Bipartisan Politics

[Mr. Blue]

Reading this forum lately kind of kills my hope for this idea of bipartisan politics. Basically politics have become so polarized, so narrow-minded that I sincerely doubt there will ever be this notion of bipartisanism ever again.

Democrats hate Republicans with a passion, Republicans hate Democrats with a passion, and us independents just look at the spectacle of it all and think...why can't they find common ground?

Perhaps it's our culture that's promoting this carnival type atmosphere where intelligent people are reduced to a WWF audience and they're looking for a smackdown, lol...but seriously if America can't embrace some basic bipartisan concepts we're doomed.

Democrats / Republicans have different agendas...fine. However, why can't they get together on some issues, comprise, and get 'er done. Education, Dependency on foreign oil, healthcare, etc, etc, etc. There's middle ground solutions to all these problems, but both parties are jackasses and it's either done their way or no way.

Political Parties = The New Religion

[stefan segal]

Blue...some behavior precludes the 'kiss and make up' of our sandbox days...but don't dispair...good ideas and the displaying of honest and right apparent motives sucker dems all thetime to work with repugs...to include repugs...to sometimes even trust repugs...until they stab us in the back again.

We dems aren't so stupid as to continually expose our backs for stabbing...we value the the remedial laws passed in that interi, period enough to pay the price of embracing repugs...even though we "knew you were a snake before we took you in."

Stefan

[Mr. Blue]

Stefan, I'm glad you're around to prove my point, lol. "Repugs" and all, its this mentality of them vs. us...it's just like religion. People are isolating themselves on a set of beliefs that may or may not be right.

There's always solutions available when intelligent people get together with the intent on compromise, giving a little, and dealing with differences in an open minded kind of way.

Not all republicans are bible thumping megalomaniacs, just like all democrats aren't loony tree hugging nuts thats weak on national security...in fact the "core" of America is this moderate middle that's willing to compromise on topics...the problem is the fanatics of both parties prevent this middle of the road approach.

Nixon in 69 said something that's still accurate today, he referred to this "Silent Majority" in America. Well this silent majority still exists, it's alive and well, and it doesn't follow the extreme right or left of politics. It's not represented by the media which is either so far left or so far right you can't get a straight answer, it's not represented by the political candidates, and this silent majority every Presidential election is left picking between two extremes that don't represent their moderate beliefs.

As an independent I often wonder why anyone would show allegiance to either party...they both kind of suck.

[stefan segal]

Blue, I don't argue with your point on the character and ethics of both parties, but I do take exception with you balling me together with those who follow a doctrine rather than assets and merits of the situation.

In my experiience...and I've been tracking politics more and less since FDR..I quit for some years when Eisenhaur was elected.

My first letter to the president telling him I knew him as a monster thief and liar was nixon.

As I was saying, in my experience, the repugs have more than earned my unrelenting emnity...unless they alter their 'rule with a fist...little people be damned" view of governing.

Stefan

[Mr. Blue]

People view their own party through rose colored glasses. If History is viewed objectively you'd find that you'd have to go pretty far back to find a President worthy of praise. If I had to pick one it'd probably be Theodore Roosevelt. It's a pretty sad assessment when you can say that there's been no President in your lifetime you admired.

As I'm friends with Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, and Green Party Members (there may even be a communist or two, lol)...I just never understood the undying loyalty some people have to their party. All you need to do is look at the news 7 days in a row, even when someone in a political party does wrong, NO ONE from the political party will condemn them unless it's absolutely necessary and then they make sure to illustrate how the other party is just as a bad.

Why is that? Republicans defend Republicans tooth and nail. Democrats defend Democrats the same way...even if these people are DEAD WRONG. It seems to me we're becoming a nation of zombies, spoon fed rhetoric from both parties, we dismiss the failings of our "own kind" and magnify the failings of the "others"

Personally, time to wake up and smell the coffee that our system of government is broken...the people in power have perverted the system to make sure they maintain power forever. That's probably the one thing both Democrats and Republicans agree on...how to keep power between those two parties and keep everyone else out. There is one other thing they agree on, but that's a topic for another day.

[stefan segal]

It's more often than not that dems can't get a single line of action together because they don't line up like repug ducks.

I believe it takes a disaster like butch/cheney to scare dems into the solidarity you are witnessing today...that and the way repugs have been steamrolling dems beginning with the Clinton impeachment...there's a lot of anger built up...and I for one commend the dem's monumental civility.

