Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-27-2007, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Spots Wyoming
18,700 posts, read 42,057,790 times
Reputation: 2147483647

Advertisements

I truly believe that whoever is in office is going to catch blame. I mean, we have to have somebody to point at and unfortunately it's the pres most of the time. WMD in Iraq? We point at Bush when in fact it was his advisors that told him they were there and he listened. Some of his advisors actually stepped forward and admitted they were wrong, but we still point at Bush and accuse him of putting us in harms way.

I think we should judge Presidents by how little negativity we point out. haha
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-27-2007, 06:41 PM
 
Location: Your mind
2,935 posts, read 4,999,520 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by silas777 View Post
Funny, that relationship between weed and politics! I used to think Jimmy Carter was smart because he was for legalizing weed! WOW, Thank god I grew up!
I think that most conservatives would be more favorable to a relationship between weed and politics if such a relationship could be proven to be heterosexual. Since the two items have no sexual identity it might be that the right is opposed to such a relationship between the two because of the possible "interpolitiweedical marriages" possibly laying the groundwork for the legalization of other, "improper" relationships, such as that between a man and a sofa, or a goose and a duck (the horror!) The only way to solve this is to modify the English language to be more like Spanish, where every noun is given a "gender identity..." we could have "la politica" and "el weedo" or something so that the two could then be masculine on one hand and feminine on the other in order that they may be wed in holy matrimony.

Otherwise soon there shall be banners, "Marriage is between a man and a woman, not between a Plant and a Politics! God made Adam and Eve, not John Adams + Weed! Stop immorality in its tracks before our traditional values are dismantled by unholy relationships!" Tom Tancredo and the other far right presidential candidates can be expected to take up the cause immediately in order to garner points from their constituency. GWB will call for a constitutional amendment to make relationships between Politics-es and weeds (whether the smokable variety or the kind that chokes your flowers out) illegal, in order to protect the sanctity of marriage and preserve the moral fabric of society. Massachussets and Vermont will be the only states to defy the ruling, while Alabama, Mississipi, and Texas will enforce the new law with "The Chair" as the penalty.

Para evitar este es necesario hacer algo tan drastico que sus amigos pierden las cabezas en un mundo de las vacas de la infertilidad. Tan drastico que los hombres de las montanas cortan el pello y estudian el Telletubies para saber que Jerry Fallwell vive en las corazones de millones de personas de los Estados Unidos, de Mexico, y de Mars. AYAYAY.

Last edited by fishmonger; 05-27-2007 at 07:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2007, 07:19 PM
 
1,028 posts, read 2,338,324 times
Reputation: 392
Same here, I voted GOP (I don't consider myself "Republican" but non-religious conservative bordering on libertarian). The GOP of the past five years, at least the Rove GOP is no better than the Dems. Fiscal irresponsibility, enriching the few, catering to special interests. It starts with the extreme alliance with religious conservatives but expands into the suspicious level of corporate enrichment that suggests corruption.

I wonder if I should join the GOP simply to trigger an ideological war within it. If you want a legitimate, ethical counterbalance to the corrupt oligarchy of power (lobbyists-Dems-Reps), you have to infect at least one of them and bring them down from within.

There are members of the GOP who were sooo greedy for power that they sacrificed their principles. They don't stand for me. If you care about fiscal responsibility, restrained government across the board (including restraint when it comes to spiritual issues), etc, instead of running away, stand up to the sob's who've hijacked the party. "Let's Roll."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2007, 10:01 PM
 
Location: N.H.
1,022 posts, read 3,475,624 times
Reputation: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishmonger View Post
Para evitar este es necesario hacer algo tan drastico que sus amigos pierden las cabezas en un mundo de las vacas de la infertilidad. Tan drastico que los hombres de las montanas cortan el pello y estudian el Telletubies para saber que Jerry Fallwell vive en las corazones de millones de personas de los Estados Unidos, de Mexico, y de Mars. AYAYAY.
Please Type English LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2007, 12:36 AM
 
Location: Northeast
1,300 posts, read 2,613,423 times
Reputation: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marks View Post
That is so true. Both are a nightmare
Except one has been in control 6 months, the other 6 years.

You guys had the opportunity to make it right after four years, but still screwed it up. Considering the majority of Republicans weren't smart enough to correctly judge Bush in 2004, any comments on a Democrat controlled congress after 6 months are worth about as much as Dick Cheney's shooting skills.

~T
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2007, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
7,731 posts, read 13,428,520 times
Reputation: 5983
I think that Republicans will have a hard time getting into ny office even though it was the fault of George Bush.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2007, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Maine
22,920 posts, read 28,268,441 times
Reputation: 31244
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremeyk482 View Post
Any fellow Republicans?
I'm a former Republican. Does that count?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2007, 10:33 PM
 
9 posts, read 15,654 times
Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evlevo View Post
But I gave up on them in about 2003.

They no longer stood for what is important to me

*Deficit reduction

*Less Bureaucracy

*Prosperity for all (or at least all but the lazy SOB's)

*Honesty and Integrity

I think saddling up with the Religious Right was the beginning of the end.
How on earth would the religious right impact any of the above issues? That's just goofy. No socially conservative issues have been addressed in this administration. I am a social conservative, not radical just conservative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2007, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,778,277 times
Reputation: 24863
I figure every lazy SOB (insert welfare cheat etc) in this country could be supported in a fine fashion on the money the Bush regime has borrowed from the banks (China) and given to Corporate America in the last 6 years. This economy will be destroyed, if it is not already, by the excesses of government (I mean Republican) spending on just military contracting let alone the absurdities of Homeland Security.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2007, 07:05 AM
 
7,381 posts, read 7,692,666 times
Reputation: 1266
I too was once a Rep., socially and fiscally conservative. I became disillusioned in the early 90's because of the compromising of principles by the Reps in power. Granted, to stay in power, the Reps were required to act like Dems by bying votes and promising everything to everybody. This is not cheap and increased the budget and the deficit. After the "Rep Revolution" in '96, I had hope that things would change, but we all know the outcome of that experiment. These events only confirmed my suspicions that the Reps hadn't the desire nor had the convictions to be true to the principles that supposedly made up the earlier Rep. party platform.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top