Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Posted: 10/2/2006 1:33:31 PM EST
With the election comming up the Repulicans are driving fuel cost down to drive up votes and the Democrats orcastrating these "school shootings" .....
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:36:04 PM EST
has your account been hijacked?
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:36:38 PM EST
You have a solution? I'm all ears.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:39:30 PM EST

Originally Posted By ANGST:
With the election comming up the Repulicans are driving fuel cost down to drive up votes and the Democrats orcastrating these "school shootings" .....


What a retarded post.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:41:24 PM EST
I'm going to assume that was tongue-in-cheek.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:42:05 PM EST
I'm going to try my best not to vote for either party.

But is there a choice?

I will MAYBE vote for a Republican candidate if he is a newbe.
I will TRY to find Independant candidates that are worth voting for, but that is going to be tough.
I will vote for a Democrat if it will send an incumbent Republican home.

I WILL vote. Staying home is not an option. I will NOT vote for the same lying piece of shit I got elected the last time.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:43:26 PM EST
lesser of two evils. Libertarians don't have a viable candidate beyond local elections.

'nuff said.

No Expert
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:44:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2006 1:46:21 PM EST by ANGST]

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
I'm going to assume that was tongue-in-cheek.


While you are right , it's sad that around here you can never tell

Being around US government workers most of my life has taught me one thing. This government isn't competent enought to pull of a "conspiracy" .


I know , thats just what "they" want us to think
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 1:50:43 PM EST
Sometimes I wish we had term limits, it seems like the longer someone is in Washington the more corrupt and incompentent they become.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 2:00:32 PM EST
If Congress didn't vote to increase the debt limit and the Chicoms didn't buy the paper .gov would come to a screeching halt. We are bankrupt. The Fed can crank out fiat to its hearts' content, prices will just go up. One day we will come to a bad end. Thanks to the two major parties.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 2:07:12 PM EST
Because the Dimocrats would be 1000 times worse AND they WILL most certainly go after your guns...

Link Posted: 10/2/2006 2:08:05 PM EST

Originally Posted By Ryan1021:
Sometimes I wish we had term limits, it seems like the longer someone is in Washington the more corrupt and incompentent they become.


Like Ted Kennedy for example?
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 2:15:14 PM EST
I'm disgusted with both parties, especially when it comes to immigration. I don't think the Repubs have done nearly enough on this issue, and they have majority control, so no excuse.

But however bad the Repubs are, just imagine how much worse the Dems will be. Weaker GWOT, more porous borders + amnesty, a new AWB...I shudder to think what will happen if they gain control of congress in Nov, more so if they manage to get a Dem into office in '08.

I'll vote republican, simpy because they disgust me a bit less.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 2:37:20 PM EST



97 Reasons Democrats Are Weak On Defense And Can't Be Trusted To Govern
In Wartime

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 9/29/2006

Today's Democrats are nothing like Presidents Roosevelt, Truman and
Kennedy, who with courage and decisive action kept on top of their jobs
and aggressively confronted one national defense crisis after another.

Jimmy Carter, elected during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, and (1)
believing Americans had an inordinate fear of communism, (2) lifted U.S.
citizens' travel bans to Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia and (3)
pardoned draft evaders.

President Carter (4) also stopped B-1 bomber production, (5) gave away
our strategically located Panama Canal and (6) made human rights the
central focus of his foreign policy.

That led Carter, a Democrat, (7) to make a monumental miscalculation and
withdraw U.S. support for our long-standing Mideast military ally, the
Shah of Iran. (8) Carter simply didn't like the Shah's alleged
mistreatment of imprisoned Soviet spies.

The Soviets, (9) with close military ties to Iraq, a 1,500-mile border
with Iran and eyes on Afghanistan, aggressively tried to encircle,
infiltrate, subvert and overthrow Iran's government for its oil deposits
and warm-water ports several times after Russian troops attempted to
stay there at the end of WWII. These were all communist threats to Iran
that Carter never understood.

Carter (10) thought Ayatollah Khomeini, a Muslim exile in Paris, would
make a fairer Iranian leader than the Shah because he was a religious
man. (11) With U.S. support withdrawn, the Shah was overthrown, and (12)
the ayatollah returned and promptly proclaimed Iran an Islamic nation.
(13) Executions followed. Palestinian hit men were hired to secretly
eliminate the opposition so the religious mullahs couldn't be blamed.

Iran's ayatollah (14) then introduces the idea of suicide bombers to the
Palestine Liberation Organization and paid $35,000 to PLO families whose
young people were brainwashed to attack and kill as many Israeli
citizens as possible by blowing themselves up. This inhumane menace has
grown unchallenged.

The ayatollah (15) next created and financed with Iran's oil wealth
Hezbollah, a terrorist organization that later bombed our barracks in
Beirut, killing 241 Marines and sailors. With Iran's encouragement this
summer, (16) Hezbollah attacked Israel and started a war that damaged
Lebanon and (17) diverted the world's attention from Iran's nuclear bomb
program.