As the momentum picks up in deconstructing the repug blitzkrieg engine of war on our Constitution, one by one carting them off to jail or hiding in abject disgrace (awaiting their trials to be assigned their own cell like delay), you will see great changes for the better...even as the country's economy goes up in smoke.

When Edwards/Richardson take over in 08, you will see what democrats can do to pull this country together.

Have you paid attention to the dem budget? Fiscal surplus beginning in '12...with laws protecting paygo that cannot be changed in the future.

Whatever you call youself...have you seen repugs move us in the direction of growth in any area in their time since "contract on america"?...it has all been down hill...social services cut to the bone or cut out entirely...schools in disarray for no child left behind...air and water quality turned to shit, labor protections recinded, vets homeless living on the streets..point to an area that doesn't have a corporation in their name that has prospered or even grown since the repug gained control.

I'll wait for your answer Blue. But you say you are ambivilent about parties...green or socialist etc. but I bet you definitely are not...I repeat NOT comfortable with repugs running government...even though you attempt to pass for totally non-partisan.

Stefan

[Bill]

I just don't see the country recovering from this and getting back together. At least not for years.

A vicous stalemate is the best we can hope for. If they fight, at least they are not governing badly and mucking things up all the more.

And, I figure the republicans started it, so I don't think anybody should complain if they end up catching a beating.

Besides, nobody has any idea how to solve the real problems.

So, I figure your initial argument, the end of bipartisanship, is probably true.

[kres24GT]

Reading this forum lately kind of kills my hope for this idea of bipartisan politics. Basically politics have become so polarized, so narrow-minded that I sincerely doubt there will ever be this notion of bipartisanism ever again.

Democrats hate Republicans with a passion, Republicans hate Democrats with a passion, and us independents just look at the spectacle of it all and think...why can't they find common ground?

Perhaps it's our culture that's promoting this carnival type atmosphere where intelligent people are reduced to a WWF audience and they're looking for a smackdown, lol...but seriously if America can't embrace some basic bipartisan concepts we're doomed.

Democrats / Republicans have different agendas...fine. However, why can't they get together on some issues, comprise, and get 'er done. Education, Dependency on foreign oil, healthcare, etc, etc, etc. There's middle ground solutions to all these problems, but both parties are jackasses and it's either done their way or no way.

Political Parties = The New Religion


They have different agendas? Since when?

[Mr. Blue]

I'll wait for your answer Blue. But you say you are ambivilent about parties...green or socialist etc. but I bet you definitely are not...I repeat NOT comfortable with repugs running government...even though you attempt to pass for totally non-partisan.

I'm not comfortable with any politician that I've helped to elect since I had the right to vote. That fact alone is disturbing to me. Am I pleased with how the Republicans are running things? No. Am I pleased with how the Democrats are running things? No.

Republicans are repeating history. The same road that has been trampled on by Presidents since we decided to become world police. We've forsaken our citizens to fight ideological wars abroad, we've hurt our freedoms fighting invisible phantoms, and the parties in power, whether it be Democrat and Republican have allowed this nonsense to continue.

I fault both parties for the state our country is in because politicians are too worried about poll numbers to actually sprout a backbone and do the right thing.

So how do we turn it around when both parties have failed us? I've run a few businesses in my life, whenever I've had a problem where two people are bickering and it's hurting their productivity...they either settle it or they get fired.

Send your campaign contributions to the Blue Party :D

[Mr. Blue]

I just don't see the country recovering from this and getting back together. At least not for years.

A vicous stalemate is the best we can hope for. If they fight, at least they are not governing badly and mucking things up all the more.

And, I figure the republicans started it, so I don't think anybody should complain if they end up catching a beating.

Besides, nobody has any idea how to solve the real problems.

So, I figure your initial argument, the end of bipartisanship, is probably true.

I don't see America recovering anytime soon. In fact I almost understand how a Roman felt during the Fall of the empire.

[stefan segal]

Blue...you and Kres have a lot of general dissatisfaction in common...neither one of you have offered up much in the way of positive efforts in suggestions...Kres is a "johnny one note"...playing his single tune moronically in it's frequency and sameness, and you, seem to suffer from paralysing buyer's remorse...been married long?

Blue...it's like when sea-ice cracks and begins floating apart...you make a choice or not making a choice becomes a choice. Our politics today is just like the sea-ice...split and quickly moving apart...Blue...this is no time to agonize over your insecurities like constant worrying over prayer beads...life is passing you by...your window on freedom of choice is quickly closing.

