For those who voted for Bush in '04...

Did I vote for Bush? Yeah, twice.
Would I do it again? Yeah, twice.
The alternatives were Gore, then Kerry.
Now, I'm sure they would have done everything perfect,
but I can't see how they would have handled 9/11, Hurrican Katrina/FEMA problems,
the economy, NSA, any better or worse than Bush.
Scandals- both sides are have corrupt people.
And for everyone from Patrick Kennedy's state-
how can you elect idiots like that to actually be your leader?
I know, I know- I'm stuck with Dick Durbin!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ May 14 2006, 09:19 AM) [snapback]255138[/snapback]</div>

Is clapping to every idiocy of Mystery Squid's all you can do? Pathetic...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(theforce @ May 13 2006, 06:58 PM) [snapback]254910[/snapback]</div>

Sounds like the free market is working fine by what you say above. Why should you make big money for doing almost nothing?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eyeguy13 @ May 13 2006, 10:43 PM) [snapback]254985[/snapback]</div>

Much of what you say sounds very true, thanks!

The part I would take exception with is the Surplus point - that as you say is only a matter of timing as to what is going on in the world. If Clinton had spent money on preventing Terrorism then we would not have the problems we have now.

Also, while liberals claim foul on Bush's tax cuts what they fail to realize is that tax revenues are up significantly because of these cuts. They raising overall incomes and thus actual taxes collected went up even though marginal rates are down. They also cry foul that the cuts unfairly give to the rich. Well first they should, as the rich are the ones that pay most of the taxes. But look at it another way, based on these cuts the rich now pay a much higher percentage of taxes than the poor, much more so than in many decades. So, you all should credit Bush with making things more equitable. The analysis of this was shown in "The Week" this past week.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hybridTHEvibe @ May 14 2006, 09:49 AM) [snapback]255149[/snapback]</div>

Makes you sick, doesnt it vibrator???
I can clap where & for whom ever I chose whatcha think about that Lil' Vibe
Its obvous your jealous of windstrings, MS & myself why else would you repeatedly lash out at our posts..
Are you lonley, craving attention, ok ill call a truce with you , heres a box of tissues..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(kirbinster @ May 14 2006, 10:27 AM) [snapback]255159[/snapback]</div>

I remember getting taxed from hell so to speak when clinton was in office, tax return whats that? I had to pay the IRS money..

I guess that most overlook information like this. "Good Post" kirbinster's on a roll here .

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ May 13 2006, 11:20 PM) [snapback]255018[/snapback]</div>

Read my earlier reply regarding the $56 -- you got what you deserve. Those that pay the taxes deserve the reduction not those that don't. Democrats are the once that want to take from the rich and give to the poor. Be careful what you wish for, for once the masses truly start to vote then you will be considered the rich and they will take from you.

You further make my point when you say you will never vote for a Republican ever again. So you agree that you are only voting for an ideology not a person, for if you thought otherwise you would not make a statement as such. Thanks for your support.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ May 14 2006, 10:32 AM) [snapback]255162[/snapback]</div>

sure you can clap; it's a good quality of a cheerleader. just shows you have nothing of your own to say

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hybridTHEvibe @ May 14 2006, 10:57 AM) [snapback]255175[/snapback]</div>

LOL sure dude I add my own commintary But there is no reasoning with the village ____.
is there.?.

The Democratic Agenda for 08'.
I think, If the Democrat Party takes the house they could open an investigation into the 2000 election of President Bush. Their greatest dream fantasy would become true if it were determined he wasn't leagally elected. Would this open the door for President Bush to run again in 2008, since this term would become his first? Would this be Karl Rove's crowning achievement?

Democratic Agenda: The Two-Year Republican Hate-In
The Democrats have announced their agenda if they succeed in taking back the House in November, and as predicted, it focuses on exactly what the Democrats have done for the past six years: hating Republicans. Rather than having much of a legislative agenda, the Democrats plan to run on the promise to launch endless investigations of Republicans and the administration:

Democratic leaders, increasingly confident they will seize control of the House in November, are laying plans for a legislative blitz during their first week in power that would raise the minimum wage, roll back parts of the Republican prescription drug law, implement homeland security measures and reinstate lapsed budget deficit controls.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said in an interview last week that a Democratic House would launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House's first-term energy task force and probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Pelosi denied Republican allegations that a Democratic House would move quickly to impeach President Bush. But, she said of the planned investigations, "You never know where it leads to."