In November 1979, Iranians, including (18) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, their
current puppet president who was elected in an unfree, rigged election
in which opponents were intimidated into not running, (19) stormed the
U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held 52 U.S. personnel hostage for 444 days.

Carter, after nearly six months, (20) belatedly attempted a poorly
executed rescue with only six Navy helicopters (three were lost or
disabled in sandstorms) and Air Force planes with Delta Force commandos.
The mission was aborted, but foul-ups on the ground resulted in a loss
of eight aircraft, five airman and three Marines. The bungled plan was
never put down on paper for the Joint Chiefs to evaluate. There were
practice sessions, but no full dress rehearsal, and pilots weren't
allowed to meet with their weather forecasters because someone in
authority worried about security.

America (21) can thank the well-meaning but naive and inexperienced
Democrat, Jimmy Carter, for a foreign policy that lost a strong military
ally, Iran, and (22) put the U.S. at odds with a gangster regime that
was determined to build nuclear bombs to wipe Israel off the map and
threaten the U.S. and other nations. Iran also has a working
relationship with al-Qaida, which also wants nukes. Care to connect the
dots?

Shortly after a meeting at which Carter kissed Soviet leader Leonid
Brezhnev on each cheek, (23) the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Carter the
appeaser was shocked. "I can't believe the Russians lied to me," he said.

During the Carter Democrat period, (24) communism was on a rampage
worldwide. In an unrestrained country-capturing spree, communists took
over (25) Ethiopia, (26) South Yemen ( (27) located at the mouth of the
Red Sea where they could block Mideast oil shipments and access to the
Suez Canal), (28) Afghanistan, (29) Angola, (30) Cambodia, (31)
Mozambique, (32) Grenada and ( 33) Nicaragua.

Compared to the pre-Vietnam War defense budget in 1964, Carter requested
in fiscal 1982's defense budget (34) a 45% reduction in fighter
aircraft, (35) a 75% reduction in ships, (36) an 83% reduction in attack
submarines and (37) a 90% reduction in helicopters.

The Soviets for years (38) consistently spent 15% of their GDP on
defense; (39) in 1980 we spent under 5%. As a percentage of our
government's spending, defense was lower than before Pearl Harbor. No
wonder a Republican, Ronald Reagan, had to vastly increase defense
spending to help us win the 45-year-old Cold War and relegate the USSR
to the ash heap of history — an astounding feat no one (except Reagan)
believed possible.

In addition to a communist enemy rapidly expanding its territorial
conquests, Reagan (40) inherited from Democratic management a 12%
inflation rate (highest in 34 years), (41) 21% interest rates (highest
since Abraham Lincoln was president), (42) a depleted military and (43)
a serious energy crisis.

For eight years (44) congressional Democrats ridiculed and fought with
Reagan and were on the wrong side of nearly all his defense and economic
policies. They said he wasn't bright — an "amiable dunce," as party
elder Clark Clifford (45) put it. They maintained his tax cuts wouldn't
work, (46) that he insulted the Soviets by labeling them the "Evil
Empire" (47) and that he was going to start World War III by putting
missiles in West Germany to counter new Soviet SS-20 nuclear missiles
installed in East Germany. (48) John Kerry wanted a nuclear freeze that
would guarantee the Soviets overwhelming tactical nuclear superiority in
Europe. (49) Kerry seemed to constantly advise retreating, giving up and
handing our enemies what they wanted — a recipe for us to lose every war.

Democrats waffled (50) on Reagan's request for support of Contras who
were fighting to stay alive and take Nicaragua back from Daniel Ortega's
communist Sandinistas. Each month, the Soviets poured $50 million worth
of Russian tanks, anti-aircraft weapons, Hind attack helicopters and
munitions into that central American country.

Democratic leaders (51) all dismissed as a ridiculous pipe dream
Reagan's plan for the U.S. to develop a missile that could shoot down
incoming enemy missiles. (52) Showing no vision, Democrats mockingly
called it Star Wars.

Democratic politicians (53) were proved wrong on virtually every vital
Reagan policy. (54) His tax cuts set off a huge seven-year economic boom
that created 20 million new jobs. (55) Interest rates tumbled from 21%
to 7 1/2%. (56) Inflation nose-dived from 12% to 3%. And (57) oil prices
collapsed when — contrary to warnings from Democrats — he removed price
controls on natural gas.

Reagan's motto was "Peace through Strength," (58) not peace through
weakness and accommodation. With his steadfast determination and
perseverance, the communists were kicked out of Grenada and defeated in
Nicaragua, Ethiopia and Afghanistan. And for the first time in history
Soviet expansion ended.

