Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 181
  1. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by nthimage View Post
    Kenedy is one of Three (formerly) and actively sitting senators whom I have no respect for. The man's escapades resulted in the death of an innocent young girl; while there was a huge cover up, and side-step.

    Chappaquiddick incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The others are Chris Dodd, and Barney Frank who created the collapse of 2008.
    As much as I'd like to agree with you, I have to say that the number three is, at minimum, two short. Might I direct your attention to the great state of California!
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    This is quite amusing, I can't wait to hear the democrats explain this. This is the 3rd election recently where the great Obama comes riding in on his white horse, to save the day, and the people....the PEOPLE....have told Obama they are tired of his leftist liberal trash. I mean....this is Ted Kennedy's seat! ROFL (moderator edited)
    I protest my edited post. Would it have been better if I had said "in your face" Kennedies or "in your face" Obama? Is that better? Good grief. People in here act all tough until their precious Obama is attacked. You know he isn't a god. Grow up folks and just admit the dude is arleady becoming a weak Prez. I wonder how many people will ask for his help in the future on the campaign trail....and after just one year.....ROFL. Does this post need to be edited?
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #83  
    Hello Everyone,

    I posted this in another Forum, but will shift here. I predicted that I thought that Coakley would actually pull out the win. She obviously hasn't, and therefore my prediction was wrong. I'm very happy to admit that.

    It will be interesting to see what comes of this.

    At a minimum--we've restored a TINY amount of Checks and Balances that the one-party rule has effectively eliminated. Still--it is a very thin capacity on the Republican side.

    The upside for the leftists out there. NOW, you can cry about "obstructionist" Republicans without making fools of yourself, because technically, this is now possible.

    KAM
  4. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #84  
    Hello Everyone,

    I saw this in a story about the MA Senate Election

    Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern said the vote should be a "wake-up call" for Democrats that "now is the time for bold action."

    "The reason Ted Kennedy's seat is no longer controlled by a Democrat is clear: Washington's inability to deliver the change voters demanded in November 2008. Make no mistake, political paralysis resulted in electoral failure," Stern said.


    Now, I'd be hard pressed to find a more inaccurate spin on what happened last night. This in my view is no more than total self-delusion. I've heard this argument elsewhere, and it never made sense, but it is very clearly illustrated in this MA Senate Race.

    Attributing this loss for Democrats, as being due to FAILURE to pass Healthcare is completely wrong. Why would anyone take a result where the voters came out AGAINST what you are trying to do, as an indication that they really want you to do it.

    Brown Ran clearly against ObamaCare, yet somehow in Stern's mind they voted for Brown because they WANT ObamaCare. This is simply the most laughable reversal of logic I can think of. If they wanted to insure passage of ObamaCare, they would OBVIOUSLY vote for the Candidate who openly supported it--who had President Obama himself campaign for her just 3 days prior talking about the importance of the Healthcare bill in relation to this candidate.

    How can anyone who isn't totally irrational create this reversal in their minds and think it is reasonable?

    Massachusetts voters selected the Candidate who OPPOSED Obama's Healthcare plans, and for other reasons as well, but this was certainly a major issue at hand in this election.

    This is a wake up call for Democrats--but it is a call to go against what the American people are clearly saying (in poll after poll). They do not want this, and now, there is an undeniable (unless you are Andy Stern) demonstration of that. I'm guessing that many Practical Democrats (or those who simply fear for their position) got this message loud and clear.

    Edited to Add: Here's another quote from Howard Fineman at Newsweek.
    Politically, the bill has become what the late historian Barbara Tuchman called a "march of folly." Sometimes, she wrote, political or military leaders pursue strategies even after they are faced with incontrovertible evidence that their course will lead to ruin. Sticking to their original decision becomes a matter of faith, not reason.
    From this article: http://www.newsweek.com/id/231340

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 01/20/2010 at 10:37 AM.
  5. #85  
    Where are all the liberals today? Licking wounds? They don't seem quite as bold as they once were? Getting harder to hide behind Obama these days?
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  6. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Where are all the liberals today? Licking wounds? They don't seem quite as bold as they once were? Getting harder to hide behind Obama these days?
    To be honest, I was expecting a pushback from the Democrat Spin Machine.

