Quote:
Originally Posted by j8ear
It doesn't pain me in the least. All though most of what you offered is irrelevant (polls, delay, Katrina, etc....), I agree whole heartedly that Bush has spent far to much. Almost like a democrat? Imagine where we'd be if the left controlled things.
|
You're forgetting that the last democrat in office turned the economy around while paying down the deficit.
Quote:
Clinton "balanced the budget...?" That is just absurd. The productive and the tax paying balanced the budget, thanks to the frugleness of a republican legislator.
|
Gee you guys love to have it both ways don't you? During the campaign we hear "I'll fix the budget the democrats broke." As soon as the campaign's over we hear "hey the legislature directs the budget, the president has nothing to do with it." Which is it?
Like it or not, the "frugalness" came from Clinton. He's the one that submitted the budget (I know, it's hard to remember that because Clinton didn't pull the theatrics of wrapping it in an american flag). The guy that dreams up and then submits the budget has a BIG part in what that budget does.
Quote:
Maybe the only real solution is one party counter acting the other with either one in the executive and the other in the legislator.
|
You're getting closer. If you want my real opinion I'd just as soon drop both parties and start fresh.
Quote:
Unfortunately the democrats are probably finished in this country
|
That's rich.
Quote:
they evolved from the slave advocating party
|
Learn history. The democrats were not the slave advocating party. That's just stupid. The entire country stood by and let slavery happen. I know you'd like to dump all that in the democrats' laps, but it's simply not true.
And people who actually study history are aware of the fact that, even though modern day republicans take credit for being the party that abolished slavery, it's simply not true. Back when Lincoln was a republican, the republicans had radically different ideals than they do today. In fact, they were more like democrats. Even Bush acknowledged to the NAACP that the republicans "have not always carried the mantle of Lincoln." Not surprising he would say that considering the complete values and platform shift the party underwent since Lincoln. And now the republicans stand firmly in opposition to basic human rights such as equal treatment under the law (gay marriage anyone?)
Besides, comparing any party today to what that party was 200 years ago is asinine and accomplishes nothing.
Quote:
into the party of the working class industrial economy protecting, and are now the party of fringe lunacy, social experimenation, poverty pimping, government solving advocates with not one success to show for all the money they've extorted and then squandered.
|
A bunch of hyperbolic crap with not a shred of real evidence to back it up.
What social experimentation? If by poverty pimping you mean democrats don't want people to suffer while neo-cons don't care if people suffer as long as the wealthy don't feel it, then I guess you have a point there. I don't know what you mean by government solving advocates. The fringe lunacy comment is just absurd. Were I in your shoes I'd be embarassed at having written that, as it demonstrates either a vacuous ignorance of politics or a knee-jerk opinion formed on little evidence or independent thought and much regurgitation of what others have said.
Quote:
Maybe some party will rise up and make a valiant opposition to this out of control republican snafu.
|
Neat. We agree on something. And for the record I don't think the democrats are that great either. They're better than the republicans any day of the week because instead of spending money killing innocent iraqis and american soldiers they'd rather spend money making life better for people. But they've lost the ability to state a clear goal and convince the public of it, and they seem to have found an uncanny ability to get the least likely presidential candidate to win all the primaries and go up against the well oiled republican spin machine.