Reagan (59) never quit exerting pressure on the Soviets. In Berlin, he
demanded that Gorbachev "tear down this wall," and in time the Berlin
Wall fell. In the end the communist Soviet Union dissolved. The
Reagan-Bush administration had won the Cold War.

Years later, (60) a group of Russian generals were asked about the one
key that led to the collapse of the USSR. They were unanimous in their
response: "Star Wars." Gorbachev feared it would render the Soviets'
nuclear missiles obsolete for an overwhelming first strike, and they
could not afford to build the hundreds more that would be needed or hope
to match America's great technical ability. (61) So Gorbachev threw in
the towel after Reagan held firm at Reykjavik and refused to stop SDI
research. Years later (62) Gorbachev said he didn't think it could have
ever happened if Reagan hadn't been there.

In July 2001, (63) the U.S. military used an SDI missile launched
thousands of miles away and flying at near bullet speed to blow a test
missile out of the sky. (64) Democrats from Dukakis to Gore to Kerry all
said this would be impossible and that missile defense would never work.
They were all wrong. Reagan was right.

The current terrorist threat (65) to U.S. national security did not
begin on 9/11, but in the early 1990s. Bill Clinton was elected November
1992. (66) The first bombing of our World Trade Center on Feb. 26, 1993,
killed six people and injured 1,000. Terrorists hoped to kill 250,000.
(67) Some of the apprehended terrorists were trained in bomb making at
the Khalden terrorist camp in Afghanistan.

October 1993. (68) A Somali warlord, with help from weapons and top
trainers sent by al-Qaida, shot down two U.S. Blackhawk helicopters.
Eighteen Americans were killed and 73 wounded. Clinton, under pressure
from a Democratic Congress, ordered retreat and withdrawal of all U.S.
forces. Said Osama bin Laden: "They planned for a long struggle, but the
U.S. rushed out in shame."

January 1995. (69) Philippine police discovered Ramzi Yousef, mastermind
of the World Trade Center bombing, had a plan to blow up 12 American
airliners over the ocean and fly a plane into CIA headquarters. They
informed Clinton's government of the plot.

Bin Laden (70) tried to buy weapons-grade uranium to develop a weapon
that would kill on a mass basis — like Hiroshima. (71) In November 1995,
a car bomb exploded at a Saudi-U.S. joint facility in Riyadh, killing
five Americans.

June 1996. (72) Khobar Towers, which housed U.S. Air Force personnel in
Saudi Arabia, was blown up by Saudi Hezbollahs with help from Iran and
some al-Qaida involvement. Nineteen Americans were killed and 372 wounded.

July-August 1996. (73) The U.S. received from senior level al-Qaida
defectors intelligence on the creation, character, direction and
intentions of al-Qaida.

February 1998. (74) Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri issued a fatwa
declaring "war on America" and making the murder of any American
anywhere on earth the "individual duty" of every Muslim.

May 29, 1998. Finally, (75) after a long series of deadly bombings
carried out since 1992, and bin Laden calls to attack the U.S.,
Clinton's CIA created a plan to raid and capture the al-Qaida leader at
his Tarnak Farms compound in Afghanistan. After months of planning,
consultations with senior officials in other departments and numerous
full rehearsals that went well, the raid was called off at the last
moment by CIA Director George Tenet and others worried about possible
collateral damage and second-guessing and recrimination if bin Laden
didn't survive.

Aug. 7, 1998. (76) Al-Qaida blew up U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es
Salaam, five minutes apart, killing 200, injuring 5,000.

Now (77) Clinton's team, wanting to take stronger action, decided to
fire Tomahawk missiles at bin Laden's training camps as well as a Sudan
aspirin factory. (78) But the administration gave up to 48 hours notice
to certain people, including the chief of staff of Pakistan's army, so
India wouldn't think the missiles were aimed at them. Somehow
forewarned, bin Laden and his terrorist leaders all left — no terrorists
were killed, but U.S. ineffectiveness was on full display.

Dec. 20, 1998. (79) Intelligence knew bin Laden would be at the Haii
house in Kandahar but again passed up the opportunity due to potential
collateral damage and the risk of failure. (80) Clinton approved a plan
by his national security adviser, Sandy Berger, to use tribals to
capture bin Laden. But nothing happened.

Next, (81) the Pentagon created a plan to use an HC 130 gunship, a more
precise method, against bin Laden's headquarters, but the plan was later
shelved. Lt. Gen. William Boykin, deputy undersecretary of defense, told
the 9/11 Commission "opportunities were missed due to an unwillingness
to take risks and a lack of vision and understanding."

Feb. 10, 1999. (82) The CIA knew bin Laden would be at a desert hunting
camp the next morning, the 11th. But the military failed to act because
an official airplane of the United Arab Emirates was there and it was
feared an Emirate prince or official might be killed.

