The "death" of the Republican Party will "save" America.

[JoeB131]

I'll bet you do wish you were in a union. They protect the lazy and incompetent.

And, this is where you really fit in: They dictate your opinions to you.

Not really. I know union guys who are voting for Romney, not realizing they are probably going to take away their nice union jobs... So not only don't the unions tell them what to think, they don't even make convincing cases they're voting against their own interests.

But to the point, sorry, in the 20 years since I left the Army, the biggest incompetence I've seen is in management.

Like the two brothers who ran the company into the ground a year after their parents left it to them...

Or the company that made 10 year decisions on the basis of a three year non-renewable contract.

Never lost a job due to my own actions... Never got a review that was less than exemplary... and never worked in a place where I didn't move up and get greater responsibility as time went on. I'm up for a promotion now.

So if you want to nurse your losses in rhetoric with the belief I'm a bad person, feel free.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

I'm not going to wade through all your verbal diarhea... but this is just a silly statement..

As to the subject of the thread: the fact of the matter is that it is the Democratic Party that has experienced the greater decline during the last four decades, not only losing its decades-long lock on Congress, but losing most of the congressional and senatorial elections in recent decades, the result being that Republicans have mostly controlled Congress ever since. Indeed, Republicans are poised to increase their hold on the House and take back the Senate once again in November regardless of who wins the presidential election.

This is nonsense. Democrats won four of the last five popular votes for President. (Sorry, the Democrat won the vote in 2000. Look it up.)

Congressional elections aren't telling because those districts are heavily Gerrymandered... And this is part of the problem. There really are never any more than 100 House seats and 10 Senate Seats that are really ever in play at any given election cycle.

The Republicans should have gained control of the Senate this year because the Democrats took control in 2006. But because of Akin idiocy about "legitimate rape", Hoekstra's racist "Debbie Spend it now" commercial and a few other flubs, the Dems have a good shot at maintaining control.

No. You're full of crap, as we all can see. You're obfuscating. I never said anything about presidential elections in this regard, let alone anything about Gore winning the popular vote in 2000, as if I were not aware of that, as if that were not the whole point of the contested 2000 election and Bush's Electoral College victory via the state of Florida, as if I had to look anything up.

Shut up!

As for presidential elections: Republicans have won the popular vote four times out of the last eight elections and on average by wider margins, and have won the electoral vote five times out of those same eight during the period about which I am talking. Clinton would have lost his first race had that nincompoop Perot not been in the race, by the way. That's five total Republican terms to three total Democratic terms, 3 Republican presidents versus 2 Democratic presidents.

Further, you unwittingly acknowledge that I am right about Republicans mostly controlling Congress in recent decades with your gerrymandering tripe, which hardly accounts for this dramatic historical shift, yet characterize this observation as nonsense in your opening salvo. So which is it?

Clearly, there is nothing nonsensical about the historical observation in and of itself. It's an objective, indisputable fact of recent history. Your blather about gerrymandering is another matter altogether, an attempt to explain the reason for this shift however silly, given that a party must first gain hegemony at the state level before it can attempt to entrench its hegemony.

Further, both Republicans and Democrats who closely follow the dynamics of elections did not expect Republicans to win Congress back in 2006 or 2008. What they expected, as things developed, was that the Republicans would win back the House in 2010, which they did hands down, and might win back the Senate, if not in 2010, then in 2012. There's no "should" that you speak of in recent elections regarding the Senate. You just made that up. Whether they can win the Senate back in November has indeed been undermined by flubs. We shall see. But don't tell me that my basic observation is wrong when it most certainly is not.

The whys of it are an entirely different matter.

 

[Harry Dresden]

You never give up your right to complain.

as long as you get out there and vote.....

Your right to complain can never be taken away. Vote or don't vote, your rights are still your rights.

im talking basically about a Citizen who complains about something being passed,and then you find he did not vote......i always say,you did not participate in the process.....then dont bitch about it....

 

[Harry Dresden]

So what you are complaining about is that a Union Boss makes ten times what an average worker makes, but the average worker is probably good with that because they pull down good money.

As opposed to corporations, where the CEO's pull down 400 times what a line worker makes, and they try to balance their budgets on the backs of working folks.

And I'll bet you still don't understand why we have a holiday tomorrow to remind us of what they fought for.