    Maybe there are huddling up and discussing this, and that would be wise, because I think it is pretty clear--this is meaningful.

    Or do you mean the liberals Here in this forum?

    KAM
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Where are all the liberals today? Licking wounds? They don't seem quite as bold as they once were? Getting harder to hide behind Obama these days?
    I'll stand in for the liberals today. Most people would not consider me liberal, but I sympathize with their position enough to understand it.

    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138
    Brown Ran clearly against ObamaCare, yet somehow in Stern's mind they voted for Brown because they WANT ObamaCare. This is simply the most laughable reversal of logic I can think of. If they wanted to insure passage of ObamaCare, they would OBVIOUSLY vote for the Candidate who openly supported it...
    First you need to distinguish between "ObamaCare" and healthcare reform. The 2nd is needed, and if everyone is paying into a system, the risk is spread over a larger pool of people. While you might view this as "socialism", that's pretty much what insurance companies do anyway, so calling insurance "socialism" really isn't fair.

    2nd, I'm not sure Scott Brown yet understands what his his full constituency wants/needs. He has a good view of what his supporters want, but being that this is "the people's seat", he needs to hear from his remaining opponents and represent our state in a balanced way. I doubt that would mean completely eliminating a government mandated healthcare at the federal level. Even if it did, once discussion is opened up, congress might find ways they can foster state sponsored plans that still encourage states to adopt cost effective health care with greater economies of scale.

    Quote Originally Posted by nthimage
    Kennedy is one of Three (formerly) and actively sitting senators whom I have no respect for. The man's escapades resulted in the death of an innocent young girl; while there was a huge cover up, and side-step.
    While you may have no respect for him, many people did. I can think of no other senator more effective than Kennedy throughout his legislative career. Regarding Chappaquiddick, Ted could have done more had his judgment not been impaired. While he got off lightly, I'm sure this event forever shaped his life of service, which he would not have had to do given his families wealth. When you mention him in the context of other senators, you are implying you may not have liked his senatorial record also. Please give specifics about that.

    In closing, keep in mind that while I'm standing in for liberals here, I'm willing to continue legitimate discussion on these issues. I believe I've raised some points that we all should consider. (I won't respond to flames though.)
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  8. nthimage's Avatar
    Posts
    33 Posts
    Global Posts
    35 Global Posts
    #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    As much as I'd like to agree with you, I have to say that the number three is, at minimum, two short. Might I direct your attention to the great state of California!
    Well, Three I have 0% respect for. Maybe there are more than a few with the >0% respect

    OK, so your right

    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post

    While you may have no respect for him, many people did. I can think of no other senator more effective than Kennedy throughout his legislative career. Regarding Chappaquiddick, Ted could have done more had his judgment not been impaired. While he got off lightly, I'm sure this event forever shaped his life of service, which he would not have had to do given his families wealth. When you mention him in the context of other senators, you are implying you may not have liked his senatorial record also. Please give specifics about that.

    In closing, keep in mind that while I'm standing in for liberals here, I'm willing to continue legitimate discussion on these issues. I believe I've raised some points that we all should consider. (I won't respond to flames though.)
    OK, so it's ok to murder somebody if your life is "service" ? Ted was about himself and his family. His family built their fortune in crime. Edward Kennedy was so far left that the only reason he had any power recently is because he was one of the longest continually seated senetor's.

    I'm one of the fools whom believes in the Bill of Rights; and that powers not mentioned therein are designated to the states. Nothing Ted ever did put the power back to the state to control. So, how could I agree with anything he did in his life of self "service."

    Mary Jo, and her family are smiling.
  9. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    First you need to distinguish between "ObamaCare" and healthcare reform. The 2nd is needed, and if everyone is paying into a system, the risk is spread over a larger pool of people. While you might view this as "socialism", that's pretty much what insurance companies do anyway, so calling insurance "socialism" really isn't fair.
    I don't believe I've called Insurance "socialism." I just posted a review of where I think we should concentrate with Actual Healthcare Reform (which I support).

