Does the truth hurt?

[miami_thomas]

If Democrats did not play to the races, would those races that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the gays, would the gays that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the Jewish, would the Jewish that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the Muslims, would the Muslims that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the poor, would the poor that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the middle class, would the middle class that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the atheists, would the atheists that want to be played still vote for Democrats?

Would the Democrats just based on actual policies ever be able to win a single election? I’m guessing someday soon we will find out. That is because all the playing is becoming more difficult. With the cell phone videos, utube, twitter, and all the social advances, Democrats are finding it much more difficult to tell their lies. They are constantly starting to be caught in their playing and being shown who they really are. Then they have to tell more lies to cover up the lies and even though they still have a willing mainstream media and academia willing to cover for them the lies are still getting exposed. I believe it is only a matter of time before things collapse within the party. Question is will it be reborn with the same name or will there be an all new party all together.

 

[candycorn]

If Democrats did not play to the races, would those races that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the gays, would the gays that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the Jewish, would the Jewish that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the Muslims, would the Muslims that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the poor, would the poor that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the middle class, would the middle class that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the atheists, would the atheists that want to be played still vote for Democrats?

Would the Democrats just based on actual policies ever be able to win a single election? I’m guessing someday soon we will find out. That is because all the playing is becoming more difficult. With the cell phone videos, utube, twitter, and all the social advances, Democrats are finding it much more difficult to tell their lies. They are constantly starting to be caught in their playing and being shown who they really are. Then they have to tell more lies to cover up the lies and even though they still have a willing mainstream media and academia willing to cover for them the lies are still getting exposed. I believe it is only a matter of time before things collapse within the party. Question is will it be reborn with the same name or will there be an all new party all together.

Obama is cruising.

Why is that so? Nobody can figure out what the GOP is for. Romney's medicare plan isn't complete--60 days prior to the election. Here is a quote from his website "detailing" FAQ's about his voucher system:

How high will the premium support be? How quickly will it grow?

Mitt continues to work on refining the details of his plan, and he is exploring different options for ensuring that future seniors receive the premium support they need while also ensuring that competitive pressures encourage providers to improve quality and control cost. His goal is for Medicare to offer every senior affordable options that provide coverage and service at least as good as what today’s seniors receive. Lower income seniors in the future will receive the most generous benefits to ensure that they are able to get care every bit as good as that provided in the current Medicare program.

He doesn't know.

Where is the Governor's stand on abortion? His website says he wants to overturn Roe.
Here he was in 1994...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECVyuz5iNyQ]Kennedy Destroys Romney In 1994 Debate - YouTube[/ame]

"I sustain and support that law"---Romney on Roe.

Your post is, quite frankly, shit. The GOP has become the party of playing to the crowd; so much so that the #2 on the ticket (no pun intended)...his only contribution to the national dialogue in 13 years--his budget--had to be tossed out because it was such an albatross.

 

[miami_thomas]

If Democrats did not play to the races, would those races that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the gays, would the gays that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the Jewish, would the Jewish that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the Muslims, would the Muslims that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the poor, would the poor that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the middle class, would the middle class that want to be played still vote for Democrats? If Democrats did not play to the atheists, would the atheists that want to be played still vote for Democrats?

Would the Democrats just based on actual policies ever be able to win a single election? I’m guessing someday soon we will find out. That is because all the playing is becoming more difficult. With the cell phone videos, utube, twitter, and all the social advances, Democrats are finding it much more difficult to tell their lies. They are constantly starting to be caught in their playing and being shown who they really are. Then they have to tell more lies to cover up the lies and even though they still have a willing mainstream media and academia willing to cover for them the lies are still getting exposed. I believe it is only a matter of time before things collapse within the party. Question is will it be reborn with the same name or will there be an all new party all together.

Obama is cruising.

Why is that so? Nobody can figure out what the GOP is for. Romney's medicare plan isn't complete--60 days prior to the election. Here is a quote from his website "detailing" FAQ's about his voucher system:

How high will the premium support be? How quickly will it grow?