I notice you have the ability to properly analize a situation...an ability lacking in friend Kres...but unlike Kres, who makes his chioces with the gusto of the effectual male...be them ever so dimly percieved, you dither and whine about perfection and where perfection is so lacking in practice...what I don't understand is where does the payoff occur?

What do you get out of your stance..is it that you can state with some accuracy that you never backed a wrong play?

If this is so, a couple of things come to mind: One, is that if you do have a gut scale of right and wrong...you don't listen enough to allow your responses see the light of day, and the second is there must be one hell of a lot of internal prevaracation kicking around in your interior space to justify the bullshit going on in there...of which your protestations here give off just the whisp of the stink from it's parent source.

In short...I suspect your protestations as motivated by other reasons than you are professing here. What do you say Blue?

Stefan

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

Mr Blue, ever heard of the " southern strategy', implementeed by GOP in mid to late '60's because they were losing? Now, how in the hell do you expect there to be bi-partianship after that? Add to the fact that the Dems 3 greatest leaders were murdered in '63 and '68 and you expect bi-partianship?

[kres24GT]

Blue...you and Kres have a lot of general dissatisfaction in common...neither one of you have offered up much in the way of positive efforts in suggestions...Kres is a "johnny one note"...playing his single tune moronically in it's frequency and sameness, and you, seem to suffer from paralysing buyer's remorse...been married long?

Blue...it's like when sea-ice cracks and begins floating apart...you make a choice or not making a choice becomes a choice. Our politics today is just like the sea-ice...split and quickly moving apart...Blue...this is no time to agonize over your insecurities like constant worrying over prayer beads...life is passing you by...your window on freedom of choice is quickly closing.

I notice you have the ability to properly analize a situation...an ability lacking in friend Kres...but unlike Kres, who makes his chioces with the gusto of the effectual male...be them ever so dimly percieved, you dither and whine about perfection and where perfection is so lacking in practice...what I don't understand is where does the payoff occur?

What do you get out of your stance..is it that you can state with some accuracy that you never backed a wrong play?

If this is so, a couple of things come to mind: One, is that if you do have a gut scale of right and wrong...you don't listen enough to allow your responses see the light of day, and the second is there must be one hell of a lot of internal prevaracation kicking around in your interior space to justify the bullshit going on in there...of which your protestations here give off just the whisp of the stink from it's parent source.

In short...I suspect your protestations as motivated by other reasons than you are professing here. What do you say Blue?

Stefan


Any solution that doesn't involve being a dem sheep is deaf on your years, there is no point.

[Mr. Blue]

In short...I suspect your protestations as motivated by other reasons than you are professing here. What do you say Blue?

My motivations is to say the system is broken it's not just the right wheel, but the left as well. If you don't focus on the complete problem you never find a solution.

Obviously this standpoint will offend Republicans and Democrats a like that both parties have short changed America, have been inept in leading, and has lead us down the road to ruin.

You obviously are getting annoyed that I'm including the democrats in this statement, but considering I haven't agreed with the U.S. going to war in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq part I, Iraq the Sequel, and any number of smaller actions between those biggies...you can see why I'm not a fan of Democrats since they owned a few of those actions or sat on the sidelines.

As I've always said, I'm a strict isolationist...that's why I like Bill Richardson as at one time he said the U.S. military should only be used if a U.S. territory is attacked, now there's a novel idea. Yes, he's a Democrat, will he be nominated? I seriously doubt it as he doesn't fit the cookie cutter Democrat.

The problem is bureaucracy has replaced commonsense, bickering has replaced bipartisan action, and Nero is fiddling while Rome burns.

[kres24GT]

My motivations is to say the system is broken it's not just the right wheel, but the left as well. If you don't focus on the complete problem you never find a solution.

Obviously this standpoint will offend Republicans and Democrats a like that both parties have short changed America, have been inept in leading, and has lead us down the road to ruin.

You obviously are getting annoyed that I'm including the democrats in this statement, but considering I haven't agreed with the U.S. going to war in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq part I, Iraq the Sequel, and any number of smaller actions between those biggies...you can see why I'm not a fan of Democrats since they owned a few of those actions or sat on the sidelines.

