Democrat Strategy for future

[weasel]

Quote by: |Chris| Or how about the Pork Barrel spending of a highways bill whereby a 247M dollar bridge is going to be built in Alaska to an isalnd of only 50 people?

First, I would like to ask for your sources concerning this bridge which, honestly, sounds like a stupid idea; I would like to see the same material you did and formulate my own opinion.

I may be wrong, but the state would probably pay for the bridge not the federal government. It would therefore be the governor of Alaska's fault if the motion was passed not the president's.

Second, in true liberal fashion, you ignored all the valid points I made in my last post and instead focused on the details. How typical of the left: you aim for the tree trunk but hit the branches.

[bishop]

are you just another one of those "liberals vs. conservatives" kinds of mindless bushbots? just asking, because you sure as hell seem to be.

you need sources for the bridge to nowhere? ever hear of google?

http://news.google.com/news?sourceid...nG=Search+News


and if you really think that the republicans are engaging in record breaking deficit spending solely to protect us from terrorists, i'd say that you don't know your ass from your elbow. here's some information to help cure your ignorance:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0510-26.pdf
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa543.pdf

[Chris]

And try this

http://news.google.com/news?sourceid...nG=Search+News

Also might want to look in Volconvo

http://www.volconvo.com/forums/thread6353.html

[weasel]

from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/st...,165272,00.html

"The HOUSE AND SENATE voted overwhelmingly to pass the six-year highway and mass transit legislation just before heading home for a summer break."


Although the president may have proposed the bill, the representatives of this country (whom you elected) voted for it. Blame should be placed where it is due not where you would like to see it.


"There were a number of members of Congress who wanted a $400 billion highway bill," Al Hubbard, director of the National Economic Council at the White House, said Tuesday in defending the president's decision to accept the bill even though it was $30 billion more than Bush recommended.

"Because of this president, it is a $286 billion highway bill," he told reporters at a briefing following Bush's meeting with his economic team."


If anything, Bush saved the country money concerning this bill. Additionally, where in this source does it mention anything about building a bridge in Alaska? Unless it can be shown otherwise, my assumption is that this was an unbased speculation.

[bishop]

Quote by: weasel If anything, Bush saved the country money concerning this bill. Additionally, where in this source does it mention anything about building a bridge in Alaska? Unless it can be shown otherwise, my assumption is that this was an unbased speculation.

you ignorant fool, did you even bother to look at the links that |chris| and i posted??

and the notion that bush is saving us money while pork barrel spending is shooting through the roof (along with deficit spending in general) is absurd.. nothing more than mindless cheerleading.

[Osborn F Enready]

Did I really just hear someone championing Zell Miller?

ROFLMAO

[Athena]

Quote by: bishop i always love that ignorant "democrats are dying" nonsense... especially since the dems picked up several states during the last round of gubernatorial elections - some of them were "red" states. what's killing this country from the inside out are the fucked up priorities of both of these corrupt parties - particularly their total lack of fiscal responsibility.. and since the republicans have been in power these past several years, they deserve the brunt of the blame. they are the ones running all of the committees after all... republicans have proven that they like spending even more than democrats - and they're willing to bury us deeep in debt. i can't focus all of the blame on the two parties though... dumbassed americans deserve a good amount of blame themselves.. the fact that there were voters out there who viewed gay marriage as being a major issue this past election shows that americans don't have their own priorities together either.

Like we have much, much more discretionary money if not for the avoidable wars we have been in. We lost the war in Vietnam, and the communist did not rush into Hawaii and threaten the US. Especially during the Reagon administration, we spent a lot on military manuvers in the East protecting our oil interest. This includes granting arms to Mid East countries, while we slashed domestic budgets to the bone. If the women Saddam spoke with about invading Kuwiat, had told him the US would not tolerate it, that invasion would not have occured. And the violations of human rights are much worse in Africa than they were in Iraq. We would not be so much involved in the mid east if we had better energy policies starting in 1920 when we were aware of oil being finite, and that were headed for economic disaster and possibly war. Also if we had stayed out of the conflict between Israel and the Arabs.

I am not isolationist, but rather spend money on health care and education than avoidable wars.

[bishop]

i agree, and i'm hardly a leftist.. i see public healthcare and better education as investments in our economy and our future (and funding for alternative energy research).. in exchange, i'll happily eliminate huge amounts of foreign "aid", especially all military aid. eliminating military aid would save us about $5 billion per year.

[Athena]

Bishop, it is amazing you understood what I was saying, as I wrote that post so poorly, and had to correct it.

