Browsing this Thread:
3 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
Absolutely correct on most points. The party that moves to the center would win the next presidential election. Either major party would have a huge advantage over any third party, because of money and existing field networks. Right now the big contributors, especially on the Republican side are from the extreme conservative wings of the party. This is why we see a plethora of these right wing minded candidates that don\'t mirror all the views of most people. A third party candidate is seldom viable not because of ideology but rather because of the infrastructure that is needed to run a campaign. If a strong centerist or populist candidate from either party jumped in with money and strong friends it is not likely but possible in this election. Historically think of a campaign like Teddy Roosevelt. By now however it might be too late. This was Trump\'s dream, although I don\'t think he had a chance in hell. I would also suggest that Reagan was not elected because of his right wing views but despite them. He was perceived by many as a strong straight shooter. Carter was perceived as a nice guy but weak and over his head. People wanted change in 1979. The economy was weak and our foreign policy was considered weak by most voters. Again you are correct. Reagan pulled the center to him. It doesn\'t seem that the Republicans are going to run a viable candidate against Obama which is a shame. Competition seems to keep politicians a little more transparent and accountable. (four years of McCain would scare me but a heart attack and four years of Sarah Palin would REALLY terrify me.)
Posted on: 2011/11/13 0:11
|
|||
|
I'm not perfect.....but I'm not all bad either.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
OBAMA VS WHO???? Would Hillary have been the left's great shining knight? Doubtful, most of the folks criticizing Obama weren't crazy about Bill's centrist policies either. Like it or not Reagan set a course for this country that has pulled the center to the right. To win the presidency you need to win the center, not the wings. The GOP is struggling with this right now in their primaries. Cutting off your nose to spite your face by abandoning the Dems for a 3rd party isn't the answer, just as voting for Nader wasn't the answer, it just illustrated that there actually WAS a huge difference between the parties. I can't believe GWB's been gone only 3 years and already you people forget the lesson of 2000. Stop comparing our Dem presidents to some mythic ideal and compare them to the opposition. The Liberal that you wish for has been unelectable in the US for half a century. PS: I voted for Hillary, solely because I thought she was more electable. 4 years of McCain scared the crap out of me.
Posted on: 2011/11/12 21:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/27 12:04 Last Login : 2016/7/1 9:09 From Southern JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1205
 |
Quote:
I like you and I like your posts and I know where you're coming from but we'll never agree on this. I don't think he's week, I don't think he's indecisive, I don't think he's doing the best he can with a bad hand. I think he's a Reagan Republican who ran as a progressive in 2008.
Posted on: 2011/11/12 19:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/27 12:04 Last Login : 2016/7/1 9:09 From Southern JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1205
|
Just look at this evil, fourth largest economy in the world, socialist country that feeds their hungry babies. What the hell is the matter with them?
http://m.wired.com/beyond_the_beyond/ ... ry-poor-and-dying-babies/
Posted on: 2011/11/12 19:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The problem with your wish is that the only way in the modern D party to quell dissent is move to the right, as both Obama & Clinton did and were vilified for. LBJ strong armed the party left, and shattered it to this day. It may have been unavoidable, as that D party was a coalition of southern conservatives and northern liberals as unlikely as the current GOP of oligarchs, bible thumpers and clueless Tea Party populists. I find the way Obama gets unfairly compared to some fantasy "white Knight of the Left" that many wished for is tragic. He's made some mistakes (delaying the debt ceiling negotiation) but for the most part he's been playing the hand he was dealt fairly well.
Posted on: 2011/11/12 19:00
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
So, wait, let me figure it out. So, if I borrow money from you... And I spent it... And I can't pay it back... And you think - it is YOUR fault? Nice. And the premium phrase about "bundled INTO a toxic asset"!! This is just perfect. So, when you heard about them nasty toxic assets - you imagined it like bankers take good and clean loans - and dip them into something toxic, and this is why people can't pay? Like they COULD pay before - but after the bankers "bundled the loan into toxic asset" - that's when it all happened, and their ability to repay the loan was ruined? Quote: Quote: Ok, let's say "authority". Happy? Quote: Quote: I was not arguing which speech is good, which is not. I just said that liberals are not defending free speech - and you have just proved my point. Thanks. Quote: Quote: You misunderstood. I was not talking about myself. You see, I already saw the end of the tunnel you're digging. I was born in the USSR. I know how the socialism looks, how it works, and how id dies. Those who build socialism - succeed. Of course, as soon as you socialists succeed, and socialism is achieved, and everybody is in equal poverty - you declare that it was a "wrong" attempt and doesn't count. USSR did not count, Cuba doesn't count, North Korea doesn't count, and so on.
