Political signs - What to do with them after the election?

[Kurt Ullman]

Yet I have seen many. Probably because we use the same definition of "reasonable", they agree with me.

[Kurt Ullman]

Yet they did in great numbers, until it got rough. Then they still voted for funding the war, all the while whining about how bad it was.

[Kurt Ullman]

But in all of those places shot were being exchanged for much longer than 5 years after we got there. This argument means nothing until we get 10 or more years out.

>

[Nate Nagel]

Of course, because it *is* a bad war, but nobody wants to be responsible for cutting off supplies to grunts stationed halfway around the world through no choice of their own (save for enlisting in the first place.)

nate

[Nate Nagel]

I don't want to commit our young men and women for 10 years in Iraq for no purpose.

It's yet to be explained to me why we're even in Iraq, save for the lies of the Bush administration all proven to have been false.

nate

[Kurt Ullman]

Well enlisting is a choice. You got the "nobody wants to be responsible" part right. Of course there is a huge difference between cutting off supplies to grunts and strapping on their Congressional Cojones and saying we are fully funding their orderly withdrawal now get them the Hell out of there. At least the GOP has stuck with their beliefs for better or worse. While the Dems sit around and talk big until they actually have to vote and then vote for continuing the conflict all they while wimpering about how the big, bad Republicans will say nasty things about them. Doing what you think is right and taking the heat is the essence of leadership.

[Kurt Ullman]

I stated at the time that GW reminded me of Mandy Pantakin (sp??) in the Princess Bride: "You have killed my father's chance at a second term. Prepare to die."

Although I would suggest that being bipartisan with the Democrats at the Budget Mugging (er Summit) was the main reason.

[Boden]

I believe the reason we're in Iraq is obvious. The small Bush believed that Sadam tried to kill his daddy so he was settling the score.

Boden

[Nate Nagel]

Which brings us full circle to my original point. McCain has no set convictions (say what you will about Bush, he has those - he's almost always wrong, but at least he has convictions) so it's impossible for me to vote for him.

nate

[Kurt Ullman]

But then that would also make it impossible for vote for Obama, too.

[Nate Nagel]

Obama simply by being younger hasn't had the same opportunities as McCain to go on record with one position and then eight years later support another one. The sad thing is, I would have voted for the Y2K McCain, before he was destroyed by the same Karl Rove who's working for the 2008 McCain.

I'll probably vote for Obama not because I want to but because I feel that the current Republican administration is literally dangerous to the American way of life and McCain has done little to distance himself from their policies and actions, his protestations of "I'm not George Bush" notwithstanding. The Republican party needs to move away - no, that's not strong enough, try "make a clean break" - from the neocons and religious right and back towards a more Goldwater-esque philosophy before I can ever consider supporting them.

I would be sorely tempted to vote Libertarian just to make a point if it weren't for the fact that the election is still close enough that there's a danger that that would allow McCain to win. That can't be allowed, period. I do live in one of those states that is still "too close to call" so I really don't feel that I can vote how I really want to, I need to cast the vote that will keep McCain and Palin out.

nate

[The Daring Dufas]

I recall this thing call The Vietnam Conflict. Democrats got us into it, Republicans got us out. Yet, to this day, I'm sure that the dumb masses blame the war in Vietnam on the Republicans. Just like my Negro American friends who refuse to believe that it was Republicans who freed the slaves. And no, I'm not a Republican. Like my brother says "Republicans disgust me but Democrats are special, they horrify me."

TDD

[aemeijers]

True that. Geezer and dingbat on one side, and a Chicago machine politician on the other (although I guess that is better than Lady McBeth running.) We're screwed either way. Both sides think my money belongs to them, they know better how to spend it than I do, and if they let me keep any of it, they are doing me a favor.

Next four years ain't gonna be pretty. I plan to hunker down and try to live through it as cheaply as possible. Sure wish there was a non-tinfoil 3rd party candidate this year.

-- aem sends...

[Kurt Ullman]

So inexperience at flip flopping is a reason to vote for someone?

I'd generally support you in the latter part. But McCain was never that answer. I am not as sanguine that Obama is the answer to the question of being literally dangerous..

As I with O and B.

[retired54]

Be sure to get the ones under your bed.

G'nite cowboy.

olddog

[Nate Nagel]

It ain't exactly a ringing endorsement, but it's better than a long, proven track record of it. Plus I was much more comfortable with McCain's "flip" than I was his "flop."

In retrospect that seems to be true, although I didn't know it. I recently picked up a book of Barry Goldwater's letters out of the bargain bin at my local bookstore, and what he has to say about McCain is enlightening. Apparently he was a weasel long before I ever realized it.

It's not an answer, it's just the lesser of two weevils.

That's your prerogative, but I have to say that while Obama merely concerns me, McCain and especially Palin scare the shit out of me. This from someone who tends to lean right of center.

Voting for McCain is sending the message to the Republican Party Machine that things don't need to change, and they most certainly do if they want to continue to exist as a viable political party. Pandering to the religious right and gung-ho trailer park dwellers is not the way to work.

nate

[Kurt Ullman]

Well, I'll file that under ignorance is bliss I guess. (g).

Lesser is relative (and very personal) term, I guess.

Which is my tendency. So there (phhftt!-grin). I think the danger to the US is greater with Obama precisely because he is less tested. I thought even last year, that no one was doing Obama a great service by pressuring him to get in now or be labelled as someone who was unable to get in the race. I think it would have been much better for the country and the candidate if he had taken my advice and waited until the next time. Even if Hiliary had made it, he would have been VERY young 8 years hence.

Worked in the past. Of course, selling your ass to the Unions and the Trial Lawyers is a well-proven political plus.

[Jim Yanik]

Nate Nagel wrote in news: [e-mail]:

Yup.

Obama has lied to you BIG time. He's counting on the "useful idiots",too,who only hear what he says and don't bother examining his past record.

[Nate Nagel]

Bush has lied to me (and you!) too. So has McCain. The only difference between them is the intent of their lies.

We've already seen where Bush's lies have taken us. McCain simply will tell you whatever you want to hear to get elected; I have no idea what his true agenda is. Obama is simply a Democrat; that's bad, but that's less bad than the devil I don't know.

The real problem is people like you who refuse to accept that you've been lied to and manipulated.

nate

[Jim Yanik]

Kurt Ullman wrote in news: [e-mail]:

Worse;the convictions Obama HAS already evidenced are those of communism. If Nate really fears for the Constitution,OBAMA is the one who will truly tear it apart.The Second Amendment will be the first to go,followed closely by the First Amendment.

But ol Nate has drunk the Kool-aid.