Mitt continues to work on refining the details of his plan, and he is exploring different options for ensuring that future seniors receive the premium support they need while also ensuring that competitive pressures encourage providers to improve quality and control cost. His goal is for Medicare to offer every senior affordable options that provide coverage and service at least as good as what today’s seniors receive. Lower income seniors in the future will receive the most generous benefits to ensure that they are able to get care every bit as good as that provided in the current Medicare program.

He doesn't know.

Where is the Governor's stand on abortion? His website says he wants to overturn Roe.
Here he was in 1994...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECVyuz5iNyQ]Kennedy Destroys Romney In 1994 Debate - YouTube[/ame]

"I sustain and support that law"---Romney on Roe.

Your post is, quite frankly, shit. The GOP has become the party of playing to the crowd; so much so that the #2 on the ticket (no pun intended)...his only contribution to the national dialogue in 13 years--his budget--had to be tossed out because it was such an albatross.

Obama is cruising down the polls.


Maybe Mitt is being a politician and doing what the voters want. This government is for the people by the people. I know Democrats want it for the Government by the Government but it is not there yet and I doubt it ever will be in this country. At least I hope not. But because the Democrats did not listen to the people in the first two years was the beginning of the end for the Democrats.

 

[naturegirl]

I just hope one day those on the left will realize pandering does nothing to help them, it's all rhetoric and bullsh*t to get their vote.

What good does it do for me to bring a bunch of people from every ethnic background together and lie to them so they'll work for me. I can promise them the moon but if I have no clue how to harness it, it means nothing, it's just words, words they want to hear.

Now here's the catch, what are you gonna do with that moon if you manage to harness it?? Dems don't think about the future, today is all that matters, the H*ll with future generations.

 

[miami_thomas]

I just hope one day those on the left will realize pandering does nothing to help them, it's all rhetoric and bullsh*t to get their vote.

What good does it do for me to bring a bunch of people from every ethnic background together and lie to them so they'll work for me. I can promise them the moon but if I have no clue how to harness it, it means nothing, it's just words, words they want to hear.

Now here's the catch, what are you gonna do with that moon if you manage to harness it?? Dems don't think about the future, today is all that matters, the H*ll with future generations.

I disagree I think the Elites never plan on getting the moon. They just want to promise it. Once they have what they want and the constitution is dead and the government runs everything is all that matter. They will say the ends justify the means. They just want their “Hunger Games” so the citizens give based on their ability to the elites needs.

 

[Seawytch]

As someone who is gay, I don't feel "pandered" to, especially since this President has ended DADT, refused to defend the horrible DOMA and a bunch of other things that helps LGBT families.

 

[miami_thomas]

As someone who is gay, I don't feel "pandered" to, especially since this President has ended DADT, refused to defend the horrible DOMA and a bunch of other things that helps LGBT families.

That is pandering. It is not giving but promising. They can’t give you all those things or they will offend the others they pander to. They pander to tell you why you need the government but if they actually take care of those things then you don’t need them anymore and they will never reach what they really want and that is full government control.

 

[Liberal]

I smell desperation...

When you compare the two parties it "looks" like Dems are pandering, when in reality they are emboldening these minorities through recognition and support.

Republican neocons tried to get vote purges to remove voters whom "coincidentally" happened to be mostly minority voters and Dems came in to point it out.

I can see how some people may confuse this for pandering to evil minorities, especially when you sprinkle a little racism and butt hurt in the mix.

 

[Seawytch]

As someone who is gay, I don't feel "pandered" to, especially since this President has ended DADT, refused to defend the horrible DOMA and a bunch of other things that helps LGBT families.

That is pandering. It is not giving but promising. They can’t give you all those things or they will offend the others they pander to. They pander to tell you why you need the government but if they actually take care of those things then you don’t need them anymore and they will never reach what they really want and that is full government control.

DADT is ended. The DOJ is NOT defending DOMA. Gays can visit their families in the hospital. We get Family Leave if we work for the Federal Government. Those aren't promises but ACTIONS. There is a clear distinction between the two candidates for the LGBT voter.

 

[miami_thomas]

I smell desperation...

When you compare the two parties it "looks" like Dems are pandering, when in reality they are emboldening these minorities through recognition and support.