We know exactly where it will lead, and Pelosi does as well. She displays disingenuity when she claims that the attempt to rehash all of the old complaints that lost them three elections in a row has no ultimate purpose. However, Russ Feingold exposed the real direction of the Democrats with his call for hearings and censure (at the least) of George Bush earlier this year, a move that made Democrats very nervous then but apparently no longer.

The plan to re-open the investigation into Dick Cheney's energy-planning meetings is a perfect case in point. The executive has the right to consult with anyone they see fit in forming policy. In fact, that concept forms the entire basis of executive privilege, and for good reason. If they do not want to reveal their consultants, that is their prerogative. The courts have ruled against the Democrats on at least two occasions on this.

The Democrats, instead of attacking the policy, want to smear the administration instead to undermine it. They wanted to intimidate the White House into backing down through court action instead of the political process. When that didn't work, they stalled Congress on the energy bill for five years. Voters responded to both the Bush energy policy, the Democratic lawsuit about the task force, and the obstructionism on which the Democrats relied -- and they voted more Democrats out of office in the House and Senate.

The voters have spoken on this issue, but the Democrats refuse to listen. Now they want to use this election as yet another referendum on their obstructionism, this time through the use of endless investigations into long-dead issues like the task force. Well, if the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, then Democrats may want to schedule a mental-health screening for their leaders.

Not everything the Democrats propose is crazy, however, and the GOP had better take notice. One proposal, an effort to reinstate spending controls through either tax increases or spending cuts, needs to be addressed by the profligate Republican majority. The GOP has a major vulnerability on spending over the past six years, and they need to put their house in order. Conservatives have long warned about the massive increases in federal spending and the effect they will have on the electorate, especially a disheartened GOP base in the midterms. Porked-up emergency spending bills such as those passed by the Senate last week provide Democrats with gilded examples of Republican irresponsibility, examples which are impossible to defend.

Had the Democrats stuck to fiscal responsibility instead of witch hunts, they may have garnered some support from disillusioned Republicans. Their confident declaration of war should rouse these disaffected voters to return to the Republican Party in November, to keep Congress from bringing this nation to a standstill in the middle of a real war against terrorists.

Saw this yesterday on the net, and about all I can say is that I've NEVER, in watching the political scene for the last 30 years, seen such a self-centered, self-obsessed pack of cretins as the current Democratic party... short of, perhaps, the Perotistas in '92 and '96 - and even then, Perot was running more on a 'boot all the bastards out' sort of platform, instead of 'investigate them into the ground.'

The Dems seem to have completely gone over to taking care of the loony left, instead of examining what's going on and setting their goals and priorities accordingly. As it is, their priorities sure don't seem aimed at doing what's good for the country, or winning the WoT, or making sure our borders are secure, or handling the energy crisis - it's to gain power and wreak revenge on their personal and political enemies - and if it doesn't do anything good for the country that's just too damn bad. I'd expect that sort of childish, revenge-seeking crap from grade schoolers, or maybe high-school cliques or even some of the posters here at PC. But these are grownups, supposedly responsible enough to run the country.

The Dems have fought Bush tooth and nail to avoid any energy reform. They've fought drilling in ANWR and anywhere else in the US territorial waters. They've fought him tooth and nail on homeland security, and the running of the WoT. Social Security's in trouble, and they've been VERY proud of their ability to keep ANY substantial reform from even being considered.

And I'm supposed to believe that by electing them everything's magically supposed to get better? That the energy problems they've spent the last 5 years exacerbating will magically clear up? That Social Security's going to be come solvent for the next 60 years? That Homeland Security's going to become leak-free? All we have to do is trust them with the running of the country?

They really believe we're stupid, and don't remember what they've done to block everything they're complaining about, don't they?

Vote Democratic? I don't THINK so!