Oh, I understand it. Probably better than you.

Nevertheless, your apology for your union masters is noted. Not at all surprising, really.

You don't mind being shackled when it's the union chaining you up.

Dude, I wish I was in a fuckin' union. Good benefits, good pay, bosses can't screw with you unnecessarily....

Ten years ago, I wouldn't have said that. But all it really takes is one truly shitty boss to show you why unions are needed.

which is why they are still needed where i work.....the PO....only there are more than one shitty boss there......

 

[JoeB131]

If you don't have the intellectual honesty to see that Gerrymandering distorts congressional pictures, then I'm really not sure what to say to you.

Fact is, Republicans are on a Demagraphic decline. They've completely alienated blacks, they've largely alienated hispanics, and young people don't identify with it as a party. This is poison for a poltiical party.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The thread title should read, 'The death of both Parties will save America.'

That's a naive thought. Go ahead and destroy both parties, guess what will happen. The people that supported those parties will prop up people just like them and we'll be right back where we started. It's the same as RDean's idiotic op. Destroying the GOP won't do a damn thing. Conservative minded people will still exist and will just make another party exactly like the GOP.

The only thing that can save this country is for the american people to start caring more about their country than they do partisan politics. The GOP is giving a prime example of this right now. It doesn't matter how bad their nominee would be for the country, all they care about is partisan politics and beating the opposition party. Granted, democrats are no better, but right now it's the GOP displaying this idiocy.

maybe.....but perhaps the ones who will grab control have learned something.....

 

[Mac1958]

.

Yeah, I definitely have to vote, I bitch up a freakin' storm.

.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Oh, I understand it. Probably better than you.

Nevertheless, your apology for your union masters is noted. Not at all surprising, really.

You don't mind being shackled when it's the union chaining you up.

Dude, I wish I was in a fuckin' union. Good benefits, good pay, bosses can't screw with you unnecessarily....

Ten years ago, I wouldn't have said that. But all it really takes is one truly shitty boss to show you why unions are needed.

I'll bet you do wish you were in a union. They protect the lazy and incompetent.

And, this is where you really fit in: They dictate your opinions to you.

Dave....if they dont, they get sued by those same people.....

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

I'm not going to wade through all your verbal diarhea... but this is just a silly statement..

Of course not, because leftists don't read conservatives. Their minds are closed traps. They don't know what conservatives actually think. Conservatives are evil, they're racists. Lefty never gets past his delusions, let alone tackle the actual essence of conservatism. Lefty expects conservatives to read him, and conservatives do in order to accurately engage him.

Ever notice how often it is lefty prattling about how he's not going to read this or that written by a conservative? Conservatives know what lefty thinks and why because conservatives read and evaluate the opinions of others thoroughly. Lefty just spouts the slogans and epithets fed to him by others.

By the way, that post was written to Dave, not you. I didn't address it to any of you leftist lunatics because I know that your minds are closed traps. Never mind that it discusses the principle reason for the trend away from the two major parties and the real-world result thereof. A pertinent counterview about the state of the nation.

Lefty doesn't want to think, doesn't feel that he needs to think. It's easier to go along with what he's been told to think by the mainstream media and the public education system that shaped his mentality, hammered it into him.

 

[rdean]

All those white people at the Republican convention. And delegates throwing peanuts at a black CNN camera woman and saying, "This is how we feed the animals". The sad part was that she expected it. She said this is how white Republicans act in that part of the country. As if we didn't know.

 

[rdean]

I'm not going to wade through all your verbal diarhea... but this is just a silly statement..

Of course not, because leftists don't read conservatives. Their minds are closed traps. They don't know what conservatives actually think. Conservatives are evil, they're racists. Lefty never gets past his delusions, let alone tackle the actual essence of conservatism. Lefty expects conservatives to read him, and conservatives do in order to accurately engage him.

Ever notice how often it is lefty prattling about how he's not going to read this or that written by a conservative? Conservatives know what lefty thinks and why because conservatives read and evaluate the opinions of others thoroughly. Lefty just spouts the slogans and epithets feed to him by others.

By the way, that post was written to Dave, not you. I didn't address it to any of you leftist lunatics because I know that your minds are closed traps. Never mind that it discusses the principle reason for the trend away from the two major parties and the real-world result thereof. A pertinent counterview about the state of the nation.