    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    2nd, I'm not sure Scott Brown yet understands what his his full constituency wants/needs. He has a good view of what his supporters want, but being that this is "the people's seat", he needs to hear from his remaining opponents and represent our state in a balanced way. I doubt that would mean completely eliminating a government mandated healthcare at the federal level. Even if it did, once discussion is opened up, congress might find ways they can foster state sponsored plans that still encourage states to adopt cost effective health care with greater economies of scale.
    He's stated fairly clearly that he believes Healthcare Reform is needed. He was in opposition to ObamaCare, presumably because he knows that it is a back-room, dirty-deal filled mess.

    I greatly favor State-based plans, so the people can decide much more directly what is good for them. This issue does not belong at the National Level, and that is an inherent problem throughout. They don't have the Constitutional power, or the practical power to do this to serve the people properly. A State level system has a better chance. Now, of course, the Federal government is already highly involved, so removing themselves to the maximum extend (retaining an oversight role) is likely an important part of real reform.

    The current Healthcare reform is very clearly a farce in my view--totally focused on political issue First and foremost, rather than having much of any concern about actually reforming Healthcare in America. That's the chief reason why I think it needs to be relegated to the dustbin of bad ideas.

    Let's work together to get ACTUAL reform, and take it step by step. It CAN be done, and if President Obama was Smart, he would get on board with this idea, rather than seeking to serve his leftist special interest. He's got a Fresh opportunity here, and he should take it. Bill Clinton was wise enough to understand this, and because of that, I think the Country Benefited--from some ACTUAL bipartisan deals.

    KAM
  10. #90  
    Its just the same old thing..

    Republicans LIE and Conive to get what they want, and it seems to work very well.

    Democrats are just too stupid to be in charge of ANYTHING.

    I quote Jon Stewart: "Its not a matter of the Republicans playing chess while the Democrats are playing checkers, its more like the Republicans are playing chess, while the democrats are in the nurses office, because they glued their balls to their thighs AGAIN!"

    Ughhh

    sickening poison that just seems to keep getting worse on BOTH ends..

    I QUIT
  11. #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    ...When you actually dissect the people who are "against" this healthcare reform, surveys show that a significant portion is actually liberals who think this bill is a copout and doesn't go far enough--most polls that show opposition to this healthcare plan don't give you the full story.
    Can you support this with at least two examples?
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    As a liberal, I completely blame the Democrats for their weak leadership. They caused this Massachusetts defeat.

    When you have a supermajority, you have to govern--that means passing the bills you say you were going to pass. If the Democrats had passed the healthcare bill in 6 months, rather than waivering for a year, Democrats could have claimed a victory in their #1 domestic priority.

    Whether you like the healthcare bill or not, if that's what you say you will pass when you get elected, you better pass something--or you're seen as a failure.
    No, You couldn't be more wrong. The Drive to "pass something" is exactly why they lost in Massachusetts, and why the people of this country (specifically independent voters) are opposing this. Thinking people in this country don't want "something"--that's political garbage. They want the RIGHT thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    If the healthcare bill ultimately fails, the Democrats should be thrown out just to learn a lesson (Just like the Democrats were thrown out after the Clinton bill failed). Stop pretending to be bi-partisan as the Republicans try to sabotage every piece of legislation--Democrats should have rolled over them and voted on one piece of legislation after another.
    I think you couldn't be more wrong. The Democrats weren't thrown out because they failed to pass something--they were thrown out, because people didn't like what they DID pass.