May 1999. (83) Detailed reports from several sources let the CIA know
that bin Laden would be in Kandahar for five days. Everyone agreed it
was the best chance to get bin Laden. But word came to stand down. It
was believed Tenet and Clinton were again concerned about civilian
collateral damage. A key project chief angrily said three opportunities
were missed in 36 hours. October 2000, (84) the USS Cole was bombed,
killing 17 U.S. sailors. No action was taken due to concerns expressed
by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

Americans must learn from history and costly mistakes. Sadly, (85)
Democrat Jimmy Carter, a Southern peanut farmer, became our Neville
Chamberlain, creating the specific conditions that have brought us the
three greatest threats to our national security today: 1) (86) Iran's
nuke-bound terrorists; 2) (87) al-Qaida and other terrorists; and 3)
(88) North Korea and its nuclear weapons.

Carter's (89) inability to deal with the Soviet communists emboldened
them to invade Afghanistan. A 23-year-old bin Laden also was drawn there
to recruit young Muslim fighters and build a network to raise money for
the anti-Soviet jihad that later became al-Qaida.

Years later, (90) civilian Carter took it on himself to go to North
Korea and negotiate a peace agreement that would stop that communist
country from developing nuclear weapons. He then convinced Clinton and
Albright to go along with it. (91) The signed piece of paper proved
worthless, as the Koreans easily deceived Democrats and used our money,
incentives and technical equipment to build nuclear bombs and increase
the threat we face today.

The Clinton administration (92) had at least 10 chances to get bin
Laden, but it repeatedly could not make the decision to act. There were
too many people and departments involved, too much confusion and no
strong leader to make the tough decisions to act. They were too timid
and concerned about repercussions if they failed.

Contrast this inability to take action with Harry Truman's ability to
make sound decisions and get results on complex defense issues — from
dropping the bomb to end WWII to helping Iran and Turkey stave off the
Soviets, from defending Greece from communist takeover following WWII to
confronting and beating the Soviet's Berlin blockade with a 14-month
night-and-day Berlin airlift, from taking on the North Koreans to
ultimately firing the popular Gen. Douglas MacArthur for insubordination.

Further Democratic incompetence in matters of defense emerged from
Clinton's attorney general, Janet Reno, and her deputy, Jamie Gorelick.
(93) They built a legal barrier that in effect prevented the CIA from
sharing intelligence with the FBI before 9/11.

Democrats in the Clinton administration (94) allowed the selling of
important defense technology and secrets to the Chinese, who are now
engaged in a massive military buildup.

Estimates are that (95) 10,000 to 20,000 terrorists were trained in bin
Laden's many camps in the years before 9/11.

Oil is also vital for our national defense. In 1952 we produced 93% of
the oil we consumed. Now we depend on the Mideast and others for 66%.
Democrats have been largely responsible for this because they have
blocked all efforts to drill in Alaska and certain offshore areas
estimated to contain 10 billion to 20 billion barrels of crude.

Democrats (96) in Congress condemn current efforts to intercept
terrorist phone calls, to mine data to ferret out future attacks against
us, and to trace the movement of terrorist money through banks. All the
while they want special treatment for enemy prisoners captured on the
battlefield. This helps the enemy and undermines our troops in the field.

We're in a war. Something always goes wrong in a war, and our military
leaders have made mistakes in Iraq. But quitting and leaving would
amount to defeat for the U.S. in the global war on terrorism and create
chaos. Quitters never win.

Here's the problem: America needs two strong, sound political parties.
As far as domestic policy is concerned, it really doesn't make much
difference if Democrats or Republicans are in power. Ours is a free,
entrepreneurial society where anyone can do anything he or she wants if
they have a positive attitude and the desire to work, learn and achieve.
Ambitious people come from all over the world to take advantage of this
tremendous opportunity. This is one reason our economy is so resilient,
continually bouncing back from periodic setbacks, driven by new
inventions and achievements.

However, (97) when it comes to which party has proved more capable in
acting to defend and protect Americans from foreign enemies, there is
only one choice. From Johnson to Carter to Clinton, virtually all the
defense policies and decisions made by Democratic administrations have
been unsuccessful. And in many cases, they have unintentionally but
materially increased the danger to our national security and the safety
of all Americans.
And if you add three more reasons--Ned Lamont, Howard Dean and Nancy
Pelosi--that brings the count up to an even 100.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 2:43:57 PM EST
I take it you're not voting, then.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 7:51:49 PM EST
takes time. vote for enough libertarians in local elections then they get more respect regionally then nationally. americans these days won't do anything that doesn't happen right now. know tons of poeple that don't vote because they don't like the candidates that they feel will win instead of voting for the people that they actually want to win.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:03:52 PM EST
I am a reg. Libertain. But I vote Repbulican and suport there candates. Lesser of two evils. The lest Gov. Is the best Gov.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:09:40 PM EST

Originally Posted By AR-10:
I'm going to try my best not to vote for either party.

But is there a choice?