Lefty doesn't want to think, doesn't feel that he needs to think. It's easier to go along with what he's been told to think by the mainstream media and the public education system that shaped his mentality, hammered it into him.

The Democratic Party has conservatives. Some call them "Blue Dogs". There are no liberals in the Republican Party.

 

[daveman]

I noticed you ignore where I totally bebunked your "fifth generation of welfare" bit. but I totally understand, I humiliated you on the "hillary was a birfer" nonsense you were repeating... can't pop two of your balloons in one day...Okay, here it is again, to deepen your humiliation..


The Welfare Queen is a myth all the way back to Reagan...

Time on Welfare and Welfare Dependency: Testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee on Human Resources


Quote:


Now of coure, that's the "bad" welfare. Not the "okay" welfare like Social Security, Unemployment Insurance and Medicare... You've "paid" for those (cough, cough, not really cough cough).

Yeah. Now let's look at some science:

The Intergenerational Transmission of Poverty in Industrialized Countries by Stephen P. Jenkins, Thomas Siedler :: SSRN

Download the paper. Pages 28 and 29 summarize seven studies done in the US concerning intergenerational transmission of welfare benefit receipt.

All seven studies show that the daughters of women who receive welfare benefits are more likely to receive benefits than the daughters of women who haven't.

Now, do you still want to bitterly cling to the discredited idea that there is no such thing as intergenerational welfare dependence?

Of course intergenerational welfare dependence has been a well-documented phenomenon for decades, one that even the Democratic Party as led by Clinton explicitly acknowledged when it signed on to welfare reform in the 90s, though in truth it was the Republican-controlled Congress that initiated it and drove it home. That the reform proved to be a great success in improving the lives of those families that had been trapped in dependency is beyond dispute. It's just that the ideology of the hard, America-hating left thrives on government largesse. If the government isn't the principal provider for the downtrodden they just don't feel right about it. They simply ignore the facts because the facts contradict the stated claims or expectations of their worldview, such as it is. The leftist's "ideology" is more of a collection of slogans and epithets, really.

Leftists for all their talk of rationality are nothing more than a herd of braying sentimental emotionalists. Only we classical liberals are the true intellectual students of government. We understand what works and what doesn't, because we understand that reality and human nature are ruled by certain universal principles. Adhere to them and you will succeed. Defy them and you will fail.

But leftists are not just hysterically sentimental infants, they are not merely delusional, living in a world that exists nowhere in reality beyond their pointed heads, they are liars. Pathological liars. They are utterly depraved, intellectually and morally, and it is their lack of moral fortitude that drives their intellectual dishonesty.

As to the subject of the thread: the fact of the matter is that it is the Democratic Party that has experienced the greater decline during the last four decades, not only losing its decades-long lock on Congress, but losing most of the congressional and senatorial elections in recent decades, the result being that Republicans have mostly controlled Congress ever since. Indeed, Republicans are poised to increase their hold on the House and take back the Senate once again in November regardless of who wins the presidential election.

I trust that Romney will win, as in historical experience no president has ever managed to survive such a dismal performance as that of Obama. The coming debates should drive Romney's superiority in managing economic woes home. But it will be close, and perhaps Romney will not be able to win one or two of the essential swing states and secure the support of the Electoral College, and that is a function of a relatively new historical trend, which goes not to the supposed lack of interest of the Republican Party to attract so-called minority voters, it goes to the last two generations of public-educated Americans who are tethered to no particular ideological worldview or historical narrative. They are adrift, lost in the muddy, black waters of intellectual incompetence, understanding nothing of the real world beyond their immediate circumstances. Pathetic.

This is the growing swell of Independents who think of themselves as being more open-minded and politically thoughtful than those of us who strongly adhere to one of the two major parties. Well, they are more open-minded and thoughtful than the drooling idiots of the Democratic Party for sure, so their half right. They just don't have the historical and intellectual experience and understanding to know that the classical liberals of the Republican Party have got it right. And so these Independents swing from this party to that in each election cycle mostly depending on how the economy is fairing. Never mind that recessions are cyclical and will be dramatically more short-lived if Republicans, rather than the free-market and individual-liberty-hating Democrats, are in charge.