As I've always said, I'm a strict isolationist...that's why I like Bill Richardson as at one time he said the U.S. military should only be used if a U.S. territory is attacked, now there's a novel idea. Yes, he's a Democrat, will he be nominated? I seriously doubt it as he doesn't fit the cookie cutter Democrat.

The problem is bureaucracy has replaced commonsense, bickering has replaced bipartisan action, and Nero is fiddling while Rome burns.


The sheep can't hear you Blue. All they can say is my party is only 99% as corrupt as the other guys, vote for us.

[Bill]

It is sad that Richardson won't get much of a chance - but we can't know this for sure yet. We have to wait for the first primaries.

However, Blue, and Kres, most of your criticisms still sound like covert apologies for the republicans, and secret admiration for republican rule.

Attacking the dems serves the repubs.

There remain no other viable options.

Without a viable option, anti-dem attacks can only have one purpose.

So put up your viable option.

[Mr. Blue]

However, Blue, and Kres, most of your criticisms still sound like covert apologies for the republicans, and secret admiration for republican rule.

Attacking the dems serves the repubs.

Bill, normally I agree with a lot of what you say but your completely off base with this one. I voted for Nader the first time around and would have voted for him again, but ended up voting for Kerry because Bush was the worst of two evils.

Covert apologies for the Republicans...nope...wanting to make the system work...yep. Perhaps I was mistaken with this thread though...Bipartisan Politics is alive and well, but it's working in an extremely perverse way. Republicans have more or less gotten a pass from the Democrats to do whatever the hell they want and the Democrats get to complain about it.

Now this is taken from a piece Nader wrote regarding the Democrats:

It is the 2008 election that looms over this new Congress. For the Democrats in office, with few exceptions, extreme caution is the mode. This means that all the outrages Democrats attributed to the Bush regime since 2001--many of which could have been stopped by the large Democratic minority then in the Congress* are not on the agenda today.

http://www.counterpunch.org/nader01062007.html

Guess what...you're allowed to disagree with Republicans and also criticize Democrats for doing nothing to stop it. Nader, a man that suggests Bush should be impeached, yet he's able to point out the failings of the Democrats...interesting huh? Perhaps the sign of a free thinker that doesn't pray to a political party.

It's almost laughable that you try to make me sound like a Republican supporter because I happen to point out the democrats have done fuck nothing to stop the republicans.

Politics = The New Religion = Don't question my religion because that'll make you an outsider that agrees with the enemy, LOL.

[exarmyranger]

Yo Mr.Blue,Bill,imo you are excactly what doc ordered to keep the government intact...divide and controll.You cut the 2 party bullshit out of the text and your on the same side as far as political opinions.For the most part anyway.ex

[Bill]

I'm just sayin', Blue, grumbling about a lack of bipartisanship now, after what seems to me to be a pretty damn disasterous period of one party rule, is hard to interpret as anything but an apology for the republicans.

Besides, I've seen more political action in the last few months than I saw in the previous two years. So, I'm not even sure you can support the claim that a lack of bipartisanship is hobbling government right now.

It's just hurting the republicans, and uncovered all their corruption.

What bipartisanship do you want to see, specifically? What do you want to see accomplished that isn't being accomplished because the dems are putting the clampdown on the repubs, instead of "playing nice" and looking for compromises?

What compromise do you want?

[Bill]

... you try to make me sound like a Republican supporter because I happen to point out the democrats have done fuck nothing to stop the republicans.

That's an interesting statement, because you're being a bit more specific.

What should the dems do to stop the republicans?

If I misunderstood your intent, my apologies - I've just been reading examples of ways in which various pundits are saying "The Dems are doing this" and The dems are doing that", when a little research reveals the repubs did way way worse when they controlled the gavels. It may have skewed my interpretations.

[Mr. Blue]

What they're doing now is window dressing...things that were inane to begin with and the avoidance of real long term issues that have plagued us for awhile now. If I were to give you a list off the top of my head:

Social Security Reform - how many times has this been used as a campaign pledge and nothing comes of it.

Education reform - Do I really need to elaborate how America is slipping behind other industrialized nations?

Dependency on foreign oil - Well? We've pretty much known for awhile now we're going to be screwed eventually.

Immigration reform - right or left, let's fix the southern border already...either get a workers program setup, fine the shit out of companies using illegals, do something. What cheeses me off is that they make it like

Outsourcing - Umm, hello? Do we send every job we have out of the country?

Health Care - No, let's not provide health care for our people, but let's make sure we help out every other dinky country on the planet thumbsup:

Campaign finance reform - Completely overhaul the system so our politicians don't get bought off by lobby groups.