I will MAYBE vote for a Republican candidate if he is a newbe.
I will TRY to find Independant candidates that are worth voting for, but that is going to be tough.
I will vote for a Democrat if it will send an incumbent Republican home.

I WILL vote. Staying home is not an option. I will NOT vote for the same lying piece of shit I got elected the last time.


Well then, we will know who to thank when the Dems get Congress back, then the White House, and then institute a new and better AWB.

BTW, which "lying piece of shit" are you referring to?
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:15:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By ANGST:
With the election comming up the Repulicans are driving fuel cost down to drive up votes and the Democrats orcastrating these "school shootings" .....


Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:16:45 PM EST

Because no alternative party has proven itself to be any better on a state-wide or national level.

The Libertarian Party is too loony.

The Reform Party is too kooky.

The Constitution Party has zero track record.

At least the Republican Party has momentum enough to keep the Communists out of power.

And if that's all the Republican Party has, that's enough.

Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:18:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By AR-10:
I'm going to try my best not to vote for either party.

But is there a choice?

I will MAYBE vote for a Republican candidate if he is a newbe.
I will TRY to find Independant candidates that are worth voting for, but that is going to be tough.
I will vote for a Democrat if it will send an incumbent Republican home.

I WILL vote. Staying home is not an option. I will NOT vote for the same lying piece of shit I got elected the last time.


Vote for people that will ban our guns, raise our taxes, and weaken our nation's defenses?

How fucking brilliant of you.

Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:30:07 PM EST

Originally Posted By NME:

Originally Posted By AR-10:
I'm going to try my best not to vote for either party.

But is there a choice?

I will MAYBE vote for a Republican candidate if he is a newbe.
I will TRY to find Independant candidates that are worth voting for, but that is going to be tough.
I will vote for a Democrat if it will send an incumbent Republican home.

I WILL vote. Staying home is not an option. I will NOT vote for the same lying piece of shit I got elected the last time.


Vote for people that will ban our guns, raise our taxes, and weaken our nation's defenses?

How fucking brilliant of you.


I'm doing the same thing. I will try my best to not vote for an incumbent. Why should I vote for all Republicans over Democraps, only way to get the Republican party to realize we are pissed off is to get all the Incumbents out of office and hope the new congressidiots will realize that you need to look out for what's best for the country not tote the party line. Voting for the least of two evils only insures that we stay with a system dominated by two parties, neither of which have the interest of the nation in mind.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:33:00 PM EST
Cuz it's the hip thing to do! ROCK THE VOTE, YA'LL!!!

Jessica Simpson clearly belives in left vs right politics!

Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:37:02 PM EST

Originally Posted By broncobisley1:

I'm doing the same thing. I will try my best to not vote for an incumbent. Why should I vote for all Republicans over Democraps, only way to get the Republican party to realize we are pissed off is to get all the Incumbents out of office and hope the new congressidiots will realize that you need to look out for what's best for the country not tote the party line. Voting for the least of two evils only insures that we stay with a system dominated by two parties, neither of which have the interest of the nation in mind.


Ignorance must be bliss...

Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:39:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By nationwide:
Cuz it's the hip thing to do! ROCK THE VOTE, YA'LL!!!

Jessica Simpson clearly belives in left vs right politics!

torvicscans.galeon.com/jessica/jessica08.jpg


I feel strongly about BOTH of those issues!
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:40:15 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 8:43:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2006 8:43:48 PM EST by verticalgain]

Why would anyone vote for either party ?


Because they have been fooled by the left/right duality of their choice into believing that there are only two options.

ETA: If all you can see is R and D winning the election, you're basically left with one option. There's very little difference in the two.
Link Posted: 10/2/2006 9:13:40 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2006 9:14:36 PM EST by 762mmFMJ]
What if NO ONE voted for ANYONE?

Seriously, what would happen? Would the entire government come to a screeching halt?

Is that even covered in the Constitution?
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 1:59:31 AM EST

Originally Posted By NME:

Originally Posted By AR-10:
I'm going to try my best not to vote for either party.

But is there a choice?

I will MAYBE vote for a Republican candidate if he is a newbe.
I will TRY to find Independant candidates that are worth voting for, but that is going to be tough.
I will vote for a Democrat if it will send an incumbent Republican home.

I WILL vote. Staying home is not an option. I will NOT vote for the same lying piece of shit I got elected the last time.


Vote for people that will ban our guns, raise our taxes, and weaken our nation's defenses?

How fucking brilliant of you.




Voting a straight Republican ticket will get you to the same place, you just aren't fucking brilliant enough to figure it out.

How many times have you voted for a president? How many campaigns have you been actively involved in? How many doors have you knocked on?

I have "worked from within" for over twenty years. The incumbents look at their base as cattle, not employers. They're always courting the "new" voters and no lie is too outrageous when the campaign is on. Then they get to the State Capitol or the National Congress and all they are worried about is getting elected again. Fuck the campaign promises, fuck the constituents, kiss tha ass that holds the big money.