Posted on: 2011/11/12 17:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Sotomayor passed in August 2009 with a Senate of 58 Democrats. Only a weak executive allows himself to be held hostage by members of his own party, and that's exactly my point. Obama is ineffective not because of dissent within the democratic party but because of his inability to quell that dissent. He still thinks he's a Chicago democratic committee member rather than the President of the United States.
Posted on: 2011/11/12 7:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If you really look at US History our government has always been a power struggle between the Supreme court and the Congress.
Everyone who except Obama to be this leader who would just barrel through to get his way was wrong. Really besides Bush the only other two presidents who commanded that much power out of the seat were FDR and Jefferson. Getting back to the point. Its not democrat or Republican its the fact that we have a group of corrupt individuals in office.
Posted on: 2011/11/12 6:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I believe at least Sotomayor's senate was GOP majority. The fact is blocking a nominee without a smoking gun isn't considered OK, yet. I simply don't understand your faith in a senate majority if you're liberal. Dems don't have the discipline to form the needed supermajority even when they have the numbers, which isn't likely soon. There were plenty of times in 2009-10 that D senators were holding Obama hostage to their personal agendas in order for him to gain their vote. The GOP has more discipline, and they get those same rogue Dems to aid them even when they're short of 60. If GOP congressmen did that they would get shunned by the party, but Dems will sleep with anyone, even Joe Lieberman.
Posted on: 2011/11/12 2:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Ianmac said, "Luckily for me when I say, "Owlie is an asshat douchebag" its true, so I don't have to worry about it being libelous."
Is that really true? Do we know each other? For the record, I don't care what you say about me. You are entitled to your opinion. (also, I think you actually meant. ", it's true") I know nothing about you but I think you're very lucky to be home at 10 in the morning so you had the time to write that very important news about me for all to see. I, on the other hand, was hard at work, so that I can be taxed to help run the system. Now that I'm home I finally got a chance to respond. Jesus, I AM an ass-hat douchbag to think I have the right to dare say what I believe is true. I even forgot to call you names. I'm sorry. I didn't know the rules. Thank you for the head's up. It's been a real treat hearing from you. I will take your kind words under advisement. We should all do a meet-up and hang out. Maybe we could go to Barcade . I'll even buy you a drink because IMHO you seem to need something to help you chill out a bit. Have a great weekend!!!!
Posted on: 2011/11/12 1:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Sure, Alito and Roberts were a problem. But Bush was working with 50+ Republican Senators. Of course his nominations were going to be a disaster.
Instead, look at Souter and Kennedy, nominated by a Republican but confirmed by Senates with 55 Democrats. Souter turned out to be better than expected and now Kennedy is commonly the swing. Admittedly, Thomas got through a Democratic senate, but I would chalk that up to white guilt and a poor job of cross examination. My faith is in the Senate, not the white house at this point.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 22:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Really? Look at the last 4 seated justices. Do you seriously not see an ideology difference between Roberts-Alito and Kagan-Sotomayor? The "clam up confirmation" that is now in force totally nullifies the Senate and whoever gets nominated is in unless they've got a serious skeleton in the closet. I can't argue with your analysis of Obama tiptoeing when he should have steamrolled, and the GOP being willing to go all in, but that doesn't make me want them in more than him. That's like saying "this flu sucks, I might as well have cancer".
Posted on: 2011/11/11 22:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Obama's political naivete has been his greatest failing. Clinton might (or might not) personally lean slightly to the right of Obama, but she would have had the experience and will to negotiate a far more left leaning agenda. Somebody needed to tell Obama during his first year in office that he won, that he won the whole goddamn pot from both houses of Congress to the presidency. There is no need for bipartisanship when you have control of everything; there is no greater mandate than he had served to him. Instead of actually legislating, instead of reminding all the freshman Democrats that they won on his coattails, he tried consensus building with Republicans. And then they burned him. And they did it time and time again. He pussy footed around on healthcare. And then even when he had the six week window after Franken was sworn in and before Kennedy died, when the senate was filibuster proof, he still didn't pass a goddamn thing. Even after Kennedy died, they still had a majority. Did Obama push once to challenge the Republicans into actually following through with a filibuster? Did he actually try pushing for progressive legislation? No, he started by proposing compromised legislation and so began from a bargaining position that was already weak. Of course Democrats lost in the midterms; they accomplished nothing. By contrast, the Republicans have proven over and over again that they have ruthless efficiency and stalwart party loyalty when it comes to pushing for a conservative agenda. If a Republican wins the presidency, he almost certainly holds onto the house of Representatives and threatens to take the senate. If that happens and its not Romney, there will be a very serious deconstruction of federal programs in the first year if for no other reason, whoever the Republican is will know he's actually won.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 20:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The assumption that Obama would have the will or the ability to negotiate a supreme court nomination that is substantially better than a Republican is false. The senate is far more important to protecting the supreme court or to liberalizing it. And to that end I've contributed to Elizabeth Warren for Senate and will vote for Bob Menendez. A liberal senate will do more for advancing progressive SCOTUS nominees than any president.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 19:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
So the answer is let the other guy win? The moment I can vote for a true Liberal but then have my vote switched to my 2nd choice after the 1st loses I'm with you 100%. For the same reasons Obama isn't the liberal savior, scenario 2 wouldn't happen. The status quo is extremely powerful. Those with money, and getting tax money, are happy to spend the pittance it takes to buy a congressman, and big change can't happen fast with a de facto "supermajority required" Senate. You evade the SCOTUS point I make. Follow the current cases, we are one decision away from having the govt legally allowed to warrantlessly track us all 24/7 using our cell phones (which they are likely doing already). The 4th amendment is already gone for practical purposes. Just hope your dog doesn't try and do his job when they break down your door "by mistake".