Trade Deficit - Again, do I need to explain this

A Foreign Policy that has failed America for the last 100 years or so.

That took me all of 1 minutes to type out...if I actually spent a full hour writing out the problems with America I'm pretty sure I can get this post a few dozen pages long.

So, a lot of these problems have existed for a really long time now...it's not like these problems have suddenly sprung up a week ago and the politicians haven't had time to react. If a system fails it's people for that many years, on that many topics, the system is BROKEN

Republicans and Democrats both should be charged with treason. What's the big issue of the last campaign???? Gay Marriage, because you know all the other shit that I listed isn't as important as Mr. and Mr. Smith setting up house.

I'm not sure...this is just a wild thought here...but I think America might be in trouble and someone should do something about it. I mean I vote for candidates in hopes they'll actually do something instead of spending all their time preparing for the next election.

Just a thought though...don't want to upset anyone with my wild ravings of how the status quo politicians have done nothing to address these problems and how status quo politicians keep getting elected.

[Mr. Blue]

What should the dems do to stop the republicans?

Let's see...When Robert Byrd was attempting to filibuster the resolution to go to war with Iraq, said we were giving too much power to the President...he couldn't even get enough support from his own party to make it happen.

Need more? There is more...but I don't really want to spend my time digging up all the examples. Even a party in the minority can have great sway over public policy if they have the backbone for it.

It's more than just one incident though or one president or one congress...our politicians have failed us for a long time now and leading us to become a second rate power in the world.

[Bill]

Those are all good issues - and there's no politically possible answers for any of them in the current situation.

Personally, I think investigations untill the ground of DC is soaked in the blood and sweat of the investigated is the best possible thing that could happen to this country.

More important than politically impossible attempts to solve intractable problems.

Because transparency, and a government that fears it's people, is what we need, after 30 years of despotism, nepotism, and careerist corruption.

Watching politicians squirm is effective medicine for the american soul.

[Mr. Blue]

...a government that fears it's people, is what we need

Agreed. The system just seems broken to me...maybe beyond repair.

[stefan segal]

If that is what you think Blue..then it's time to get out the tool box...right?

A major prerequisite for fixing anything, I think you'll agree, doesn't involve trashing that which you need to fix.

That you grouse about all the inw

[stefan segal]

inequities and imperfections abounding..an no one can argue them out of sight or declaim their truth, does not have the positive effect of washinton dc getting on buses and going home while others who you feel more befit your idea of a proper governing body move in to take thier place...sounds a bit juvenile a reaction to a problem doesn't it...even to you?

As you are so eager in your critiques of repugs and dems alike, to spread out thier shortcommings in talent and honesty for us to view, has it occurred to you that maybe it is the power and money connected with the position that corrupts whomever you send to stand in for "the buck stops here"...in light of fact, it turns out that many bucks stop here.

If you admit that the trouble with government is people...any people, then would it be more to the point to fix that which is in place now, rather than hope these less than honest brokers stand down to allow a new crew to shoulder them out of their positions?

And most importantly, since we already acknowleged that people run the government and those same people interpret and make the laws, isn't it much better to vote in the group that is most caught in the headlights of general transparency, rather than those who have structured our agencies, judiciary, circumvented our Constitution, and suborned our press, all aimed at hiding their headlong rush to rape the public weal while transferring that wealth to the corporate cabal?

Blue...wouldn't that make more sense while you are waiting for perfection to strike DC like a bolt of lightning from the finger of some equally ellusive finger of god...before you commit to being part of the solution or the problem?

Think about it...

Stefan

[exarmyranger]

The Norsemen,called the small inland islands that dotted the marshlands Wyie's.The leaders of these little pieces of semi-dry island's were called,Kings of the Wyie's,or WyieKings.The kingdoms they raided over time pronouced w's,as v's like,"I vant to be alone",Hence they became The Viking's,the tribes that raided,and later conquered England,Ireland,Northern France,and continued to raid,and trade throughout Northern Europe. Norsemen/Norman's.Blah,Blah,Blah...To get back to the point.The Vikings were Danes,Norwegians,and Swedes,seperate self governing tribes/clans,but allie's/and Kinsmen.One practice/custom/law all had in common,the one that once made,and kept them strong untill 1100 or so.(when no longer practiced they lost,much more than they gained)Was this;When a man die's,his lands,material wealth,virtually all his possesions,including his wife/or concubine,were sent to the grave/pyre with him.No son,brother,next of kin,inherited or profited in anyway.Now that went for the son of a King same as the son of a common fisherman.Thus eliminating the risk of any self absorbed asshole becoming a King by way of the wealth,and/or acomplishments of the father.IMO...One of the few Law's created by men,that was truely for the betterment of the people,as a whole... :oldman: "Seems like alot of the problems we blame on political partys and the men they support,would be eliminated,or have never ocoured if that simple/logical rule of law was endorsed by our forefathers...ex

[Bill]

That makes for a pretty funny image, Ex.

