I overheard a member of our monthly breakfast group farther down the
table say, "I used to be a Republican, but the Republican Party left me
behind. Republicans are fiscally responsible people who do not start
wars and lower taxes."
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 22:30:00 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
To some extent he is right. It's the career politicians that, I too
believe, put their own interests above those of the nation. This of
course applies to both sides of the aisle -- but certainly more to the
Do it for their own benefit?
Have you ever HEARD of a liberal member of Congress getting food stamps or
enrolled in Medicare?
What they do is for the children of the bereft, the downtrodden, the
under-class of society, the halt and the lame, the disabled and those of
lesser abilities. Plus all the red-headed step-children.
I guess you got me there. I was wrong -- I apologize and ask for
The problems we face today exist because the people who work
for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.
I have a bumper sticker that says "Socialism Sucks, Vote Consertive"
Both parties are so infiltrated by the Progressive movement of Wilson
and Teddy and FDR (the Republicans slightly less) that we need to send
them all home for good and start over.
firstname.lastname@example.org wrote in news:2s2b3756gglq1na5h2cvtpfuatuq8thmqv@
Well, IMNSHO it is just fine to be progressive, if you're responsible and
fiscally conservative as well. I also like to gamble a little, so I am
going to buy a few thou of an SP500 index fund tomorrow ...
I never thought I would hear anyone say they were progressive AND
responsible with a straight face. As far as being progressive and
conservative, well, they are diametrically opposed points of view.
A liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own.
Well, Giordon, remember you heard it here ...
Oh, btw, a small question: When Bush entered into 2 wars abroad (I forget
what the max number of troops was in either), and cut taxes for the higher
incomes (yes mine too), was that conservative and responsible?
Sorry for the misspelling of your name, a regrettable typo. And yes, the
war in Afghanistan was as necessaary as the war in Iraq was not. But it
isn't only the waging of war that I object against, it is not planning
for the expenses of it.
No problem about the spelling. It's not my name -- it's ALF's name.
I agree that wars are definitely bad for everyone. There can be no
argument to the contrary. Regrettably, wars must be fought to protect
our freedom. Protecting our freedom is fundamental to our survival.
There can be no argument to the contrary on that point either.
On 7/31/2011 4:32 PM, email@example.com wrote:
War should be the option of last resort, not the first tool out of the
box. And 'protecting our freedom' has little to do with either of the 2
wars in discussion. Yes, the regime in power in AF needed to be knocked
down, just to make a point to other countries that would host
terrorists. (hey, it worked in Libya, for a few years.) But trying to
build a country in that backward tribal culture? NOT critical to our
survival. The second Iraq war was because they tried to kill his daddy,
George the elder. Sure, Saddam was scum, and his neighbors (mostly) were
happy for us to do their dirty work (despite their public righteous
indignation), but exactly why was he our problem again?
I blame the Brits and the other western superpowers, who drew lines on a
map without regard to the facts on the ground, in 1912 or wherever. The
west tried to create countries in a part of the world where the concept
of borders was pretty meaningless. Most people never saw anyone outside
their village or tribe or clan, and span of control for the local El
Jefe was based on how far personal loyalty to him extended. I further
blame anyone that gave modern arms to people still living, at best, in
the early1800s. The whole damn area should have been a DMZ from the
start of 20th century on. Let them fight it out with rocks and clubs.
That whole quarter or so of the planet has been killing each other for
the last, I dunno, 1500+ years. Hubris to think us enlightened
westerners are going to 'save' them. Progress has to come from within.
What are we talking about now? Nevertheless, more opinion. Racist, at that.
"We can survive another 9-11"
I thought you just said it because he tried to kill Bush-41. Get your stories
Because of 9-11. He was known to have WMDs, was known to use them, and after
9-11 he couldn't be allowed to become even more of a problem.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.