This is why so many Independents believed that Obama would be the great healer of all ills only to awaken with a hangover almost four years later. This is why they did not understand, like classical liberals, that the national debt would not shrink under his tenure, but grow dramatically, that the costs of energy and therefore food would rise, that the costs of medical care and insurance would rise, that the value of the dollar would plummet, that the economy would continue to stagnate, that Obama was talking the historically failed Keynesianism and governmentally managed economics of the 1970s era of stagnation. They don't know their history, they have no ideological mooring, no understanding of fundamental realities.

They coupled with the hard left of the Democratic Party are the decline and fall of America.

Hopefully Romney will win the election, as we who understand things know that within a year or two the economy will dramatically rebound under the policies he will champion, happily acknowledged and welcomed by all but the dishonest and delusional leftists among us. We know this, not because we are inherently psychic, but because we understand the fundamentals of realty and that the economic policies of lazier faire and individual liberty will work every time! Also, hopefully, Romney will not make the same fiscal errors made by Bush, i.e., that the economic recovery will not be muddled by unnecessary government spending as it was under the latter's administration. In other words, hopefully, this new generation will finally learn the lessons taught to the baby boomers by the Reagan administration, and this nation will have the breathing space it so desperately needs to bring the national debt under control before it destroys us.

Finally, there is something else that we classical liberals understand that hard leftists will never understand or admit, something that most Independent voters will never understand even after Romney fixes things should he be elected. The economy under Obama did not continue to stagnant, ever-threatening a double-dip, because this imbecile misjudged the depth of the recession. It did not continue to stagnant because the "stimulus" packages were not big enough. The economy continued to stagnant because government stimulus packages don’t stimulate, and the bigger the packages, the worse the results. You end up with an economy of no or sluggish growth saddled with more debt. Such never goes to the base of the private sector in any significant way; instead, such merely fuels crony-capitalism on the behalf of large corporations, those entities of big, bad business so hated by the left, at the expense of small business and that of the middleclass and working poor. Such goes to public-sector unions, to local and state bureaucracies which use those funds to payoff old debt spent on goods and services that were purchased and consumed in the past. The positive effects of what little goes to the private sector beyond the coffers of private-sector unions for purposes of infrastructure development are insignificant and short-lived. You know, those shovel-ready projects that weren't so numerous or shovel-ready after all.

A passionate supporter of Obama was utterly dumbfounded when I told him back in 2008 that if elected Obama would in all likelihood be a one-term president.

"Why?" he wanted to know.

"Because everything he represents will be disastrous for this country. I can see that, you can’t. You believe his promises, I know that his promises involve policies that will result in outcomes that are the very opposite of his promises. But I see that I could talk myself blue in the face and you would never believe me. But you will see that I am right in a few years, though you probably will still not grasp the insights behind my prediction."



What I didn’t tell him is that Obama might win a divisive and non-productive second term in a close election, a disastrous pyrrhic victory only, a real possibility given the recent historical trend of a growing population of persons divorced from the founding American ethos by an adversarial education system, an electorate that would hesitantly return him to office in fear and confusion, unlike its predecessors that would have chased the likes of Obama out of office in a landslide, more to the point, predecessors that would have never let him get into the White House in the first place.

The real political trend afoot in this country: a growing cancer of lost minds and hearts, believing in nothing and, therefore, believing in every fad that comes along, clinging to the promises made by every charismatic charlatan that comes along. Perhaps both of the parties are in decline, with the stabilizing two-party system unraveling and the last, best hope of the nation mostly aligned with the Republican Party dying out. But one thing is for certain, if most Americans do indeed come to believe that upholding the founding principles of this nation and the integrity of its sovereign borders is the stuff of white bigotry, rather than the stuff of universal imperatives that have everything to do with the ideal political culture and nothing to do with the color one's skin, if they come believe that conservatives (classical liberals, really) are thinking race and ethnicity in some myterious respect or another relative to their core socio-political principles (LOL!) this nation is doomed, and, therefore, so are the delusional morons making the allegations as they themselves will eventually discover when their Nirvana devolves into the improvised and corrupt chaos of the likes Mexico, for example.

