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.
You are incorrect. What you mean is that your opinion doesn't back up my comments. That's far less interesting and note-worthy than what you claimed (which may be why you decided not to state it that way - you wanted your comments to gather more attention than they were worth), but that's the actual provable content of your message.
The facts, however, do back up my claims. If you want to understand what hard left really means, and you're willing to admit at least to yourself that you've been deceived by the lack of perspective that many right-wing pundits suffer from, then check into Nancy Pelosi. Check into Emanuel Cleaver. Check into Joe Kennedy. That will help you understand the hard left perspective. That, and the realization that there are far fewer people that share your own right-wing perspective than you thought, will help you come to understand that Clinton is very firmly a middle-of-the-road moderate.
Did you even know that Hillary, when her husband first took office, devised some plan of National Health Care, did you know that she became very vocal, that people were asking themselves, "who is President Here, Bill or Hillary?" and she was actually told to shut up?
Clinton himself might have been middle of the road, but he was married to a very powerful hard left...and she wore the pants in the family.
well, if so, then there are a whole lot of other people out there who feel the way I feel...
who are turning towards the middle, and voting independent, b/c they are sick and tired of Washington or our parties throwing us under the bus. They have divided our nation...and they need to be stopped...people have to start wising up and writing they're Congressmen, and letting them know, how we feel...otherwise nothing will change.
And it is high time to put into effect, limited terms for them all...
I'm crazy b/c I believe Republicans have sold us out? Do you even know what is going on?
I think the voters will be looking for a change thus much more conservative much like Reagan after Carter. By the time of the next election consequences for current policies will trickle down in cost to lower incomes. Democrats have no moderate to offer really as they are all retiring before Obama leaves office.
Yes, they are, but they were like this when Obama was voted in. Even I voted for him in his first term, b/c I didn't want any more of Bush's policies, but now, I feel that I was sorely wrong, b/c McCain would have done much better then Obama has...we're all hungry for change, and to see Washington once again, do what is right...they are destroying America...it's not about the left or the right, right now, I liken them to two dirty lawyers fighting each other putting on a show for their clients, and behind doors they are going out for drinks together, laughing about the whole thing.
Did you even know that Hillary, when her husband first took office, devised some plan of National Health Care, did you know that she became very vocal, that people were asking themselves, "who is President Here, Bill or Hillary?" and she was actually told to shut up?
Clinton himself might have been middle of the road, but he was married to a very powerful hard left...and she wore the pants in the family.
Hillary Clinton is an extremist!
Actually the Clinton admin drafted Hillary to head the health care reform "task force". I don't think that makes her an extremist.
I think the voters will be looking for a change thus much more conservative much like Reagan after Carter.
Reagan sold himself as conservative, but he expanded the government and spent like a drunken sailor, which is pretty much the opposite of what a true conservative would do.
Reagan sold himself as conservative, but he expanded the government and spent like a drunken sailor, which is pretty much the opposite of what a true conservative would do.
Yes, he did, however, there was something else with Reagan that people seem to also forget.
Ronald Reagans foreign policy and how during his term or more popularly called "The Reagan
Era" his foreign policy caused terror, murder and ruined a lot of smaller innocent countries all while supporting groups and terror organizations aroundthe world.
Nicaraguan Revolution and how Reagan supported the "Contras" group, which committed horrendous atrocities to the Nicaraguan people and country as a whole. For more info on
the Nicaraguan Revolution, I would suggest reading the Wikipedia article on the subject.
The Contras were a Reagan funded paramilitary group that fought against the FSLN (Sandinista National Liberation Front) during the Revolution. Their group carried tons of human’s rights abuses some of which are the following.
. Targeted health care clinics and health care workers for assassination
. Kidnapping civilians
. Torturing civilians
. Executing civilians, including children, who were captured in combat
. Raping women
. Indiscriminately attacking civilians and civilian houses
. Seizing civilian property
. Burning civilian houses in captured towns
All of these were reported by the Humans Right Watch, and were ignored until a bill passed in congress banning US involvement with the Contras after the International Court of Justice (Nicaragua v. United States) ruled Nicaragua the victor in a human’s rights court case. Even after US involvement was banned, Reagan scandalously and illegally continued to fund the Contras group (I believe it was with taxpayer money, but I could be wrong).
