Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Agreed. Both parties are in the pocket of those whose intent is to bring down America. Vote against every incumbent, every time, forever. Make it too costly for them to buy candidates.
That is why I will be voting for Ron Paul he can't be bought and if anything he is selling the message of liberty I will take that over corrupt people in washington and tryanny.
Would going back to the Articles of Confederation suffice?
nope the constitution does perfectly fine
the 10th amendment (part of the bill of rights)
""""The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.""""
What this means for the future is we're doomed. Of course, after the damage of the Bush administration we were most likely doomed anyway. The word I would use to describe Obama these days would be wimp.
I cannot believe he thinks the lower and middle classes haven't suffered enough. I still listen to people like Ed Schultz, but I also realize these liberal talk show hosts are forced to continue to defend him. That is how they make their living.
Anyway, I'm disgusted. Are there any liberals out there who can change my mind? I do not need to hear "we told you so" from those on the right, as it was your party who brought the country down.
Since when has there ever been a liberal that had the answers? It's a mindset. Liberalism is just a bad thing for the country as a whole.
It's not "scorched earth" these are targeted, rare instances where Dems need to find some spine and think strategically.
I'm talking Obama in this one instance and a 2 or 3 Senators that need to lose.
You'd be amazed what this would signal to would be backstabers in the future.
You keep bringing up this method of moving Democrats further liberal, by sending a message with a non-vote.
Can you point to an example when "punishing" a not-liberal-enough politician (especially a president) by letting them lose resulted in a more liberal one being elected later on - as a result of a candidate moving more left in response, or the party nominating a more liberal candidate in response (not a result, say, of society being more liberal several decades later)?
You can't blame him for the meltdown, but can blame him for not doing enough in his stimulus bill.
Furthermore, he's pivoted 180 degrees and embraced right wing Hooverism where he is fully on board with cutting middle class benefits, not taxing the rich, and cutting government spending in the middle of a downturn. He's doing nothing for a serious jobs program either.
Clinton was re-elected twice (with no Supreme Court involved nor Diebold) and left us with a surplus. That is worth noticing.
It's not worth noticing because there was no "surplus" as the figures in post #98 show.
Also, no Supreme Court was involved because the losing candidate accept defeat, unlike a certain Democrat candidate in the 2000 election.
That's a fairly shortsighted view of events leading up to problems the U.S. is facing today. But you can start with government growth and regulations as far back as LBJ and his Great Society.
So if you want to bash and blame... start with LBJ, then include EVERY Congressional session since. 'Cause that's how we got here.
I did start with LBJ in this thread or another. I am not quite sure what your point is. I am not bashing or blaming. I am saying he did not uphold his commitments with the exception of healthcare reform. I'm grateful for that, but the wars count every bit as much.
What this means for the future is we're doomed. Of course, after the damage of the Bush administration we were most likely doomed anyway. The word I would use to describe Obama these days would be wimp.
I cannot believe he thinks the lower and middle classes haven't suffered enough. I still listen to people like Ed Schultz, but I also realize these liberal talk show hosts are forced to continue to defend him. That is how they make their living.
Anyway, I'm disgusted. Are there any liberals out there who can change my mind? I do not need to hear "we told you so" from those on the right, as it was your party who brought the country down.
I did start with LBJ in this thread or another. I am not quite sure what your point is. I am not bashing or blaming. I am saying he did not uphold his commitments with the exception of healthcare reform. I'm grateful for that, but the wars count every bit as much.
Did you ever consider that if employers were not concerned about Obamamcare they might be hiring???
Maybe you could get a job along with many others.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