    Stop Pretending to be Bipartisan...done, your wish there has been in effect from the first minute in office. "Bipartisan" action was nothing more than a word.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Of course, many Democrats, like Republicans, are completely beholden to big business which gives them tons of contributions, which is why the Democrats always seem so split.
    Actually, I think the Obama Democrats have made new strides in this area. They are making great gains in Crony Capitalism. It would behoove honest liberals (who tend to dislike "big business") to realize that you've totally had the wool pulled over your eyes here.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I really do hope this election is a wake-up call to Obama and the Democrats--vote for your values, not your pocketbook. The country will respect that.
    I generally agree with that statement. Of course, you'd have to A) have values, and B) have sufficient numbers of voters who share those values. Of course, the American Public REMAINS a Center-Right country, so voting for extreme liberal positions won't likely get you elected, but at least it would be honest, and I'd welcome that.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    When you actually dissect the people who are "against" this healthcare reform, surveys show that a significant portion is actually liberals who think this bill is a copout and doesn't go far enough--most polls that show opposition to this healthcare plan don't give you the full story.
    Well, the bill is corrupt--very little doubt about that. I believe you when you say that liberals don't think it goes far enough, but I would disagree that the American people would want the extreme left wants either.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    The people in Massachusetts already have close to universal care (which Brown voted for as a state senator, by the way). The citizens of Massachusetts don't seem to be clamoring to end their universal care system, so I really doubt Brown's election is all about the current healthcare bill.
    Right--it is partially about the current healthcare bill, but more importantly I think its about the APPROACH to the bill (and others). If Massachusetts wants universal healthcare--great, go for it. Figure out a way you pay for it in Massachusetts and do whatever you want.

    I think that even Blue-State MA didn't like the tricks and maneuvering that were so common in the Healthcare bill. They realized that it was Political above anything else.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Everyone is upset about jobs and the economy. Although this is a great victory for the Republicans, the Republicans have to worry about when the jobs come back. People will be less upset and less willing to vote for the other party. When Reagan entered the presidency, a year later there was 10% unemployment. By the time of the re-election, unemployment levels had fallen and he won again.
    No--I think this is a win for the country. This healthcare debacle isn't good for the country. Its good for a few politicians. I think this actually benefits many democrats--including some politicians who may now have the backbone to refuse to walk the plank for the Obama Agenda. This election confirmed that the Obama approach isn't what the people of this country want, and it isn't too late for him to be what he promised to be--bipartisan, transparent and pragmatic. It's not too late for him to live up to his potential as a great communicator who CAN bring people together--if he simply tries.

    As far as unemployment...well, unfortunately (for everyone) I think it is unlikely we are going to get a big improvement in that by the next Election. Also--historically, the memory of the bad economy carries through significantly after the recovery (see Bush 41).

    It took Bill Clinton 2 years to lose his advantage due to his running left. It has taken President Obama 1 year, and he's fallen farther faster than anyone else. Its up to him whether he wants to become the next Jimmy Carter, or follow the more pragmatic path of Bill Clinton.

    My prediction...I think he will adhere to his ideologue roots, because those are the people he's surrounded himself with. They will tell him that he just needed to do the really unpopular thing with more intensity and it would all be ok. That's a losing strategy if I ever heard one.

    KAM
  13. #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by dianehelen View Post
    Its just the same old thing..

    Republicans LIE and Conive to get what they want, and it seems to work very well.

    Democrats are just too stupid to be in charge of ANYTHING.

    I quote Jon Stewart: "Its not a matter of the Republicans playing chess while the Democrats are playing checkers, its more like the Republicans are playing chess, while the democrats are in the nurses office, because they glued their balls to their thighs AGAIN!"

    Ughhh

    sickening poison that just seems to keep getting worse on BOTH ends..

    I QUIT
    You quit? How does one quit? You opt out of taxation & Laws? Where are you going?
  14. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I actually (somewhat) agree with KAM!! The current healthcare reform package isn't really that great. It doesn't do what true health reform should do. KAM and I, however, have different solutions. I want a single payer system but KAM wants a state-based, market based system. Fine. Both could work.
    I should clarify--I could accept a State based system (as being constitutionally more acceptable), but I prefer an actual market system (which we do not have).
    Single Payer, obviously isn't what I want, but if a State and its citizens decided that was good for them--I won't oppose it (I would in MY State).
    I'll reiterate, that I think that a major problem here isn't the what as much as the how. The approach to this was to steamroll anyone and everyone necessary and cut whatever deal is necessary, and the American people I think are not comfortable with that, nor should they be. We have a Constitution for a reason. Of course, I'm not assuming that this healthcare bill is dead--I think there are plenty of things that can be done to try and force it through. I just hope that wiser minds prevail.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Medicare, however, is the elephant in the room. You would have to get rid of Medicare for a market-based system to truly work. For real competition, you have to include the risk. The elderly are the riskiest, so you can't just throw them on to the government and expect private insurances to compete effectively. Ending Medicare, however, is politically impossible.
    That's largely true. However, if we treat Medicare as a cost (which it is) and not pretend it is part of the free market healthcare system, I think the free market system can still work...although in a less than ideal way.
    Eliminating Medicare isn't possible right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Do you really think the Republicans would allow Obama to pass ANY health bill if they could stop it? Even if it were a state-based, market-based bill, there is no way the Republican would allow a Democratic President from getting that victory.
    No, I really don't think that's true, because in the end, they have to answer to their voters, and if the voters really liked what was being proposed, they would be in the exact opposite position of the Dems right now.