Anyway, do you ever think of Rome? Rome fell from within. It engaged in preventable wars, and over taxed citizens to pay for the wars, while neglecting the needs of the citizens, many of who lost everything fighting these wars. Citiznes lost their land while fighting in the wars, and then couldn't get jobs, because the work was done by slave labor. The decision making of the US is like they were using Rome as a model for what to do, instead of a model for what not to do.

[Chris]

Quote by: weasel from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/st...,165272,00.html "The HOUSE AND SENATE voted overwhelmingly to pass the six-year highway and mass transit legislation just before heading home for a summer break." Although the president may have proposed the bill, the representatives of this country (whom you elected) voted for it. Blame should be placed where it is due not where you would like to see it. "There were a number of members of Congress who wanted a $400 billion highway bill," Al Hubbard, director of the National Economic Council at the White House, said Tuesday in defending the president's decision to accept the bill even though it was $30 billion more than Bush recommended. "Because of this president, it is a $286 billion highway bill," he told reporters at a briefing following Bush's meeting with his economic team." If anything, Bush saved the country money concerning this bill. Additionally, where in this source does it mention anything about building a bridge in Alaska? Unless it can be shown otherwise, my assumption is that this was an unbased speculation.

this whole "you elected them" is bullshit. Republicans have a MAJORITY now. and they don't have the threat of veto from a democrat president :rolleyes:

[brien]

Quote by: weasel It should be noted that the only reason republicans are spending more money then democrats is that they're actively buying materials (i.e weapons and supplies) that will ensure the safety and the continued existence of this country. The republicans are getting off their butts and doing something to ensure that losers like you can try to deminish the TRUTH. Without such funding over the years, it is doubtful there would be a government to whine about. This isn't all about America either. For the first time ever, middle east countries (such as Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebannon) are increasingly being ruled or influenced BY THE PEOPLE. The citizens of those countries now have a say in their government. Instead of be ruled by fear and suspicion, the new nations of the middle east are permitting second opinions on matters compared to killing everyone who disagrees (i.e Saddam whom we toppled). These reforms came about because of OUR influence in Iraq and Afganistan. Democracy is pandemic. It spreads from country to country. If you offer it to one nation, another will quickly catch on and another. By freeing those in the middle east we have started the chain reaction. Watch the dominoes fall. You cannot deny that Iraqis are better off now than before we came. I will not deny that there are continuing problems in Iraq but if you compared our country, in its infancy around 1776 onwards, to theirs now, the two situations seem quite similar.

I yi yi, where do I start here.

Ok, Weasel wrote: It should be noted that the only reason republicans are spending more money then democrats is that they're actively buying materials (i.e weapons and supplies) that will ensure the safety and the continued existence of this country

I write: Not true. The Republicans are spending our grandchildren's money because they involve the US in wars and military entanglements around the world. They have spent billions of US dollars in Iraq for no reason at all. Money down the sewer. Saddam was no threat to the US whatsoever. You and millions of other Americans were duped. And now I have to pay for it.

Weasel wrote:This isn't all about America either. For the first time ever, middle east countries (such as Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebannon) are increasingly being ruled or influenced BY THE PEOPLE. The citizens of those countries now have a say in their government. Instead of be ruled by fear and suspicion, the new nations of the middle east are permitting second opinions on matters compared to killing everyone who disagrees (i.e Saddam whom we toppled). These reforms came about because of OUR influence in Iraq and Afganistan

I write: Well then how come when HAMAS wins democratic elections fair and square over in the "Middle East" do the Republicans ignore the "peoples" mandate by ignoring the freely elected HAMAS? Your theroy breaks down a bit here now doesn't it? The dominos seems to be falling the wrong way to suit the Republicans.

Weasel wrote: I will not deny that there are continuing problems in Iraq but if you compared our country, in its infancy around 1776 onwards, to theirs now, the two situations seem quite similar.[/quote]

I ask: Please elaborate upon this statement. I would be very interested in a history lesson here.

[bishop]

Quote by: Athena Bishop, it is amazing you understood what I was saying, as I wrote that post so poorly, and had to correct it. Anyway, do you ever think of Rome? Rome fell from within. It engaged in preventable wars, and over taxed citizens to pay for the wars, while neglecting the needs of the citizens, many of who lost everything fighting these wars. Citiznes lost their land while fighting in the wars, and then couldn't get jobs, because the work was done by slave labor. The decision making of the US is like they were using Rome as a model for what to do, instead of a model for what not to do.

heh.. it was coherent enough to understand.

and yeah, i definitely think of rome. i bought a copy of "the decline and fall of the roman empire" several years ago with our country in mind. the parallels i saw between decadent rome and our own country were astounding, and they are hardly isolated to warfare and taxes.. the rise of christianity definitely played a role, especially as christianity was widely accepted by the most ignorant and poor romans (eg. the ignorant masses).. and then you have julian's loss to the persians, followed by the huns nibbled away at rome's territory. but the most important was undoubtedly internal corruption and discord, seen both in the political establishment as well as the public at large. that last reason was billed as the most important out of all other reasons.. people became jaded as their leaders grew increasingly corrupt and unable to manipulate the world as they had in the past.. sounds pretty similar to our situation.