DUMBASSES! NITWITS! BRAINWASHED NO-NOTHINGS! THE DUPES, THE FODDER OF EVERY MONTROUS TYRANNY THAT HAS EVER EXISTED THE WORLD OVER.

And in most cases, by the way, atheist is just another term for bootlick statist.

Repnazi says I gotta wait.

 

[daveman]

I'll bet you do wish you were in a union. They protect the lazy and incompetent.

And, this is where you really fit in: They dictate your opinions to you.

Not really. I know union guys who are voting for Romney, not realizing they are probably going to take away their nice union jobs... So not only don't the unions tell them what to think, they don't even make convincing cases they're voting against their own interests.

And yet the union spends their dues on Democratic Party campaign contributions.

How's that for representation? Oh, yeah -- fuck 'em, right?

But to the point, sorry, in the 20 years since I left the Army, the biggest incompetence I've seen is in management.

Like the two brothers who ran the company into the ground a year after their parents left it to them...

Or the company that made 10 year decisions on the basis of a three year non-renewable contract.

Never lost a job due to my own actions... Never got a review that was less than exemplary... and never worked in a place where I didn't move up and get greater responsibility as time went on. I'm up for a promotion now.

So if you want to nurse your losses in rhetoric with the belief I'm a bad person, feel free.

People who support Communism don't win arguments. But keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

 

[JoeB131]

I'll bet you do wish you were in a union. They protect the lazy and incompetent.

And, this is where you really fit in: They dictate your opinions to you.

Not really. I know union guys who are voting for Romney, not realizing they are probably going to take away their nice union jobs... So not only don't the unions tell them what to think, they don't even make convincing cases they're voting against their own interests.

And yet the union spends their dues on Democratic Party campaign contributions.

How's that for representation? Oh, yeah -- fuck 'em, right?

And they are free to vote their leadership out if they don't like that. But they never really do. Probably because the rank and file - or at least the majority of them- know democrats will be the ones protecting their jobs.

[

But to the point, sorry, in the 20 years since I left the Army, the biggest incompetence I've seen is in management.

Like the two brothers who ran the company into the ground a year after their parents left it to them...

Or the company that made 10 year decisions on the basis of a three year non-renewable contract.

Never lost a job due to my own actions... Never got a review that was less than exemplary... and never worked in a place where I didn't move up and get greater responsibility as time went on. I'm up for a promotion now.

So if you want to nurse your losses in rhetoric with the belief I'm a bad person, feel free.

People who support Communism don't win arguments. But keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

There are conservatives here who argue very welll.

You aren't one of them.

 

[daveman]

Dude, I wish I was in a fuckin' union. Good benefits, good pay, bosses can't screw with you unnecessarily....

Ten years ago, I wouldn't have said that. But all it really takes is one truly shitty boss to show you why unions are needed.

I'll bet you do wish you were in a union. They protect the lazy and incompetent.

And, this is where you really fit in: They dictate your opinions to you.

Dave....if they dont, they get sued by those same people.....

True. Meanwhile, the lazy and incompetent are still employed, making the job harder on the good workers, and driving up the costs of goods and services.

 

[JoeB131]

I'll bet you do wish you were in a union. They protect the lazy and incompetent.

And, this is where you really fit in: They dictate your opinions to you.

Dave....if they dont, they get sued by those same people.....

True. Meanwhile, the lazy and incompetent are still employed, making the job harder on the good workers, and driving up the costs of goods and services.

What makes it hard to get good workers is that the whole model is based on cheating them at every oppurtunity...

There really are no bad workers. There are just bad managers and bad supervisors. I can't tell you how many 'bad' employees I got great performances out of simply by providing leadership and being fair with them.

 

[Pheonixops]

.

You could be right. Political Correctness and Identity Politics have been very effective strategies for the Democrats, dividing people into little groups. The GOP may have to go in that direction to survive, we'll see.

.

The republicans don't divide people into little groups like the "real Americans", "job creators", etc.?

 

[daveman]

Not really. I know union guys who are voting for Romney, not realizing they are probably going to take away their nice union jobs... So not only don't the unions tell them what to think, they don't even make convincing cases they're voting against their own interests.

And yet the union spends their dues on Democratic Party campaign contributions.

How's that for representation? Oh, yeah -- fuck 'em, right?