Republican neocons tried to get vote purges to remove voters whom "coincidentally" happened to be mostly minority voters and Dems came in to point it out.

I can see how some people may confuse this for pandering to evil minorities, especially when you sprinkle a little racism and butt hurt in the mix.

They are pandering and there is no other name for it. The purge is of non-citizens out of the polls so of course most would be minorities though not all are. As far as the requiring ID goes makes sense. ID cards are pretty much required for everything. You mean that requiring people to show ID for cigarettes or alcohol is racist? It is amazing how brain washed some Democrats are. Do you really not analyze things that you are told before passing it on?

Democrats don’t want to fix the problems in fact racism was well on its way out when in 1993 Democrats changed directions and started promoting the whole division thing. That is when they started pushing the “African-American” instead of just American. They need division or they would never get elected.

 

[miami_thomas]

As someone who is gay, I don't feel "pandered" to, especially since this President has ended DADT, refused to defend the horrible DOMA and a bunch of other things that helps LGBT families.

That is pandering. It is not giving but promising. They can’t give you all those things or they will offend the others they pander to. They pander to tell you why you need the government but if they actually take care of those things then you don’t need them anymore and they will never reach what they really want and that is full government control.

DADT is ended. The DOJ is NOT defending DOMA. Gays can visit their families in the hospital. We get Family Leave if we work for the Federal Government. Those aren't promises but ACTIONS. There is a clear distinction between the two candidates for the LGBT voter.

As far as the marriage act most republicans have a problem with it because marriage is a religious thing. It has nothing to do with gays in general. The fix would either for the government to stop recognizing marriage all together and leave that to the privacy of individuals or to change the marriage term to unions. Make everyone unions under the government instead of marriage.

My company allows for unions for some things not just for gays but even those of us that don’t want to get married. But it is a battle for all and it will be won slowly. But trying to use government to force the issue is not the answer. When government gets into the business of forcing things can go wrong.

When you want the government to do things for you then you are asking government to force it on everyone else. Sure it is what you want but it is still taking someone else’s freedom away. People used to use the government to try and force gays to not be gay. Society was able to eventually end that but now gays want government to force everyone to accept them. Who is wrong here?

 

[Liberal]

They are pandering and there is no other name for it. The purge is of non-citizens out of the polls so of course most would be minorities though not all are. As far as the requiring ID goes makes sense. ID cards are pretty much required for everything. You mean that requiring people to show ID for cigarettes or alcohol is racist? It is amazing how brain washed some Democrats are. Do you really not analyze things that you are told before passing it on?

The voters that were purged were not all illegal or dead, infact they are not finding very many iilegal citizens at all. (link goes to story)

But, there is a serious question that come s along with the whole issue: Why do the purge so close to an election? By the time citizens got word that they were purged it would be pretty hard to get everything in order in time to vote? Add the fact that many were considered poor, some may not have the facilities and transportation to get it done in a timely manner.

Is that acceptable or fair to those whom are not illegal, but got purged?

Same thing for ID cards, why enforce or pass laws so close to an election? Why not try and be fair to give people enough time to get things in order?

 

[rightwinger]

I just hope one day those on the left will realize pandering does nothing to help them, it's all rhetoric and bullsh*t to get their vote.

What good does it do for me to bring a bunch of people from every ethnic background together and lie to them so they'll work for me. I can promise them the moon but if I have no clue how to harness it, it means nothing, it's just words, words they want to hear.

Now here's the catch, what are you gonna do with that moon if you manage to harness it?? Dems don't think about the future, today is all that matters, the H*ll with future generations.

Who do Republicans pander to?

The one percent who buy elections

 

[miami_thomas]

They are pandering and there is no other name for it. The purge is of non-citizens out of the polls so of course most would be minorities though not all are. As far as the requiring ID goes makes sense. ID cards are pretty much required for everything. You mean that requiring people to show ID for cigarettes or alcohol is racist? It is amazing how brain washed some Democrats are. Do you really not analyze things that you are told before passing it on?

