Hey, how do you think I feel? I started it with a simple request for opinions on an article I read that suggested we needed more than 2 viable political parties.
IIRC, about the first 5 responses addressed that issue :-).
For what's it worth, I agree with each of your sentiments, except of course the P.O. part! ; )
You created a monster! :-)
Okay, okay. Having more than two major parties is like putting steel treads on a Prius. We don't HAVE a parliamentary system where multiple parties can wheel and deal. We have a unitary executive and our form of government really doesn't lend itself to multiple parties.
The last third party with any real traction was Teddy Roosevelt's "Bull Moose" party that broke away from the Republicans. Teddy got enough votes to deny the presidency to Taft and we got Woodrow Wilson. To a lesser degree, Ross Perot was still able to deny the election to Bush(41) and we ended up with Clinton.
Which was a very good thing for our economy, we had jobs, spending money, low inflation. The Bushes were too far right, and now we have some kind of wacko leader who knows more more about how to hurt the economy than anyone else. Hopefully the public will come to realize before it's too late. Let's raise the debt limit--yeah, like that's going to help... again! I don't side with any party, other than Libertarian, but doubt that party will ever make it. Too bad McCain said "if it takes a 100 years of war so be it" else he may have won. I won't vote for a "war" president if I know he/she is one.
Bush was "right"? NCLB and prescription drugs were *not* conservative issues.
BTW, presidents don't raise debt limits.
On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 07:43:01 -0800 (PST), the infamous " snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com" scrawled the following:
Whassat? National Coalition of Liberal Bozos?
No, they tell the idiot CONgress to do it.
-- In order that people may be happy in their work, these three things are needed: They must be fit for it. They must not do too much of it. And they must have a sense of success in it. -- John Ruskin, Pre-Raphaelitism, 1850
"No Child Left Behind"
And if Uppity told you to jump off a bridge?
Well he is the Messiah, right?
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:47:48 -0800 (PST), the infamous " snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com" scrawled the following:
Equally bad on the Conservative side.
I'd say "I'll be right behind you." then uncross my finners.
-- In order that people may be happy in their work, these three things are needed: They must be fit for it. They must not do too much of it. And they must have a sense of success in it. -- John Ruskin, Pre-Raphaelitism, 1850
That was my point. Bush was *not* a conservative, in any way.
That works.
Indeed he was not. He was/is completely devoid of any principles or morals.
It's not surprising you'd come up with something so original. What a moron.
:
Oh, I don't deserve that much credit; a few billion of us already had that figured out. And it's maroon. Mr. Maroon to you.
Hmm. One of his first acts was to curtail fetal stem cell research, a bete noir among social conservatives.
During his tenure, he managed five (I think) tax cuts, the darlings of economic conservatives.
No conservative, social or economic, will fault with the Alito and Roberts appointments to the Supreme Court.
Then there were other initiatives which conservatives generally supported, such as the Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, Office of Faith-based Initiatives, and of course the darling of the neo-conservatives, preemption in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Of course MY favorite conservative didn't get elected (I wasn't running), but an honest appraisal of Bush would be that he was more conservative than not.
Uh, that's (generally) the mark of liberals. Interestingly, our current president hasn't been to church - so far as I know - in the year that he's been in office. Surely there are churches in D.C. run by loons.
What the hell does that have to do with anything?
Bill Clinton attended church and could not keep his dick in his pants, so conservatives don't have an exclusive on hypocrisy.
Church attendance makes one moral? How long a list do you want which proves that many conservative right-wingers can also be hypocrites? How many church attendees (of political ilk) see it as a photo-op? They attend because it gets them votes?
Isn't there some room at The Family Centre, the one John Ensign attends?... (speaking of loons)
Oh.. and HOW are Ted Haggard and Jimmy Swaggart doing these days?
Does Cheney attend church? Did he find one that doesn't enforce the False Witness clause?
You, Bub, come off as too intelligent not to be baiting. You're not that blind.
I disagree. Every step of the way, Bush supported a larger and more powerful Federal government.
With respect, the size of the government is not the test of conservativism as it is with liberals.
Conservatives are not opposed to all forms of an enlarged government. For example, we enthusistically root for a larger military. And, or course, larger prisons. A bigger border patrol certainly. Police and fire departments could almost always stand enlargement. More courts - both criminal and civil - would ease some of society's pains.
No, conservatives are selective in the role of government and hold that many things (such as psychological treatment of dogs with ADD) should be left to the individual.
I agree that going to church doesn't make one moral - I never said it did. Most would agree that a moral person - one who holds that morality is absolute - attends organized worship services. Obama does not attend church. The odds of him being devoted to the concept are greatly diminished, although certainly not zero.
Moreover, after a mere scratching of the surface, you'll find that progressives hold morality to be situational, not absolute - that is, often the end justifies the means. And Mr. Obama is certainly of the progressive inclination.
Heck, if simply going to church imbued one with the teachings of the faith, then Obama's 23 years in Reverend Wright's church would surely have inclined Obama toward immutable precepts of humility, charity, love, justice, ....
Wait...
Never mind.
-----
As an aside, hypocrisy gets a bad rap. Ninety percent of gynecologists are men.
Oh I agree with you that church attendance is not dispositive one way or the other. Ronald Reagan almost never went to church and today, well, he surely sits at the right-hand of God.
HomeOwnersHub website 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.