    This whole year has been a demonstration that the American public still is willing to flex its muscles, and isn't as asleep as many assumed it is. That cuts both ways.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    That's the world of politics we live in today. So, "Actual" reform (whatever THAT means) is impossible unless one side runs over the other. Republicans have no interest in being bi-partisan at all-- don't pretend that if this healthcare bill fails, the Republicans are going to start working really hard on another one.
    Actual reform means something that isn't a political fraud--like the current, special interest bill is. It means something that in addition to having an actual benefit, it is accomplished above board, and without resorting to every trick in the book to shove down the throats of the public--against their will no less.

    Well, I don't speak for Republicans. I can only tell you what I advocate doing (and I started another thread on that exact topic). My demand is for good government. One of the reasons I am so disgusted with the Democrats is that they specifically followed a path of opposition at every turn, no matter the cost. I sure as heck am not going to support that same nonsense from the Republicans.

    KAM
  15. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #95  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    You quit? How does one quit? You opt out of taxation & Laws? Where are you going?
    Atlas Shrugged.

    KAM
  16. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #96  
    This vote is simply a correction. The Democrats rode to a super-majority solely on Obama's coattails and nothing more. Now that the kids are gone from the polls, the responsible voters will start evening the spread to be more reflective of what this country truly is: Center Right.
  17. #97  
    +1
    lol
  18. #98  
    Liberal = *****. Its been said before and I will say it again here. They amount nothing more than a deceitful, treehugging caravan of whining pseudointellectual blowhards in politics... their lives repeatedly consist of "do as I say, NOT AS I DO" particularly when it comes to paying taxes or "saving the environment".

    Their attacks on republicans for financially "taking care " of their cronies or good ole boys have proven to be hypocritical as they now are allowing the GREATEST bonuses in the history of wall street to be given to the very bankers who ruined this country.

    The subprime mess was created by clinton, perpetuated by chris dodd but they blame all failures on repubs.

    They were mouthing off about gaining the majority in congress and yet here it is not even a year later and they have LOST it miserably - IN LIBERAL DOMINATED STATES!!!!! ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!! Take it, dippocrats, TAKE IT!!!

    They nominate fellow cronies who don't pay their taxes... nearly all of obama's nominees were disgraced by such unethical practices.... They are a party rife with corruption - just take New Jersey as an example, and don't even get me started on charlie the " banking queen" rengel... the filthy fat tax evading toad with that disgusting speech impediment who is head of the "ways and means" committee.
    They view al gore as some planet -saving demi god when he is one of the most disingenious rats on the planet.... driving one of his FOUR suvs from his gigantic carbon footprint mansion to his chem trail belching private jet to speak to us about how we consume too much or are destroying the planet. (did I mention there were 9 fundamental factual errors / lies in his "iinconvenient truth"?)
    Scum.

    Good riddance to these vile snakes. My post was pretty harsh but I have nothing but contempt for the bile that is left... (should be called the "theft" rather than the left)
  19. #99  
    Healthcare Reform:

    1) Get rid of pre-existing conditions
    2) Require participation. I hate this step, but step 1 only works if you do step 2. You can't have people coming onboard with no pre-ex only when they have an illness or accident. Plus, this helps keep premium costs down as the healthy and youngsters are paying into the system.
    3) Step 1 helps the person who can afford the coverage but can't get the coverage, but does nothing for the person who simply can't afford it. So, the states must help fund those that can't afford it. This can be done by some type of gas tax (.05/gallon?) or sales tax. These funds must be allocated for health premium assistance. The amount (%) you qualify for depends on your income.
    4) Open up coverage across state lines.
    5) Aggressively attack Medicare fraud.
    6) Tort reform.

