Republican Ad up on the site...Follow

It's not enough I have to listen to long, drawn out diatribes of how local control is the way to go (except when it's inconvenient). How great health care corporations are that gave CEO's 94 million dollars in compensation last year, and how intellectual giants like Rush Limbaugh and Shawn Hannity really do make sense (if you compare them to Coombs).

Now I have to see ads for the most inept President ever on this website.

Seriously. Just shoot me now.

Or, better yet, if you're a Republican, pull your head out of your *** and shoot yourself now.

I watch GWB and all I can think of is "does ANYONE think this guy is a good President?" We've got more debt than we can shake a stick at, a fiscal policy designed to destroy any middle class that we may have left, and we're fighting a war we won't win. But HEY! We got tax cuts... right? That'll make it all better...

I know there are Bush backers (or was it asspackers?) on this board that think he walks on water and is going to deliver us into heaven, but I really find myself wondering why? Why support this guy? What is it about him that gets the religious idiots and backwoods ************* all hot?

Now, I can hear you thinking right now... "Like John Kerry is any better". I agree. I don't think he's much better. There aren't any candidates that I'm really happy with at this point. However, I'll take a German Shepard with a bad case of syphillus over GWB. Give me two monkeys in a room over his entire staff of advisors.

Hey, I know not everyone's going to agree with me, and that's fine. But, take some free advise, worth exactly what you're paying for it.

The next time you see Good Ol' Georgie, think to yourself... "This man is the leader of the greatest nation that may have ever existed in history". Are you comforted by that thought?

I'm not.

Grady

Theory number two: No one likes to admit they are wrong. The stronger their previous support the more likely they will continue to support him. Bush would need to admit to fondling small boys before most epople would change their minds at thi point.

No, I said that they are idiots and should shoot themselves... that's a world of difference.

Regardless of whether you agree with me or not, the fact of the matter is that I just don't get it. I don't understand the enamour. It doesn't add up for me.

I don't think everything he's done is evil. I do think he's done an incredible amount of stupid things. Working to get rid of overtime being one of them of late. The fact is that business SHOULD pay for overtime for their employees, and by undermining overtime for some, you're setting the stage to erode it for everyone.

I don't think that spending billions of dollars and creating a huge deficit is fiscally conservative. I don't think it's fair to pawn off our obligations to the next generation.

I think we're involved in a conflict that has no good resolution to it.

I know that this President, and the powers behind his party, are FOR having an ignorant mass of lower class people and a small upper class that runs evertything. No Child Left Behind, the Medicare program that's doomed for failure, and the aforementioned fiscal policy are proof of this. The fact is that the people driving the Republican party right now don't want public education, they don't want affordable health care (that would cut into their buddies' profits), and they want all the recognition but they want someone else to pay for it.

I do think that right after 9-11 that Bush handled the situation well. I do think there's more to a President than being able to deliver a soundbyte (something he's terrible at but don't generally count against him). I do think that we, as a people, deserve a better choice than either of the choices before us.

I do think that you're not a Republican. You may vote that way but you're not representative of what the party has become, at least not where I live. Republicans in Minnesota are the most zealous variety. Few and far between are the moderates. And it's quite aggravating. Republicans here talk about keeping sex offenders locked up, but don't want to pay for it. They talk about keeping health care costs down, but are noticeably silent about United Health paying their CEO $94 million dollars last year... some of them even praise the market for that one (I've heard them do it). We've got a Republican Governor who hired a known racist to be his Public Safety Commission... not because of a few "n" words he's tossed out, but by his actions as a police officer and several instances in his Department. Oh, but he did ask for the guys resignation... after incidents that were already public in 1995 were brought back up.

Republicans here want to cut ALL funding from health clinics that MAY offer either abortions or might even have the audacity to present it as a option. We're not talking about cutting the funding that would go directly for abortions, we're talking about cutting all the funding a facity would get for treating a patient... Medical Assistance, MNCare, the whole nine yards. I've stated many times in the past that I don't care whether abortion is legal or not, but threatening to cut care for people that can't get health insurance is ******* stupid.

So, no Gbaji, I don't think you're a right wing zealot Republican. You sound a lot more like me. And, I'm a Democrat at this point. And as much as MN is considered a liberal state, the Democrats here are the moderates at this time. There are pro-life, pro-choice, pro-gun, anti-gun, ect ect ect, in the Democratic party. The only moderates left in the Republican party are guys that have been in office for years and the party is afraid to get rid of. Almost all the new members of the legislature are just to the right of Himmler. And the ones that aren't end up voting just like the ones that are. It's really discouraging.

There's plenty of room in the middle for both of us G, but the truth is that where I live, a Republican in the middle is an endangered species. And the other Republicans have opened season up on them...

Grady

Sounds like your issue is mostly with state and local politics, not federal. There's a world of difference, you know? Every single thing you mentioned (with the exception of the Iraq war) is not a federal issue. What does Bush in particular have to do with that?


It's also funny how amazingly different your perspective on politics is going to be based on where you live. The pendulum swing both ways, and it's not in the same spot in all areas of the nation.