Words taken from important people:

Lord Alexander Tytler on the fall of the Athenian republic: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened" (Norman Thomas, 1936 presidential candidate on the Socialist ticket

Lenin once said that "the way to crush the bourgeoisie [the middle class] is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation."


"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the
blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery."
.......Winston Churchill


"Lies come first, and drag along the gullible. Truth limps in long afterward on the arm of time." - Balthazar Gracian

"Does it give you the slightest pause that the goal of the Democrat Party to destroy President of the United States George W. Bush coincides precisely with the goal of global jihadists to destroy the President of the United States George W. Bush?" anon

Hussein Massawi, former leader of Hezbollah, summed it up very pithily: "We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you."

Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve." --George Bernard Shaw

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." --Plato

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything." --G. K. Chesterton

"A man can't be too careful in the choice of his enemies." --Oscar Wilde

"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." --Aesop

"Under every stone lurks a politician." --Aristophanes

"Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" - Plato

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on the frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond words. When I was a boy, we were taught to be discrete and respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise and impatient of restraint." --- Hesiod (ca. 700 BC)

Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -- Louis D. Brandeis, U.S. Supreme Court Justice (1916-1939)

There is much to be said in favour of modern journalism. By giving us the opinions of the uneducated, it keeps us in touch with the ignorance of the community. Oscar Wilde

Trying to determine what is going on in the world by reading newspapers is like trying to tell the time by watching the second hand of a clock.â€--Ben Hecht (1893 - 1964)

"Newspapers are unable, seemingly, to discriminate between a bicycle accident and the collapse of civilization." -- George Bernard Shaw, Irish playwight and critic, 1856-1950

Your failure to be informed, does not make me a wacko. -- John Loeffler

so hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils..........

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hybridHASNOvibe @ May 14 2006, 09:49 AM) [snapback]255149[/snapback]</div>

Are you a little guy that secretly drives a big SUV?

:lol:

 

This seems relevant to the discussion:

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2727144?pg=latest&htv=12

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(theforce @ May 13 2006, 03:58 PM) [snapback]254910[/snapback]</div>

Actually, I think you'll find the President will always take credit for a good economy, and will always deflect blame if the economy goes south. I don't think they have that much impact on the economy by themselves. Government policy can have an impact, through taxes and regulations, but the ironic thing is that most people don't want to see the kinds of incentives that make business happy (one of the major gripes about Republicans is that they are too friendly toward business).

With the Republicans having control of the Senate, the House and the Executive branch, I'm mortified at how unfriendly our country still is toward business. Government has grown greatly, consuming more and more of the GDP, and there are very few voices calling for limited government, simplified taxes, less interference in private affairs and greater personal freedom (which means more freedom to fail; we all want "safety nets").

I'd vote for Bush again given the same choice. And besides, you usually vote not to put the man in office you want, but to prevent the man from taking the office that you definately DON'T want.

Take cheer, though. Your experience is very typical. If you're looking for a job where you earn "big money for doing almost nothing" go on welfare. Its not "big money" but it is, at least, something you can do to get money without doing anything. Every other job requires work, and lots of it, to get ahead. Those people you see who appear to be earning big money probably worked their butts off when they were your age. I know I did, in below-mimimum wage jobs for the first five years, then in progressively better jobs as I got older.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ May 13 2006, 08:20 PM) [snapback]255018[/snapback]</div>

You understand that the tax breaks are proportional to what you pay? If you are only getting back $56, you obviously are not paying your fair share. "Fair share" means that you pay at least what I do each year

You consume the exact same square footage as a human being as a person earning 5 million dollars, who will get back a lot more. Yet he pays from 20 - 35% of his income in taxes. You won't contribute $3 million dollars in taxes in your life. (Actually, I hope both you and I DO have that "problem", but I doubt that I will).

Under the current tax plan, the bottom 50% of wage earners pay only about 4% of the income taxes. At the other end of the scale, the top 25% of wage earners pay a whopping 83% of the income taxes. If you consider someone "rich" if 75% of the rest of the country earn less than them, then they are already paying the most taxes. The top 1% of wage earners pay 35% of the income taxes collected. See http://taxesandgrowth.ncpa.org/hot_issue/share/ for more.