    Healthcare reform is needed.....but it does not need to be taken over by the government. Government is not the answer to every problem. The above is obviously simplified, but I feel it is something that can work. It opens up the doors to the uninsured and will help with the costs of healthcare coverage. Isn't that what we are suppose to be trying to fix?

    The election results last night, in my opinion, should say to members of Congress that what has been proposed by the Senate and the House is not what they want. Don't make it just a democrat thing. Obama said he could reach across the aisle, well prove me wrong Obama, and actually do that. Both Republicans and democrats have a history of saying they will do that, but in reality, it means reaching across the aisle to bring the other side on board with our (whichever party is in control) plan. How about we actually get both parties involved and get something passed?

    And finally.....life in American would be much better if we had term limits and the Fair Tax.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  20. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Sadly, the presidency has become an American Idol contest. The dizzying high ratings of Bush 2 and Obama were unsustainable, by any account. The fall was absolutely predictable. The high came because people were absolutely rejecting Bush and the Republicans. The fall came when the Democrats showed they could not easily end the Bush policies. People want an end to the wars; they want fair, cheap, easily accessible healthcare; they want wall street to stop giving huge bonuses; they want jobs.
    The fall came when the people realized that the claims made during a campaign that they ignorantly were swept up in didn't make any sense in the first place. The reason the crash is so far and fast is that Obama basically promised things he couldn't do, and people made the mistake of buying into that nonsense. The Obama campaign also relied heavily on the blame-game tactics painting the President as some lord of the country who could make things good or bad at his whim, forgetting that this same nonsensical notion could bite him when things go bad that are out of his control.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    They are growing disenchanted with Obama because he can't do all this magically at once but the people demand it now. The Republicans have shown no vision on how to achieve any of this, so their election is based on a rejection of Obama, not because they have anything interesting to offer.
    No, they are growing disenchanted, because they bought into a pack of lies--and are probably angry at themselves for buying into such false hope.

    I would agree that currently Republicans are benefiting from growing disappointment with Obama and Democrats. I would also agree that Republicans lack vision--which is why they fall into the same idiotic big-government nightmare that Democrats actively pursue. I don't care who does it--its unacceptable to me in either case. I'm hoping that someone who values liberty and actually follows the Constitution can get elected in sufficient number, but I'm not holding my breath. If not--I'm left (again) with the lesser of two idiots (evils).

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Funny, that's exactly what the strategy Republicans have taken. They think that people rejected Bush and his Republican party because they weren't conservative enough--so they are heading out even further right.
    Well, actually, in a Center-Right country that is a somewhat viable strategy. Ronald Reagan ran as a conservative and was elected twice--massive victory on the second. George W Bush ran as a Conservative (whether he was or not really) and won twice. His Father, betrayed Conservatism in a high profile way (new taxes) and paid for it. Jimmy Carter--massive loss as a liberal. Bill Clinton--ran as a Centrist, won, ran left, lost the Congress and was forced back to the Center, and won big. Barack Obama didn't run openly as a leftist ideologue--he ran as a Pragmatic guy who would govern from the center, and while I wasn't fooled by that, I think many people were and thanks to Bush fatigue it worked well enough.

    While I think it only goes so far, running right works much better than running left in a Center-Right country. I know you might not want to believe that, but its proven true again and again. The fact is that the Democrat Leadership of today is already significantly outside of the general public's political range.

    If President Obama continues his leftist ideological pursuits, and is open about it in an election, I don't see how he can win. Liberals only win when they run to the center. Republicans generally don't have to do this, again, because we are a Center-Right country, and on economic policy, we are even more right. Most independent voters are fiscal conservatives, and social liberals. Someone (it might have been you) mentioned that all Republicans need to do to win in 2010 is focus on fiscal conservatism--that's a winning issue for them.

    KAM

Posting Permissions