Posted on: 2011/11/11 19:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
What do I have to gain from another Obama presidency if he continues another four years of moderate conservatism? In scenario 1, Obama wins. The flyover states keep cashing the checks I write to the federal government while dictating some neo nazi conservatism. In scenario 2, Obama loses. The flyover states stop taking my money through the federal programs that whatever nutty conservative deconstructs while dictating some neo nazi conservatism. Don't get me wrong, I much rather see a true liberal ascend to the presidency and institute genuine reforms: national healthcare, strict environmental laws, civil liberty protections, organized labor protections, social support programs, lower college costs, and progressive taxation. But right now, that's not what Obama is promising. "Not as bad as the other guy" isn't good enough anymore.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 18:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The rest of this thread is too silly to respond to, but this I've got to address. PLEASE KEEP PERSPECTIVE!! It's that thinking that got us GWB to begin with. Yes, flawed as he was, Gore WOULD have been better than Bush! Try this, it's been my philosophy for decades: The President's most important role is as a nominator of Supreme Court justices. Presidents come and go, and have limited power to really change direction, but justices stay for decades and can change the nature of our country. Yes Obama has dissapointed you, but what if we now had another Scalia & Thomas instead of Kagan & Sotomayor? We'd now have no right's left in our country but the 2nd Amendment. If for no other reason than this, till we have national instant runoff, please don't petulantly throw your vote away on a 3rd party.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 18:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
answer to question, hard line financiers seem to Republican, so the answer seems to be yes. If people got nearly what they put into this system, our sewers would work, and taxes would be less, with no abatements and 1/2 price two family houses. We have way too much subsidized housing for one town to support. Too many double dippers.
Seems a proponent of this thought-stream would have to run on a D-ticket to even have a chance..and would still lose.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 17:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Luckily for me when I say, "Owlie is an asshat douchebag" its true, so I don't have to worry about it being libelous.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 15:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/27 12:04 Last Login : 2016/7/1 9:09 From Southern JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1205
|
Quote:
Um... Are you Rudy's wife? Interesting point about libel though. Can something stated as fact on an internet forum rise to the level of libel? I guess we'll never know. Because applying that standard would end the Fox "News" channel. The Supreme Court will never touch that issue.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 13:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
WTF R U talkn' 'bout ? It is against the law when you make false accusations about someone's character. You stated your opinion as fact and you're SO wrong. This has nothing to do with free speech...it crosses the line and becomes libelous and slanderous. Just because YOU say it, doesn't mean it true.
Rudy Giuliani NEVER was a cop. Giuliani served in the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, eventually becoming U.S. Attorney. He prosecuted a number of high-profile cases, including ones against organized crime and Wall Street financiers.He was extremely successful. Did someone you know go to prison because of him? Have something positive to say or shut up because you REALLY don't know what you're talking about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudy_Giuliani#Legal_career
Posted on: 2011/11/11 7:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
also, the ACLU has even defended the Westboro Baptist Church, those vile anti-gay people from Kansas. They don't only defend liberal causes, they defend anyone who is having their civil liberties infringed upon.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 6:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
denying the right to association? what the hell are you talking about? thought crimes? Is this a sci-fi movie? I don't know what you're talking about! prohibiting you from making honest transactions? What does that even mean? taking a third of what you make? Are you talking about taxes? You mean the tax rates that Republicans set? Or are you complaining about how we have the lowest taxes right now that we've ever had in our history? The only thing that makes any sense out of what you say is the "forcing me to buy things" which I guess you're talking about health-care. Funny thing is, a lot of Democrats and liberals don't like that either, and it was originally proposed by Republicans in the 90s.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 6:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/27 12:04 Last Login : 2016/7/1 9:09 From Southern JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1205
|
This is too easy but... why not...