Come to California sometime Grady. The land where the liberals have pushed their policies to the point where we'll elect *anyone* who isn't politics as usual. If you want to see where liberal politics fail, you have only to look at California. A state that spends more money on education then just about any other state, yet is ranked like 48th or something in terms of quality. A state that has more laws and restrictions on its citizens and businessess then you can shake a stick at, and has a failing business infrastructure as a result. A state where everyone screams about the cost of power, but no one makes the connection that all those environmental laws that they passed that make it impossible to build a power plant anywhere in the state are the reason for the high prices. A state that applies huge taxes and tarrifs to those "evil" corporations (manufacturing specifically, but I'm sure they'll get to the others soon) and then wonders why the economic strata is separated sharply between those who make good money working at a bio/tech company (only businesses without physical "products" shipped in and out of the state), and everyone else who's working in the service industry because there's nothing left inbetween. A state, that at the same time has passed so many laws "protecting" it's natural habitats and restricting development, that the only people who can afford housing are those same bio/tech employees, while everyone else gets to live in crappy apartments that cost most of their salary. A state that has the highest gas prices in the nation because we have laws requiring mandatory additives be placed in the gas to make the air "cleaner" (not that that helps much though). Of course, the same people who agreed with those laws will ***** about it while driving their SUVs to the gas station...


Come live in California sometime and you'll see the end result of most of the Democrat party policies. You'll understand that all the good intentions in the world don't always have a good end result, especially when they aren't weighted with even an ounce of common sense. You'll start to hate the bumpersticker/slogan methodology of liberal politics because they deliberately discourage discourse and thought on any issue in favor of what "feels right".


So sure. Your situation is different then mine. I have no problem with that. Feel free to be a Democrat if that's what you feel is best for your state and your current position in life. But don't tell me that I'm crazy for being a Republican when you don't know anything about the political/economic realities where I live.

Again. If you want to discuss a particular bit of politics, I'm all for that. But to make a blanket statement that one party or the other is "bad" is just silly. Like it or not, the membership of both Rep and Dem parties are pretty close in numbers nationwide. Just because you don't personally see a good reason to be a member of the "other party" doesn't mean that those reasons don't exist. Empirical evidence would suggest that they do, else there wouldn't be so many of them (going both ways).

Hmmm... Not really. However, they did put in a proviso that the *additional funding* they recieved worldwide must be used in programs that are HIV/AIDS treatment specific, and not connected to the dispensing of condoms and teaching of safe-sex.

Special interest? Certainly. But would you really expect differently if the shoe was on the other foot? Are you suggesting a Democratic Congress, with the same control, wouldn't have maybe made a proviso that absinence coudn't be taught as an effective prevention for AIDs in order to get the funding?

This is just politics as usual. You've got two very distinct sides of this issue, each supporting "their party". If you're going to ***** about this, then lets bring up the entire topic of special interest groups, campain donations/finance, and basically rebuild the entire methodology of the US campain system while we're at it. This is just one instance of a whole problem, and it's certainly not restricted to any one party.


What's interesting is the difference of opinion on this particular issue depending on who you're listening to:

http://www.planetwire.org/details/3842

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31308


If you're looking only at your own side, the "other side" will always seem bad. From where I sit, this is just politics as usual, and relatively moderate politics at that. If he's got the nutballs on the right and the left annoyed at him, maybe he's more in the middle? You will *never* please a hard core person btw. Not with anything less then making the whole world exactly the way they want it. Both sides in this represent extremes. Neither is correct. Somewhere in between is. Just because the pendulum swings slightly one way or the other is hardly cause for alarm folks. As long as it's still more or less in the middle, we're doing fine.

I consider myself a moderate, was once registered Republican (just changed to Democrat this year), and voted for both Bush the elder and Reagan, but the thought of 4 more years of Bush scares me silly. So I think it's great the Republicans are running ads on my site. I think I'll take the money I make off of those ads and donate it to Kerry. How's that for irony. Thank's George for helping me fund your opponent. Keep those ads coming.

(So if you're a democrat, click on those ads a lot. They will think they are popular and run even more and I'll just have more to donate to Kerry )


Edited, Mon Apr 19 20:06:58 2004 by Allakhazam

Welcome aboard, Comrade!

Yan I am probably just ignorant on this subject not being a woman but how is abortion a women's health issue? I thought it was a choice.



If that is the policy then doesnt the "in cases other than threat to life of the woman" cover the womens health issue? I am not disagreeing with you I honestly want to know.

Sorry, can't let this one slip by. Abortions are not health care. They are elective surgery in the vast, vast majority of cases, no different than lipo-suction or breast implants. The G shouldn't have anything to do with paying for them.

I am not "from" Minnesota, but I do have the pleasure of living here. All I can say is it's about time this state began to join the mainstream. What kind of liberal whackos send Mark Dayton & Paul Wellstone to the senate at the same time? Now we only have one left to unseat. "Progressiveness" is just another word for liberal. Liberals are people who scream bloody murder when a convicted sex offender kills a college girl, but cry foul when we civilly commit someone who may not be an overt risk of re-offending. Death penalties are a good thing.

Because, of course, it's best when everyone sits squarely in the middle to protect the status quo.

Some people believe we can do better than the current status quo.

By the way, Humphrey wasn't part of the mainstream when he was fighting for civil rights when he was in office.

Edited, Tue Apr 20 11:26:01 2004 by Yanari

Move as far right as you like, Moe. I'll be over here on the left doing my best to maintain the cosmic balance.

Hell, I may vote for John Kerry for one reason, and one reason only. If Kerry wins, Hillary can't realisticly run for president until 2012, when she'll be 65. That alone would be worth 4 years of Kerry.