[brien]

Quote by: bishop heh.. it was coherent enough to understand. and yeah, i definitely think of rome. i bought a copy of "the decline and fall of the roman empire" several years ago with our country in mind. the parallels i saw between decadent rome and our own country were astounding, and they are hardly isolated to warfare and taxes.. the rise of christianity definitely played a role, especially as christianity was widely accepted by the most ignorant and poor romans (eg. the ignorant masses).. and then you have julian's loss to the persians, followed by the huns nibbled away at rome's territory. but the most important was undoubtedly internal corruption and discord, seen both in the political establishment as well as the public at large. that last reason was billed as the most important out of all other reasons.. people became jaded as their leaders grew increasingly corrupt and unable to manipulate the world as they had in the past.. sounds pretty similar to our situation.

I have written more than once, I can hear the fiddle music off in the distance. :(

[weasel]

from Acts 28: 26-27 NIV

'Go to this people and say, You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'


Describes the liberals fairly well does it not? You people have blinded youselves to the truth; you see only what you want to see and nothing can persuade you otherwise.

Do not misconstrue my words as being pro-republican. They have their share of troubles and unethical dealings as do ALL parties who deal with politics which promote unethical dealings such as bribery. Reform has lightened this stain on the American flag but the absurbdity to which politicians stoop to now a days (I'm looking at you John Kerry) is astounding.

Maybe it would be better to dissolve the US government now and spare America the slow death that its experiencing not just because of the liberals but because of the departure from what made this nation great. What that was and how we got in this situation is up to someone wiser than me to explain.

[Chris]

Quote by: weasel from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/st...,165272,00.html ...If anything, Bush saved the country money concerning this bill. Additionally, where in this source does it mention anything about building a bridge in Alaska? Unless it can be shown otherwise, my assumption is that this was an unbased speculation.

If all you trust is Fox News -that demonstrates your close-mindedness and also shows that you probably cannot be helped -sorry.

[bishop]

Quote by: weasel from Acts 28: 26-27 NIV 'Go to this people and say, You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' Describes the liberals fairly well does it not? You people have blinded youselves to the truth; you see only what you want to see and nothing can persuade you otherwise. Do not misconstrue my words as being pro-republican. They have their share of troubles and unethical dealings as do ALL parties who deal with politics which promote unethical dealings such as bribery. Reform has lightened this stain on the American flag but the absurbdity to which politicians stoop to now a days (I'm looking at you John Kerry) is astounding. Maybe it would be better to dissolve the US government now and spare America the slow death that its experiencing not just because of the liberals but because of the departure from what made this nation great. What that was and how we got in this situation is up to someone wiser than me to explain.

every post of yours just reads like the immature musings of a semi-retarded teenager.. pray tell, what is a liberal exactly? i ask that because you're tossing around these asinine generalizations as if you just took supped some alphabet soup and you're getting this magical wave of insight that nobody else has.

conservative.. liberal... nothing more than meaningless words that don't mean a damn thing in reality. some people just want the sense of security that labelling yourself seems to provide.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: weasel Describes the liberals fairly well does it not? You people have blinded youselves to the truth; you see only what you want to see and nothing can persuade you otherwise. Do not misconstrue my words as being pro-republican.

Your reflexive disparaging of "liberals" indicates otherwise. Considering the "conservatives" have the White House, a majority on the SCOTUS and a majority in both houses of Congress you have no reason to slam the liberals/left/Democrats for much of ANYTHING, yet you do and I have yet to hear any negatives about the GOP. This tells me you are a right winger who has nothing of substance to brag about so you feel the need to slash at the powerless Democrats. Sad.

[GodBlessAmerica]

Using the race card.
Using the class warfare card.

Keeping minorities dependent on social services in exchange for the vote.

Maintaining government employee and union welfare by overpaying them with tax dollars and benefits in exchange for the vote.

Sabotaging the war.

Remaking God in their image.

Surrendering the war on terror.

[GodBlessAmerica]

Seems kind of a depressing platform to me.