Quote:
Try telling that to a family whose house was seized by a bank that bundled their home into a toxic asset. This is out and out fraud that is endorsed by conservatives. (Conservatives being Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama.) Quote:
How are you "under his control"? Did he plant a chip in your head? Quote:
Meaning you can't hate on people of color and homosexuals without someone calling you out on it. How horrible is that? Quote:
What's especially funny is that Bill Clinton, though he screwed us with NAFTA and deregulation, left office with a surplus. Bush and a Republican controlled Congress and Senate left us mired in massive debt. The only way you can counter that argument is to do a Fox "News" lying campaign as you are doing. Quote:
I'll never ever EVER vote for a Republican. I'm voting for the socialist candidate in 2012. I'm so angry at Obama I hope Romney wins. It won't make any difference. I've finally joined the club of people who think that most Democrats and Republicans are the same animal. Quote: And no Democrat will ever stop "tax and spend" because this is the CORNERSTONE of being a Democrat. This: DHS Doesn't Want Its New Spy Drones Quote: It will all end only after we ran out of money. Things that can't go forever - won't. So, like Greece, Italy, USSR before them - we will go broke. We're out of money because our jobs have been farmed out to third world countries, and because Wall Street crashed our economy and now refuses to lend money while still making insane, over leveraged bets with OUR money. Quote: Within few years most of the more affluent residents and businesses will leave. Affluent corporations aren't here now. They're global. They don't pay taxes. They don't belong to any country. Only a silly person would think they do. Affluent residents are leaving? When? To where? Let me know so I can travel there and tax and spend them. Quote: Stunned, depressed and with no idea of what went wrong. Now you do. You're welcome.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 6:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/27 12:04 Last Login : 2016/7/1 9:09 From Southern JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1205
|
This is too easy but... why not...
Quote:
Try telling that to a family whose house was seized by a bank that bundled their home into a toxic asset. This is out and out fraud that is endorsed by conservatives. (Conservatives being Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama.) Quote:
How are you "under his control"? Did he plant a chip in your head? Quote:
Meaning you can't hate on people of color and homosexuals without someone calling you out on it. How horrible is that? Not being able to rant about how much you fear and despise Mexicans, black people and f*gs without someone telling you that you are a fascist must be horribly oppressive for you. Quote:
What's especially funny is that Bill Clinton, though he screwed us with NAFTA and deregulation, left office with a surplus. Bush and a Republican controlled Congress and Senate left us mired in massive debt. The only way you can counter that argument is to do a Fox "News" lying campaign as you are doing. Quote:
I'll never ever EVER vote for a Republican. I'm voting for the socialist candidate in 2012. I'm so angry at Obama I hope Romney wins. It won't make any difference. I've finally joined the club of people who think that most Democrats and Republicans are the same animal. Quote: And no Democrat will ever stop "tax and spend" because this is the CORNERSTONE of being a Democrat. This: DHS Doesn't Want Its New Spy Drones Quote: It will all end only after we ran out of money. Things that can't go forever - won't. So, like Greece, Italy, USSR before them - we will go broke. We're out of money because our jobs have been farmed out to third world countries, and because Wall Street crashed our economy and now refuses to lend money while still making insane, over leveraged bets with OUR money. Quote: Within few years most of the more affluent residents and businesses will leave. Affluent corporations aren't here now. They're global. They don't pay taxes. They don't belong to any country. Only a silly person would think they do. Affluent residents are leaving? When? To where? Let me know so I can travel there and tax and spend them. Quote: Stunned, depressed and with no idea of what went wrong. Now you do. You're welcome.