Republicans need to be SHOWN that they will either represent their constituents or they will be fired. This election cycle is the perfect time to show as many of them as posible where the exit is.

Weak willed Republican voters who are pulling the lever while holding their noses are the real problem. They encourage a complete lack of accountability on the part of the politicians.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 2:04:50 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 2:51:54 AM EST
I went to the county Republican "Meet and Greet Barbeque" a week ago and told one of the "movers and shakers" of the state party exactly the same thing.

Right after he got done giving a speach about how excited he was to see the "college vote" swinging our way. Now THERE'S a bit of wishful thinking.

I got him off in a corner and told him the same exact thing I typed above. Nicely, but directly. He recognized my face, because he has seen me at political functions in the past. He agreed with my sentiment, but begged me not to give up.

I reminded him that I was the base he was taking for granted when he stood up there ticking off poll figures, and I was not voting for anyone in the room, except maybe that newbe over there in the hand-shaking line. I could tell by his actions and words that he was not hearing this for the first time.

So, yeah, when the Dems take the Congress this fall, it will be ALL my fault.
Boo fucking Hoo. Maybe the Republicans will get the message before 2008.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 2:52:38 AM EST

Originally Posted By ANGST:
With the election comming up the Repulicans are driving fuel cost down to drive up votes and the Democrats orcastrating these "school shootings" .....


If this is a joke, it is a moderately funny one.

If this is serious, then you are obviously beyond hope.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 3:26:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR-10:
I take it you're not voting, then.


You always should vote. I am seriously sick of eitther of my 2 choices. I know there are third parties out there, but in reality it comes down to Republican or Democrat and they are both equally slimy.

I will probably vote for Allen for senator from VA, and see if there is anyone else on the ticket for the other races.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 3:45:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR-10:

Voting a straight Republican ticket will get you to the same place, you just aren't fucking brilliant enough to figure it out.

--chop--




Yes, oh so brilliant one...

Voting for people that are the exact opposite of what I want in office is somehow a good thing that I am not intelligent enough to see....

I'd expect to hear this sort of immature logic from a college student, but from someone that claims to have "worked from within for over 20 years" it's quite sad, really.

Either you've got a separate agenda, or you just have no damned sense in you whatsoever.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 3:54:22 AM EST

Originally Posted By NME:

Originally Posted By AR-10:

Voting a straight Republican ticket will get you to the same place, you just aren't fucking brilliant enough to figure it out.

--chop--




Yes, oh so brilliant one...

Voting for people that are the exact opposite of what I want in office is somehow a good thing that I am not intelligent enough to see....

I'd expect to hear this sort of immature logic from a college student, but from someone that claims to have "worked from within for over 20 years" it's quite sad, really.

Either you've got a separate agenda, or you just have no damned sense in you whatsoever.



Yeah, I have an agenda alright. It goes like this;

Everybody who said one thing to get elected and then persues their own agenda in office is getting fired.

You just go pull that lever and pat yourself on the back, like a good Republican. It's the easy way out. I've done it for years. This election cycle, I will actually have to think. It sucks for me, but doing it your way is what got us in this mess.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 3:55:30 AM EST
vote?

vote republican and vote for the lesser of two evils.. end of story..

vote democratic and you get pelosi, kennedy, shumer, fienstein, kerry with sorros driving the bus.

true polically power is won from the ground up. the republican party has enough infrastructure and its underlying philosphy is good enough. what's needed is some good old return to fundamentals with some strong party leadership and a dash or two of charisma from a leader with true conservative values.

hold your nose and vote repubican this time or you may end up up to your eyeballs in socialist dogshit as a consequence....

if you want something better long term, pray for conservative leadership and put in some time working with grass roots folks to get the right people into office..
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 3:59:03 AM EST
We cover this every month or so.

The mentally limited that think it's wrong to "vote for the lesser of two evils", are almost beyond help.

Unless I am running for office myself, any candidate I vote for will support some issues that I do not support. I vote for the candidate that most closely supports the issues which are important to me.

That is almost always the Republican candidate.

And just one question, please. I remember the Assault Weapon Ban, 10 round magazines, outlawed "stocks and grips", and all the rest of that foolishness. When was the last time we heard of such nonsense?

Oh. That's right. When the "don't vote for the lesser of two evils" types let the Democrats take control of the gooberment.

Wake up, people.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:08:33 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2006 4:09:19 AM EST by ANGST]

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
We cover this every month or so.

The mentally limited that think it's wrong to "vote for the lesser of two evils", are almost beyond help.

Unless I am running for office myself, any candidate I vote for will support some issues that I do not support. I vote for the candidate that most closely supports the issues which are important to me.

That is almost always the Republican candidate.

And just one question, please. I remember the Assault Weapon Ban, 10 round magazines, outlawed "stocks and grips", and all the rest of that foolishness. When was the last time we heard of such nonsense?