When a politician gets voted out, we toss everything he owns on a big fire in front of the capital. Then we toss him on it, followed by his staff.

That'll take care of the revolving door between politics and lobbyists.

Cut down on a few media talking heads, too. ;-}

[Mr. Blue]

If that is what you think Blue..then it's time to get out the tool box...right?

A major prerequisite for fixing anything, I think you'll agree, doesn't involve trashing that which you need to fix.

If I have a toaster that doesn't work I get out the tool box and repair it...if the toaster is too far gone I throw it out and buy a new one. A tool box won't fix this problem...we need a new toaster.

[Mr. Blue]

The Norsemen,called the small inland islands that dotted the marshlands Wyie's.The leaders of these little pieces of semi-dry island's were called,Kings of the Wyie's,or WyieKings.The kingdoms they raided over time pronouced w's,as v's like,"I vant to be alone",Hence they became The Viking's,the tribes that raided,and later conquered England,Ireland,Northern France,and continued to raid,and trade throughout Northern Europe. Norsemen/Norman's.Blah,Blah,Blah...To get back to the point.The Vikings were Danes,Norwegians,and Swedes,seperate self governing tribes/clans,but allie's/and Kinsmen.One practice/custom/law all had in common,the one that once made,and kept them strong untill 1100 or so.(when no longer practiced they lost,much more than they gained)Was this;When a man die's,his lands,material wealth,virtually all his possesions,including his wife/or concubine,were sent to the grave/pyre with him.No son,brother,next of kin,inherited or profited in anyway.Now that went for the son of a King same as the son of a common fisherman.Thus eliminating the risk of any self absorbed asshole becoming a King by way of the wealth,and/or acomplishments of the father.IMO...One of the few Law's created by men,that was truely for the betterment of the people,as a whole... :oldman: "Seems like alot of the problems we blame on political partys and the men they support,would be eliminated,or have never ocoured if that simple/logical rule of law was endorsed by our forefathers...ex

LOL Brilliant!!!!

[exarmyranger]

Aw you are too kind,I'm probably blushing...Thanx Mr.Blue.t/c ex

[kres24GT]

It is sad that Richardson won't get much of a chance - but we can't know this for sure yet. We have to wait for the first primaries.

However, Blue, and Kres, most of your criticisms still sound like covert apologies for the republicans, and secret admiration for republican rule.

Attacking the dems serves the repubs.

There remain no other viable options.

Without a viable option, anti-dem attacks can only have one purpose.

So put up your viable option.



Fuck Republicans, fuck them in their religious assholes, then lock them up for violating anal sex laws. How's that?

[Bill]

I think you are being intentionally obtuse, to the point of apologia, Kres.

The question on the table is, what vote is the viable alternative?

If we aren't to suffer years of political war and stalemate between two lousy groups of masters, who should america vote for?

[kres24GT]

I think you are being intentionally obtuse, to the point of apologia, Kres.

The question on the table is, what vote is the viable alternative?

If we aren't to suffer years of political war and stalemate between two lousy groups of masters, who should america vote for?


I do not like Republicans. I do not defend them, however there is more love for Dems here than Reps, so crapping on Reps isn't really necessary here.

Any solution will be dismissed by you as not possible. You will keep voting for the same crap and expect differences. I will vote for what I believe in, not what I consider the lesser of two evils. It is what it is.

[exarmyranger]

That makes for a pretty funny image, Ex.

When a politician gets voted out, we toss everything he owns on a big fire in front of the capital. Then we toss him on it, followed by his staff.

That'll take care of the revolving door between politics and lobbyists.

Cut down on a few media talking heads, too. ;-}:lmao2: HaHa,and they called the"Norsemen"...Barbarians,at least they waited untill a man was dead.Also how many politians would you figure have attained a high level government office without Daddy's or family,financial support? I can't think of any off the top of my head.There must be "some",who?... :dunno: .t/c Bill. :cool: ex.