And they are free to vote their leadership out if they don't like that. But they never really do. Probably because the rank and file - or at least the majority of them- know democrats will be the ones protecting their jobs.

Wrong. Democrats will protect union leadership because union leadership gives the Democratic Party money.

You really believe that shit about the Dems being for the working man?

Obama Jobs Council Packed With Outsourcing Companies

Obama Stimulus Funding Goes Abroad, Outsources Jobs

Obama

Yeah. Obama really cares about you.

[

But to the point, sorry, in the 20 years since I left the Army, the biggest incompetence I've seen is in management.

Like the two brothers who ran the company into the ground a year after their parents left it to them...

Or the company that made 10 year decisions on the basis of a three year non-renewable contract.

Never lost a job due to my own actions... Never got a review that was less than exemplary... and never worked in a place where I didn't move up and get greater responsibility as time went on. I'm up for a promotion now.

So if you want to nurse your losses in rhetoric with the belief I'm a bad person, feel free.

People who support Communism don't win arguments. But keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

There are conservatives here who argue very welll.

You aren't one of them.

Yes, but your idea of a good argument is one that completely agrees with you.

If you want an echo chamber, go back to DU. You won't be exposed to any scary nasty conservative ideas there.

 

[daveman]

Dave....if they dont, they get sued by those same people.....

True. Meanwhile, the lazy and incompetent are still employed, making the job harder on the good workers, and driving up the costs of goods and services.

What makes it hard to get good workers is that the whole model is based on cheating them at every oppurtunity...

There really are no bad workers. There are just bad managers and bad supervisors. I can't tell you how many 'bad' employees I got great performances out of simply by providing leadership and being fair with them.

No bad workers? Horseshit.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYhuK_doOEc]TTC faretaker caught sleeping on the job - YouTube[/ame]

David Pecoraro, 'Serial Spitter' Teacher, Swats At, Spits on Student (VIDEO)

Goldstein: City Employee Caught Drinking On The Job « CBS Los Angeles

Seattle employee caught on casino run in city car | KING5.com Seattle

Capitol Confidential » Comptroller says DEC employee drank on job

And let's look at union leadership:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/nyregion/06indict.html

FBI Investigating Prominent Labor Leader Andy Stern In Corruption Probe At SEIU

Corrupt union leader sold out members to crooked contractors and embezzled nearly $200,000 from the labor organization - NYPOST.com

NE Indiana Machinists Secretary-Treasurer Pleads Guilty to Embezzlement | National Legal and Policy Center

Las Vegas Laborers Local Office Employee Sentenced for Thefts | National Legal and Policy Center

Deputy Sheriffs' Association Boss in California Pleads No Contest to $400k+ Theft; Sentenced | National Legal and Policy Center

West Virginia Laborers Council Director Pleads Guilty; Sentenced | National Legal and Policy Center

Ex-Los Angeles SEIU Boss Indicted for Theft, Tax Evasion | National Legal and Policy Center

NYC-New Jersey Port Authority Union Boss Sentenced | National Legal and Policy Center

WSJ Reveals Huge Hidden Union Political Spending | National Legal and Policy Center

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm not going to wade through all your verbal diarhea... but this is just a silly statement..

Of course not, because leftists don't read conservatives. Their minds are closed traps. They don't know what conservatives actually think. Conservatives are evil, they're racists. Lefty never gets past his delusions, let alone tackle the actual essence of conservatism. Lefty expects conservatives to read him, and conservatives do in order to accurately engage him.

Ever notice how often it is lefty prattling about how he's not going to read this or that written by a conservative? Conservatives know what lefty thinks and why because conservatives read and evaluate the opinions of others thoroughly. Lefty just spouts the slogans and epithets feed to him by others.

By the way, that post was written to Dave, not you. I didn't address it to any of you leftist lunatics because I know that your minds are closed traps. Never mind that it discusses the principle reason for the trend away from the two major parties and the real-world result thereof. A pertinent counterview about the state of the nation.

Lefty doesn't want to think, doesn't feel that he needs to think. It's easier to go along with what he's been told to think by the mainstream media and the public education system that shaped his mentality, hammered it into him.

The Democratic Party has conservatives. Some call them "Blue Dogs". There are no liberals in the Republican Party.

oh dont start this shit again.....you were already shot down once......do we have to do it again?....