Oh. That's right. When the "don't vote for the lesser of two evils" types let the Democrats take control of the gooberment.

Wake up, people.


I just think it sucks we only have 2 evils to choose from, we need at least 4 or 5 different evils.

Like this

A:

B:

C:
D:
E:
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:16:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By ANGST:

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
We cover this every month or so.

The mentally limited that think it's wrong to "vote for the lesser of two evils", are almost beyond help.

Unless I am running for office myself, any candidate I vote for will support some issues that I do not support. I vote for the candidate that most closely supports the issues which are important to me.

That is almost always the Republican candidate.

And just one question, please. I remember the Assault Weapon Ban, 10 round magazines, outlawed "stocks and grips", and all the rest of that foolishness. When was the last time we heard of such nonsense?

Oh. That's right. When the "don't vote for the lesser of two evils" types let the Democrats take control of the gooberment.

Wake up, people.


I just think it sucks we only have 2 evils to choose from, we need at least 4 or 5 different evils.

Like this

A:

B:

C:
D:
E:


Agreed.
I like having more evils to choose from.

Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:16:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2006 4:17:08 AM EST by NME]

Originally Posted By AR-10:



Yeah, I have an agenda alright. It goes like this;

Everybody who said one thing to get elected and then persues their own agenda in office is getting fired.

You just go pull that lever and pat yourself on the back, like a good Republican. It's the easy way out. I've done it for years. This election cycle, I will actually have to think. It sucks for me, but doing it your way is what got us in this mess.



Over a dozen major terrorist attacks targeting the US mainland thwarted, thousands of Jihadis meeting their doom in Iraq & Afghanistan, very, very strong economy, status of the RKBA improving across the nation...

Yes, this horrible "mess" that you're going to save us all from...

Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:23:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By ANGST:

Originally Posted By AR-10:
I take it you're not voting, then.


You always should vote. I am seriously sick of eitther of my 2 choices. I know there are third parties out there, but in reality it comes down to Republican or Democrat and they are both equally slimy.


+1

IMHO, I think we need a "None of the Above" box. If "None of the Above" wins, we throw out/disqualify the people on the ballot and start over. I bet a lot of non-voters would turn up to vote for "NotA".
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:31:47 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2006 4:34:15 AM EST by AR-10]
You "nose holding straight ticket" voters just keep laughing.

"Mentally limited" is pretty fucking insulting, by the way.
Rather conceited, too.

But hey, we got that border control we asked for, didn't we?
Oh, yeah, sewed up tight, it will be.


I am a Republican at heart. I am simply tired of being crapped on by the guys who shake my hand and smile while they tell me they are lifetime members of the NRA.

They are rinos, almost every one. What makes them a better choice than the Democrats?

I am not saying "vote Democrat". I am saying FUCK the rinos, and if enough people do the same, maybe we will get some Republicans back in office.


I would LOVE to see "none of the above" on the ballot. Maybe that would wake some of the public servants up.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:33:31 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2006 4:43:32 AM EST by mrphelps]

Originally Posted By AR-10:
You "nose holding straight ticket" voters just keep laughing.

"Mentally limited" is pretty fucking insulting, by the way.
Rather conceited, too.

But hey, we got that border control we asked for, didn't we?
Oh, yeah, sewed up tight, it will be.


I am a Republican at heart. I am simply tired of being crapped on by the guys who shake my hand and smile while they tell me they are lifetime members of the NRA.

They are rinos, almost every one. What makes them a better choice than the Democrats?

I am not saying "vote Democrat". I am saying FUCK the rinos, and if enough people do the same, maybe we will get some Republicans back in office.


I would LOVE to see "none of the above" on the ballot. Maybe that would wake some of the public servants up.


You do realize that it would be perfectly acceptable for someone to reply to your posts with the "baby crying seal of the Democratic Party", right?

Listen, your logic is 100% flawed. You would remove someone that has done 75% good and 25% bad and replace them with someone who has already stated they will do 75% bad and probably no good? I think they have a term for that it goes something like "don’t cut off your nose just to spite your face".

I'm just as pissed at the Republicans as the next guy when it comes to issues like Immigration and the lack of spending control. But to think you would, or will, have it any better with anyone else is just flat wrong. There are two things that will happen if the Dem's get in power. 1) Taxes UP (for the "rich" of course). 2) Our country will spend the next two years with investigation after investigation.. and nothing else will get done. Other possibilities are 3) new stricter gun control laws. 4) Failure in Iraq and other parts of the world. 5) Cave to tyrants such as Irans... Almondjoyeid (sp?) and Kim Dong Ill. (aka Diplormancy). 6) We'll be sucking the UN's teet. 7) Grovel at the feet of the Frenchies asking for forgiveness. Oh, what joys the libs will bring us... but at least we showed those Republicans.