[Kinky Jones]

Also how many politians would you figure have attained a high level government office without Daddy's or family,financial support? I can't think of any off the top of my head.There must be "some",who?... :dunno: .t/c Bill. :cool: ex.

I know of only one off hand that kinda fits the mold, I grew up in the same neighborhood where JD Hayworth lived in the early 90s and I didn't come from rich blood, I believe one of my best friends even dated one of his daughters :D used to see his news channel 3 van parked at his house all the time 'cause he was a local sportscaster, take a look at where he is now, the crooked mother fucker is out of a job, too bad his bank accounts are still filled with dirty indian gaming money

[Bill]

Any solution will be dismissed by you as not possible.

Wether or not I think the vote would be wasted, there still comes a time when one goes into the little booth and picks a name.

Without a name, one is absolutely dealing with the impossible.

Because there ain't no entry for "Unspecified Good Guy Who is Neither Republican Nor Democrat" on a ballot.

[kres24GT]

Wether or not I think the vote would be wasted, there still comes a time when one goes into the little booth and picks a name.

Without a name, one is absolutely dealing with the impossible.

Because there ain't no entry for "Unspecified Good Guy Who is Neither Republican Nor Democrat" on a ballot.

It doesn't matter, just diversifying the pool would be of great help. The two party system makes it too easy to get into an us. vs. them mentality, which ends up hurting us.

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

I like " us vs them". Makes it much easier to focus on one's opponent.

[kres24GT]

I like " us vs them". Makes it much easier to focus on one's opponent.

My point exactly. The fact we view fellow Americans as opponents when it comes to matters of politics says it all.

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

Well I know pointing fingers gets us nowhere but the GOP has been the most divisive entity in this country for sometime now. They try to use the Dems strengths against them, like being accepting & tolerent. At some point you have to realize that these people, the GOP, don't like us & they never will, it's not in them. Our views of this country are very, very different. Their view is based on looking backwards, our view is based on looking forword.

[kres24GT]

Well I know pointing fingers gets us nowhere but the GOP has been the most divisive entity in this country for sometime now. They try to use the Dems strengths against them, like being accepting & tolerent. At some point you have to realize that these people, the GOP, don't like us & they never will, it's not in them. Our views of this country are very, very different. Their view is based on looking backwards, our view is based on looking forword.


LMAO @ this garbage, the Dems and GOP have the same goals. Ni ether is tolerant of anyone who disagrees with them either.

[Kinky Jones]

LMAO @ this garbage, the Dems and GOP have the same goals. Ni ether is tolerant of anyone who disagrees with them either.

yeah the whole "we have a different view" only seems to lasts until the elections are over, once they are in office they dance to a completly different beat... seriously, fucking milk subsidies and tons of other bullshit in what is supposed to be the start to the end of the war???? and they have to be put in so that the dems will vote for it, not to get a few republican votes... i know that the dems haven't had controlling power in the US in a long time and they deserve a little bit of time to do some things but fuck if they ain't doing the same damn things the reps were doing just a few months ago, pushing personal pet project funding thru on an important bill to grease them thru easily... they seriously have respect for themselves after forcing pet projects in there to make it pass, with all the good things that the bill has in it without any of that BS... how much milk money are these guys getting for lunch every day??


here are some of the things in the bill:

While conservatives were quick to attack questionable items such as $3.5 million for guided tours of the U.S. Capitol or $3 million aimed at a sugar cane cooperative in Hawaii, most of the added money promises to have broad support.

The additional funding includes:

$4.2 billion in disaster aid for farmers hurt by drought, floods and other disasters in recent years.
$6.7 billion in additional federal efforts to help victims of Hurricane Katrina, including housing aid, public infrastructure funding and aid to Gulf Coast fishermen.
$3.1 billion to implement a 2005 round of military base closures, which helps local communities affected by military base closings paves the way for redeployment of 12,000 troops stationed in Germany and South Korea to domestic bases.
$2 billion for national security efforts such as port security, explosives detection for airline baggage and rail and mass transit security grants.
$747 million to ease a shortfall in the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides health care to children from low-income families.
$640 million in heating subsidies for the poor and elderly.
$500 million to combat Western wildfires.

some pretty good stuff to put money towards, minus the 4.2 billion for farmers droughts (charge those to god not me please)

then Leahy's amendment to extend income subsidies aimed at dairy farmers with small operations was in a class by itself. It represented a rewrite of the 2002 farm bill up for renewal this year.

