Soggy in NOLA
Diamond Member
- Jul 31, 2009
- 40,565
- 5,359
- 1,830
You can't continually prop up failing businesses and their bad policies.... then you are just turning them into government lite.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well since the cons want less government it would seem that they would want dems in power.
Well since the cons want less government it would seem that they would want dems in power
Well since the cons want less government it would seem that they would want dems in power
Only to an imbecile would it seem that way. We were disgusted with the whole Bush/McCain Republican model of amnesty, NAFTA and gov't expansion. Obama and the Pelosi gang has only doubled down on this.
I would just ignore rdean. He is an uneducated, knuckle dragging neaderthal whose only purpose in life is to call people names while driving up his blood pressure. Fell pity for him and pray he doesn't stroke out.Found this on another forum.
Ezra Klein - Can Democrats govern?
I really have nothing to add except he's hit the nail on the head.
Stimulus too small? Republicans wanted the country to go bankrupt and the President to fail.
It's harder for Democrats to govern because they are made up of many different groups. Republicans are mostly uneducated white Christians who don't even know what they want. 8 years under Bush proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt. They didn't "govern", they "ruled".
Look at what the conservative Supreme Court just passed. They made corporations "people". Conservatives are dancing in the street. Politicians will now go to the highest bidder. Even out power, they corrupt.
Thank you for pointing out at least one glaring fallacy in the OP. Too small? WTF would you call about 28% of GDP, an unprecedented level of interference by the gov't in the economy?
As for the rest, you continue to prove you have never met a Republican.
And you continue to prove you are an ignorant hack. Corporations having the status of "persons" goes back to the Taft court, at least.
In the case of conservatives governing. Less is much more than what we have had in over 20 years.Well since the cons want less government it would seem that they would want dems in power.
I would just ignore rdean. He is an uneducated, knuckle dragging neaderthal whose only purpose in life is to call people names while driving up his blood pressure. Fell pity for him and pray he doesn't stroke out.Stimulus too small? Republicans wanted the country to go bankrupt and the President to fail.
It's harder for Democrats to govern because they are made up of many different groups. Republicans are mostly uneducated white Christians who don't even know what they want. 8 years under Bush proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt. They didn't "govern", they "ruled".
Look at what the conservative Supreme Court just passed. They made corporations "people". Conservatives are dancing in the street. Politicians will now go to the highest bidder. Even out power, they corrupt.
Thank you for pointing out at least one glaring fallacy in the OP. Too small? WTF would you call about 28% of GDP, an unprecedented level of interference by the gov't in the economy?
As for the rest, you continue to prove you have never met a Republican.
And you continue to prove you are an ignorant hack. Corporations having the status of "persons" goes back to the Taft court, at least.
I'll be ambassador to the United Nations.
I've thought for some time now that for the most part give or take a few issues here and there most people want the same things. They want freedom, security, good health, and the chance to provide a good life for themselves and their loved ones. Take healthcare for example, I have always belived that as a people Americans are giving and do not want to see their fellow citizens suffer. They want access to affordable healthcare, they want healthcare that is high quality and the ability to make the choice for themselves and their famailies whats best for them. Where many of those that represent us on both sides of the Isle tend to go wrong is that rather than focus on the things that most Americans believe in and build a firm foundation from there, they would rather listen not to those that vote for them but special interests groups that tell them how to feel. Take your pick on the party doesn't matter, in this they are both the same. Take Defense for example on the one hand you have citizens that want safety and security and want your troops to have the VERY best in terms of providing that, however most people would agree that if those troops are advising those that represent us we have enough of this, and not enough of that they would listen. These are foundations for good Govt. one that is responsible for the people they represent and the constitution they take an oath for, not the party they happen to belong too. When this happens maybe just maybe we might have a Govt. that watches out for the bottom line, and starts to put the needs of this nation FIRST, in terms of jobs, security, healthcare, take your pick.
Wrong again Sparky.... We saw Kerry as a pretty crappy alternative. And, given his posturing on every major issue since, we were right. Had there been a substantive and formidable alternative to Bush that would have been more to my liking, I'd have gone for themThe re-election of Bush would seem to indicate that
I've thought for some time now that for the most part give or take a few issues here and there most people want the same things. They want freedom, security, good health, and the chance to provide a good life for themselves and their loved ones. Take healthcare for example, I have always belived that as a people Americans are giving and do not want to see their fellow citizens suffer. They want access to affordable healthcare, they want healthcare that is high quality and the ability to make the choice for themselves and their famailies whats best for them. Where many of those that represent us on both sides of the Isle tend to go wrong is that rather than focus on the things that most Americans believe in and build a firm foundation from there, they would rather listen not to those that vote for them but special interests groups that tell them how to feel. Take your pick on the party doesn't matter, in this they are both the same. Take Defense for example on the one hand you have citizens that want safety and security and want your troops to have the VERY best in terms of providing that, however most people would agree that if those troops are advising those that represent us we have enough of this, and not enough of that they would listen. These are foundations for good Govt. one that is responsible for the people they represent and the constitution they take an oath for, not the party they happen to belong too. When this happens maybe just maybe we might have a Govt. that watches out for the bottom line, and starts to put the needs of this nation FIRST, in terms of jobs, security, healthcare, take your pick.
You're talking about Democrats, not Republicans.
Aha! I knew you had never met a Republican. Ask me how I know.I would just ignore rdean. He is an uneducated, knuckle dragging neaderthal whose only purpose in life is to call people names while driving up his blood pressure. Fell pity for him and pray he doesn't stroke out.Thank you for pointing out at least one glaring fallacy in the OP. Too small? WTF would you call about 28% of GDP, an unprecedented level of interference by the gov't in the economy?
As for the rest, you continue to prove you have never met a Republican.
And you continue to prove you are an ignorant hack. Corporations having the status of "persons" goes back to the Taft court, at least.
I'll be ambassador to the United Nations.
May the wind at your back always be your own.
My blood pressure is fine. I admit I don't know many Republicans. The ones I do know are ashamed of the Tea Baggers. Ashamed of Bush. Ashamed of Iraq. They seem to be Republicans because their parents are or were.
So you admit that it's a "good" thing that corporations can show political ads during campaigns? After all, they have lots of money. Hey, why not just let them "govern"?
So, you don't know any Conservatives at all, and those you know who claim to be Republicans really aren't.I would just ignore rdean. He is an uneducated, knuckle dragging neaderthal whose only purpose in life is to call people names while driving up his blood pressure. Fell pity for him and pray he doesn't stroke out.Thank you for pointing out at least one glaring fallacy in the OP. Too small? WTF would you call about 28% of GDP, an unprecedented level of interference by the gov't in the economy?
As for the rest, you continue to prove you have never met a Republican.
And you continue to prove you are an ignorant hack. Corporations having the status of "persons" goes back to the Taft court, at least.
I'll be ambassador to the United Nations.
May the wind at your back always be your own.
My blood pressure is fine. I admit I don't know many Republicans. The ones I do know are ashamed of the Tea Baggers. Ashamed of Bush. Ashamed of Iraq. They seem to be Republicans because their parents are or were.
So you admit that it's a "good" thing that corporations can show political ads during campaigns? After all, they have lots of money. Hey, why not just let them "govern"?