So, you just keep on callin us "lever pullin Republicans" and I'm gonna stash this thread away. Then, I will keep track of the threads that go on and make sure to bring this up every single time you feel the need to complain about the new Democrat leadership.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:35:30 AM EST

Originally Posted By ANGST:
With the election comming up the Repulicans are driving fuel cost down to drive up votes and the Democrats orcastrating these "school shootings" .....



LOL LOL LOL





dude, you need more tinfoil...

apply directly to forehead, don't just wrap your wang!!!1
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:38:14 AM EST

Originally Posted By mrphelps:

Originally Posted By NME:

Originally Posted By AR-10:

Voting a straight Republican ticket will get you to the same place, you just aren't fucking brilliant enough to figure it out.

--chop--




Yes, oh so brilliant one...

Voting for people that are the exact opposite of what I want in office is somehow a good thing that I am not intelligent enough to see....

I'd expect to hear this sort of immature logic from a college student, but from someone that claims to have "worked from within for over 20 years" it's quite sad, really.

Either you've got a separate agenda, or you just have no damned sense in you whatsoever.


You do realize that it would be perfectly acceptable for someone to reply to your posts with the "baby crying seal of the Democratic Party", right?

Listen, your logic is 100% flawed. You would remove someone that has done 75% good and 25% bad and replace them with someone who has already stated they will do 75% bad and probably no good? I think they have a term for that it goes something like "don’t cut off your nose just to spite your face".

I'm just as pissed at the Republicans as the next guy when it comes to issues like Immigration and the lack of spending control. But to think you would, or will, have it any better with anyone else is just flat wrong. There are two things that will happen if the Dem's get in power. 1) Taxes UP (for the "rich" of course). 2) Our country will spend the next two years with investigation after investigation.. and nothing else will get done. Other possibilities are 3) new stricter gun control laws. 4) Failure in Iraq and other parts of the world. 5) Cave to tyrants such as Irans... Almondjoyeid (sp?) and Kim Dong Ill. (aka Diplormancy). 6) We'll be sucking the UN's teet. 7) Grovel at the feet of the Frenchies asking for forgiveness. Oh, what joys the libs will bring us... but at least we showed those Republicans.

So, you just keep on callin us "lever pullin Republicans" and I'm gonna stash this thread away. Then, I will keep track of the threads that go on and make sure to bring this up every single time you feel the need to complain about the new Democrat leadership.


I think you're referring to the individual I was quoting...
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:38:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR-10:
You "nose holding straight ticket" voters just keep laughing.

"Mentally limited" is pretty fucking insulting, by the way.
Rather conceited, too.

But hey, we got that border control we asked for, didn't we?
Oh, yeah, sewed up tight, it will be.


I am a Republican at heart. I am simply tired of being crapped on by the guys who shake my hand and smile while they tell me they are lifetime members of the NRA.

They are rinos, almost every one. What makes them a better choice than the Democrats?

I am not saying "vote Democrat". I am saying FUCK the rinos, and if enough people do the same, maybe we will get some Republicans back in office.


I would LOVE to see "none of the above" on the ballot. Maybe that would wake some of the public servants up.


Its nearly impossible to override the Kool-Aid, AR-10, you're not going to convince them, just let 'em go...bahh
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:42:57 AM EST
I vote LP.

Nationally they might not have much of a chance, especially in a presidential election, but their standing determines how much federal money they get for their election next go-around.

Nobody wins an election these days without tons of cash, no matter how charismatic they are or now much their platform makes sense.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:44:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By NME:
I think you're referring to the individual I was quoting...


Yes, sorry about that. It's fixed.
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:44:43 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2006 4:58:20 AM EST by FREEFALLE7]
One I want to continue owning rifles.

Two I enjoy my wife not having to wear a burka, sorry I would rather our country die in a Nuclear fire than be taken over by a Radical Muslem/Terrorist Army.

Three I dont want to explain to my kids why they are now thousands of legaly married homos/Gays in the country.

I dont want my kids to have to accept gays, pedifiles, etc.

Did I mention I want to keep my rifles???

And seriuosly do you want this group in charge??



FREE



Originally Posted By ANGST:
With the election comming up the Repulicans are driving fuel cost down to drive up votes and the Democrats orcastrating these "school shootings" .....
Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:45:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By mrphelps:

Originally Posted By NME:
I think you're referring to the individual I was quoting...


Yes, sorry about that. It's fixed.


Link Posted: 10/3/2006 4:52:28 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2006 4:54:31 AM EST by ANGST]
Vote repulican and keep your guns ??

Check out John Warner (R-VA) and John McCain (R-AZ) and the AWB.

Either party will sell you out if they think it will get them votes. Some of them will sell you out cause they know you hate the other party so much , you are never going to vote for the other party, or cast a vote that would mean "your" party would lose. (Like a vote for a 3rd party)
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Top Top