The cost of Leahy's provision is $31 million this year, but unlike other elements of the war funding bill, it is added to "baseline" funding for agriculture subsidies at a cost of $1.2 billion through 2012.


The defense funding bill, which arrived on the Senate floor Monday, contains about $20 billion in spending unrelated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

Kres & Kinky, we'll just have to agree to disagree. If you can't see the difference between Clinton & Bush, then you must be brain dead. As far as the pork is concerned, its been around & will always be around, unfortunately. But as far this time is concerned, its ok with me as long as Pelosi forces Bush to committ to a withdrawl.

[kres24GT]

Kres & Kinky, we'll just have to agree to disagree. If you can't see the difference between Clinton & Bush, then you must be brain dead. As far as the pork is concerned, its been around & will always be around, unfortunately. But as far this time is concerned, its ok with me as long as Pelosi forces Bush to committ to a withdrawl.


No one mentioned differences between individual politicians, only the parties. I would take Clinton over Bush in a heartbeat, but that doesn't mean I think Dems are less corrupt or better for American than Republicans, because I don't.

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

No one mentioned differences between individual politicians, only the parties. I would take Clinton over Bush in a heartbeat, but that doesn't mean I think Dems are less corrupt or better for American than Republicans, because I don't.
Well Dems are less corrupt than GOP & they are better for U S. Granted, if either party occupies cingress for too long it unfortunately leads to abuse, as we are now seeing. If what's going on now in congress & elsewhere concerning the GOP doesn't bug the hell out of you then you've got you're eyes closed.

[kres24GT]

Well Dems are less corrupt than GOP & they are better for U S. Granted, if either party occupies cingress for too long it unfortunately leads to abuse, as we are now seeing. If what's going on now in congress & elsewhere concerning the GOP doesn't bug the hell out of you then you've got you're eyes closed.


If what's going in congress now, i.e. the same old crap, doesn't show you there is no difference between the two you have your eyes closed or are simply a sheep.

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

If what's going in congress now, i.e. the same old crap, doesn't show you there is no difference between the two you have your eyes closed or are simply a sheep.
The Dems stand for many more progressive issues than GOP. Unfortunately GOP has blocked alot of progressive legislation. Look at the Dem presidential field, diversity baby, diiiiiiiiiiversity.

[kres24GT]

The Dems stand for many more progressive issues than GOP. Unfortunately GOP has blocked alot of progressive legislation. Look at the Dem presidential field, diversity baby, diiiiiiiiiiversity.


What has the minority GOP blocked?

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

The Senate was blocking debate on the war in Iraq for one. But I'm referring to many things in the past. Too many to mention. When white people become the minority in this country, in about 40 yrs, that's when the fun begins. All those southerners supporting the GOP won't amount to a hill of beans.

[kres24GT]

The Senate was blocking debate on the war in Iraq for one. But I'm referring to many things in the past. Too many to mention. When white people become the minority in this country, in about 40 yrs, that's when the fun begins. All those southerners supporting the GOP won't amount to a hill of beans.


The Dems have no intentions of ending the war.

[exarmyranger]

The Dems have no intentions of ending the war.
:taunt: Clown's to the left of me. :ugho: Joker's to the right. :laugh: Here I am and that is my opinion to... :oldman: t/c ex

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

The Dems have no intentions of ending the war.
The Dems would end the war today if they could. On the other hand, why bail Bush & GOP out on this.

[kres24GT]

The Dems would end the war today if they could. On the other hand, why bail Bush & GOP out on this.


HA HA HA HA HA


All they have to do is cut the funding and the war will end.

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

They don't have the votes. It would never pass the senate.

[kres24GT]

They don't have the votes. It would never pass the senate.


They have the votes. Try again.

[imgonnaeaturlunch]

They have the votes. Try again.
They don't have the votes in the Senate. The GOP would like nothing more than for Dems to try to cut off funding without the votes & then have everyone say, " why did they try that, they knew they didn't have the votes, they must be stupid."

[kres24GT]

They don't have the votes in the Senate. The GOP would like nothing more than for Dems to try to cut off funding without the votes & then have everyone say, " why did they try that, they knew they didn't have the votes, they must be stupid."


Yes, they do, enough Republican Senators are on board to make up for Lieberman.