Posted on: 2011/11/11 6:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Name 1, - ONE, - civil liberty that liberals protect. However, here is the tricky part. For example, someone may look like he is defending a liberty of free speech. However, when you look closer, you realize that he doesn't defend ALL speech. Only the speech that he considers to be Good. And he is pretty much ok with banning of what he thinks is Bad Speech. Which means that he doesn't protect liberties, - but only privileges for the things that he likes. So, with this in mind - do you have an example of a liberty that liberals protect? In order to make it simple - let's start with the best example you can think of. Quote: Democrats might make laws against the sale of firearms, or incandescent lightbulbs, and make stricter laws on things like campaign donations and make environmental and food regulations. And make speech codes on campuses, and deny people's rights to association, and create thought-crimes, and force me to buy products and services I may not want, and prohibit me from making honest transaction with another consenting adult, and demand to take a third of what I produce, and force me to pay for government-sponsored teaching of the ideology I find repulsive, and prohibit me from making medical decisions between me and my doctor (with just 1 exception), and so on and so forth. Quote: But in general it's always the ACLU and other liberal organizations that are fighting to protect freedom of religion, of speech, and other civil rights. Really? I have never heard about ACLU taking on, for example, campus speech codes. I know FIRE works on that tirelessly - but ACLU is nowhere to be found. I did not see ACLU support in defense of 2nd Amendment either. If you choose which liberty to protect, and in which cases to protect it - you do not fight for liberty at all. You fight for PRIVILEGES, as I explained above. Quote: The only thing I can think of to ever suggest that Democrats might try to infringe upon free speech would be that equal airtime law in the 90s or whenever, which was quite possibly the dumbest law ever. Depends. If Democrats don't ever violate people's rights - than, yes, sure, it would mean that I am brainwashed. However, if Democrats DO violate people's rights - for example, - if speech codes, and "hate" crimes, and 2nd amendment violations, and all other things do happen, - that would mean that my information sources are fine. In that case we will have to look for an alternative hypothesis to explain why you can't think of any example of Democratic infringement...
Posted on: 2011/11/11 2:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Democrats and Republicans have lost the pulse of the American electorate. Unfortunately many folks are simple and just want to see their personal situations improving or at least hopeful. A large portion of our population (locally and nationally) has lost hope in the effectiveness and transparency of the people we elect. Many just inactively complain or choose apathy. For some the choice of Obama was not the choice of a Democrat but more a choice of change. The time is ripe for a populist candidate which history teaches us can sometimes be a very good or very bad thing. Our recent council election and the low turnout are symptoms of this effect. With much respect to some of very well intentioned, and educated candidates none seemed able to get the electorate in JC motivated enough citywide to get out and vote. Given the attitude of many people I talked to this would have been very challenging. So what do we do? Give up? I appreciate folks like Mr Levin and Mr. Fulop, even if I don't always agree with them. Thank you for trying and please don't stop.
Posted on: 2011/11/10 15:21
|
|||
|
I'm not perfect.....but I'm not all bad either.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Democrats might make laws against the sale of firearms, or incandescent lightbulbs, and make stricter laws on things like campaign donations and make environmental and food regulations. But in general it's always the ACLU and other liberal organizations that are fighting to protect freedom of religion, of speech, and other civil rights. The only thing I can think of to ever suggest that Democrats might try to infringe upon free speech would be that equal airtime law in the 90s or whenever, which was quite possibly the dumbest law ever. I think you read a little too much worldnetdaily and watch a bit too much fox news.
Posted on: 2011/11/10 14:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
At least with a tax and spend policy, the books are balanced. The borrow and spend republicans will spend without ever having a plan to pay off the debt.
Republicans are addicted to debt, and then inevitably its left up to a democrat to balance the budget after the shit hits the fan. What is especially funny is when people claim to be experts but they don't know the difference between communism and soviet style collectivism.
Posted on: 2011/11/10 14:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Do we need a strong republican mayor?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
If you don't know much about Communists - you can always ask someone who saw them first hand. And then escaped - to educate you. Communists base their political philosophy on the assumptions that some "Good of the Society" is more important than human rights, - especially property rights, freedom of speech and so on. From this point of view - Communists are like the opposite of Republicans. Frankly, they are very close to Democrats on their basic premises. The difference is in the degree of aggression. If you disagree with Communist - he will want you in jail. Disagree with a Democrat - he will slander you and, if you are unlucky enough to be under his control - he will throw some "speech code" at you. Colleges nowadays are like overflowing with speech regulations. However, both will demand that you surrendered fruits of your labor - because they need money to build their utopia. What is especially funny - is that we got to the point where even the most faithful Democrats see that "tax and spend" can't go any further. And yet, - you guys can't get of this drug! You will never, ever, EVER vote for anybody except a Democrat. And no Democrat will ever stop "tax and spend" because this is the CORNERSTONE of being a Democrat. It will all end only after we ran out of money. Things that can't go forever - won't. So, like Greece, Italy, USSR before them - we will go broke. Within few years most of the more affluent residents and businesses will leave. Home prices will drop when those who can't pay city taxes will start a sell-off. And the rest of you will get stuck with the bill. Stunned, depressed and with no idea of what went wrong.
Posted on: 2011/11/10 12:35
|
|||
|
||||