Not only was this move on Reagan's part wrong, it caused the lives of many Nicaraguans to be lost, all so Reagan could prevent a minor socialist revolution in Latin America.
Reagan funded a violent murderous anti-socialist insurgency and I will give you an example of Reagan funding a terrorist organization all for the reason of his personal anti-communist conservative fear.
It all started in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Reagan had the US personally fund, arm and train a militant Islamic insurgency group (Mujahedeen) that would later go on to start the terrorist organization known as the Taliban.
The insurgents eventually pushed out the USSR through the use of bombings, torture and other various forms of urban, mountain and desert guerilla warfare. While the Soviets did there far share of wartime crimes during the Soviet/Afghan invasion, it pales in comparison to the crimes that
the Taliban would later go on to commit on US civilians and soldiers.
Is it any wonder why other countries hate Americans, they actually know more about American government then Americans do.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,326 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomBen
It Really does not matter. If it is an R or D it will be the SOS.
I hope for an (I), Christie's about the only one I see who might possibly pull it off. Otherwise, (DR or (R) it'll be business as usual, party first and the country be damned.
Yes, he did, however, there was something else with Reagan that people seem to also forget.
Ronald Reagans foreign policy and how during his term or more popularly called "The Reagan
Era" his foreign policy caused terror, murder and ruined a lot of smaller innocent countries all while supporting groups and terror organizations aroundthe world.
Nicaraguan Revolution and how Reagan supported the "Contras" group, which committed horrendous atrocities to the Nicaraguan people and country as a whole. For more info on
the Nicaraguan Revolution, I would suggest reading the Wikipedia article on the subject.
The Contras were a Reagan funded paramilitary group that fought against the FSLN (Sandinista National Liberation Front) during the Revolution. Their group carried tons of human’s rights abuses some of which are the following.
. Targeted health care clinics and health care workers for assassination
. Kidnapping civilians
. Torturing civilians
. Executing civilians, including children, who were captured in combat
. Raping women
. Indiscriminately attacking civilians and civilian houses
. Seizing civilian property
. Burning civilian houses in captured towns
All of these were reported by the Humans Right Watch, and were ignored until a bill passed in congress banning US involvement with the Contras after the International Court of Justice (Nicaragua v. United States) ruled Nicaragua the victor in a human’s rights court case. Even after US involvement was banned, Reagan scandalously and illegally continued to fund the Contras group (I believe it was with taxpayer money, but I could be wrong).
Not only was this move on Reagan's part wrong, it caused the lives of many Nicaraguans to be lost, all so Reagan could prevent a minor socialist revolution in Latin America.
Reagan funded a violent murderous anti-socialist insurgency and I will give you an example of Reagan funding a terrorist organization all for the reason of his personal anti-communist conservative fear.
It all started in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Reagan had the US personally fund, arm and train a militant Islamic insurgency group (Mujahedeen) that would later go on to start the terrorist organization known as the Taliban.
The insurgents eventually pushed out the USSR through the use of bombings, torture and other various forms of urban, mountain and desert guerilla warfare. While the Soviets did there far share of wartime crimes during the Soviet/Afghan invasion, it pales in comparison to the crimes that
the Taliban would later go on to commit on US civilians and soldiers.
Is it any wonder why other countries hate Americans, they actually know more about American government then Americans do.
We tripled the national debt during his era, and there was a lot of corruption. We sold missiles to Iran, a sworn enemy of the US, despite of the embargo, and we smuggled cocaine to raise money for terrorists in Nicaragua. Now THAT'S a scandal, and here we are calling for the impeachment of the president because Cincinnati IRS office delayed paperwork......come on now....
Helping the Islamist Mujahedeen in Afghanistan was ok in my view because it had the right intentions.
I hope for an (I), Christie's about the only one I see who might possibly pull it off. Otherwise, (DR or (R) it'll be business as usual, party first and the country be damned.
Christie actually has a fair chance of getting elected especially if he removes the "R" party affiliation. He has support from both "R' and "D" side, and the IND will support him too.
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.