The voters that were purged were not all illegal or dead, infact they are not finding very many iilegal citizens at all. (link goes to story)

But, there is a serious question that come s along with the whole issue: Why do the purge so close to an election? By the time citizens got word that they were purged it would be pretty hard to get everything in order in time to vote? Add the fact that many were considered poor, some may not have the facilities and transportation to get it done in a timely manner.

Is that acceptable or fair to those whom are not illegal, but got purged?

Same thing for ID cards, why enforce or pass laws so close to an election? Why not try and be fair to give people enough time to get things in order?

First the purge and the ID cards was not so close to the election. Remember the elections are every two years. With all the politics involved it took nearly a year to get them through then you had the political attorney general challenging every one of them so that further delayed their implementation. I have always had to have an ID to vote so to all of a sudden pretend it is racist is just plain dumb.

Second as far as the first purge went. I live in Florida so we followed it from its inception. The lovely political ICE under Obama refused to allow them to use their databases to do the purge. So the first purge was not accurate at all. Then just recently they allow Florida to use their data to do the purge.

 

[Old Rocks]

As Paul Weyrich stated, the GOP does not want people to vote. And intends to impede in any manner possible their being able to vote.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw]Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[miami_thomas]

I just hope one day those on the left will realize pandering does nothing to help them, it's all rhetoric and bullsh*t to get their vote.

What good does it do for me to bring a bunch of people from every ethnic background together and lie to them so they'll work for me. I can promise them the moon but if I have no clue how to harness it, it means nothing, it's just words, words they want to hear.

Now here's the catch, what are you gonna do with that moon if you manage to harness it?? Dems don't think about the future, today is all that matters, the H*ll with future generations.

Who do Republicans pander to?

The one percent who buy elections

You win the grand prize. You brought up the Democrat pandering to the poor and the middle class. Trust me no matter how much they raise the visible tax it will never impact actual revenues. Why you ask? Because it simply modifies behavior and obviously everyone knows this all too well as they use it to influence the purchasing of cigarettes, sugar, etc…. The tax attorneys (that are 99% Democrats) will simply help the rich find somewhere else to hide their money. Isn’t it funny how that works out huh?

 

[miami_thomas]

As Paul Weyrich stated, the GOP does not want people to vote. And intends to impede in any manner possible their being able to vote.

Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube

Therefore it must be true.

 

[Liberal]

The tax attorneys (that are 99% Democrats) will simply help the rich find somewhere else to hide their money. Isn’t it funny how that works out huh?

Got a link providing proof?

I suppose they are teh jooz too.. Eh?

 

[Seawytch]

That is pandering. It is not giving but promising. They can’t give you all those things or they will offend the others they pander to. They pander to tell you why you need the government but if they actually take care of those things then you don’t need them anymore and they will never reach what they really want and that is full government control.

DADT is ended. The DOJ is NOT defending DOMA. Gays can visit their families in the hospital. We get Family Leave if we work for the Federal Government. Those aren't promises but ACTIONS. There is a clear distinction between the two candidates for the LGBT voter.

As far as the marriage act most republicans have a problem with it because marriage is a religious thing. It has nothing to do with gays in general. The fix would either for the government to stop recognizing marriage all together and leave that to the privacy of individuals or to change the marriage term to unions. Make everyone unions under the government instead of marriage.

My company allows for unions for some things not just for gays but even those of us that don’t want to get married. But it is a battle for all and it will be won slowly. But trying to use government to force the issue is not the answer. When government gets into the business of forcing things can go wrong.

When you want the government to do things for you then you are asking government to force it on everyone else. Sure it is what you want but it is still taking someone else’s freedom away. People used to use the government to try and force gays to not be gay. Society was able to eventually end that but now gays want government to force everyone to accept them. Who is wrong here?

Giving all people the SAME EXACT rights is not "forcing" anything on you.

 

[miami_thomas]

The tax attorneys (that are 99% Democrats) will simply help the rich find somewhere else to hide their money. Isn’t it funny how that works out huh?

Got a link providing proof?

I suppose they are teh jooz too.. Eh?

Trial lawyers find that generosity to Democrats pays big dividends | Texans for Lawsuit Reform

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/16/why-liberals-are-lawyers-puppets/