Now, if we want to start taxing "wealth" on a federal level instead of just income, we could see the wealthy pay a much bigger share. The numbers look quite different when you say that the top 5% of wage earners have 59% of the wealth and pay 38.4 percent of federal taxes (see http://www.osjspm.org/101_taxes.htm#7 for the other side of the argument). But taxing wealth rather than income would be a mistake, in my view, because it would discourage savings (your balance in your savings account at year end would be taxed), and encourage non-productive uses of money (shifting accounts out of the country, etc.)

 

If the choices were the same yes, if there was different, maybe not.

HOWEVER, I will NEVER vote democrat because, as a whole, the party is morally bankrupt. I still see honest Republicans all over the place. I have NEVER seen an honorable democrat above county level politics.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ May 14 2006, 03:29 PM) [snapback]255298[/snapback]</div>

Excuse me? People "consume" vastly different amounts of "square footage," largely in accordance with both their income and inherited wealth. And I would have expected a Prius owner to have some awareness of how some people out in the world consume more than others.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ May 14 2006, 12:31 PM) [snapback]255339[/snapback]</div>

Wow, Schmika, that really seems unreasonable coming from a fellow who presents/thinks of himself as a reasonable guy. Clearly, you are seeing what you choose to see. There are good and bad in both parties, both are corrupt - they just pay different pipers. I do wish there were a viable alternative to the two party system. I refuse to throw my vote away for a third party candidate who has no possibility of winning. I think a lot of people learned that as a painful lesson in the 2000 election when they voted for Nader (I was not among them).

I am a registered Democrat and admit that I am to the left of the left of the party, but even I have voted for Republicans before, though admittedly never for president - yet.

Continue to flock-shoot away. I am happy to cancel your vote on a national level, unless we are voting for the same person!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ May 14 2006, 12:46 AM) [snapback]255104[/snapback]</div>

Whoa! Nuts we have plenty of. Where to you propose we get the money to do all this world-housekeeping? Will it come from all the reductions in our taxes?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ May 13 2006, 11:46 PM) [snapback]255104[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ May 14 2006, 02:10 PM) [snapback]255382[/snapback]</div>

And I'd put money on it that he hasn't gone down to the recruiter's office to sign up. All blow and no go.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(seeh2o @ May 14 2006, 06:18 PM) [snapback]255384[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, and let's see pics. of you setting yourself on fire at an anti-war rally, or making a statement like Cindy Sheehan... Post up the number of anti-war rallies you've attended... :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ May 14 2006, 04:31 PM) [snapback]255339[/snapback]</div>

I don't know where you're looking. What's your definition of "honorable," anyway? DeLay?

In the good ol' Commonwealth of Virginia, we have had two very honest AND capable Democrat governors...Mark Warner, and now Tim Kaine.

To me (a registered GDI), the Democratic Party has a better grip on values and morals than the GOP.

I'm hoping to vote for a Mark Warner/Wes Clark ticket in 2008...Warner to fix our fiscal quagmire, and Clark to fix our military quagmire.

It's unbelievable to me that people STILL say they'd vote for Bush again. Talk about sheep. I look at our country, and there is not ONE single thing that is as good or better than it was six years ago. Progress? And don't give me the crap about 9/11 changing everything. It did, that's for sure, making the war in Afghanistan both justified and necessary. But everything else this ridiculous excuse for an adminstration has done has failed miserably...and no one can blame it on anything except incompetence and corruption.

Give me back Clinton. An unjustified war (Iraq, not Afghanistan...yes, Republicans, they are two different countries), lousy tax system, failed education initiative (All Children Left Behind), ridiculous prescription drug plan, totally crappy environmental policy (Clean Skies, my nice person), and focuses on such inane topics as gay marriage...all these dishonorable actions trump a BJ in the oval office any day.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Subversive @ May 14 2006, 01:26 AM) [snapback]255079[/snapback]</div>

And *THAT'S* why I'll never vote for McCain. He was a decent Republican. Now he's just a toady, a sell-out, a dunsel.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ May 14 2006, 04:31 PM) [snapback]255339[/snapback]</div>

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tom DeLay, "Duke" Cunningham, Jack Abramoff, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, etc. etc., etc.
Republicans- the "moral values" party!!!