of the word.