- This topic has 290 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 9 months ago by Anonymous.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 10, 2008 at 2:49 PM #151273February 10, 2008 at 3:04 PM #150939gandalfParticipant
I support moderate, slightly conservative positions. I’m a decline-to-state voter who is looking forward to throwing the bums (yes, republicans) out of office.
You have to admire the sheer hypocrisy of the republican partisans complaining about the socialism of democrats when the current republican crew is presiding over the greatest wealth redistribution program (read: WELFARE) we have ever seen in the history of this country. The beneficiaries aren’t poor though, but large corporations, foreign investors and those in the higher income brackets who truly have no need for it.
Serious question for you republican ‘socialists’ out there: How do you rationalize the ENORMOUS subsidies being given away right now to the financial industry and MBS investors including the Saudi and Chinese governments? What’s the difference between welfare for the poor and welfare for corporations, millionaires and foreign governments? What happens to our country when the only way we can pay our debts is through inflation and devaluation of our currency?
Is there an honest one among you who can explain this with a straight face? How did we get to this point? Surely Nancy Pelosi is to blame. Unbelievable.
After a decade of supporting republicans, most of us in this country think you morons on the right are a bunch of ranting full-of-sh*t bumper-sticker crapheads. Party before country. We’ve had enough of you trashing the place. The final irony is, the nail in the coffin, you’re going to down in history as actually sucking worse than the Clintons. Chew on that dog food, pooch.
I’m voting for Obama or Bloomberg. Hopefully both. Time to turn the page.
February 10, 2008 at 3:04 PM #151202gandalfParticipantI support moderate, slightly conservative positions. I’m a decline-to-state voter who is looking forward to throwing the bums (yes, republicans) out of office.
You have to admire the sheer hypocrisy of the republican partisans complaining about the socialism of democrats when the current republican crew is presiding over the greatest wealth redistribution program (read: WELFARE) we have ever seen in the history of this country. The beneficiaries aren’t poor though, but large corporations, foreign investors and those in the higher income brackets who truly have no need for it.
Serious question for you republican ‘socialists’ out there: How do you rationalize the ENORMOUS subsidies being given away right now to the financial industry and MBS investors including the Saudi and Chinese governments? What’s the difference between welfare for the poor and welfare for corporations, millionaires and foreign governments? What happens to our country when the only way we can pay our debts is through inflation and devaluation of our currency?
Is there an honest one among you who can explain this with a straight face? How did we get to this point? Surely Nancy Pelosi is to blame. Unbelievable.
After a decade of supporting republicans, most of us in this country think you morons on the right are a bunch of ranting full-of-sh*t bumper-sticker crapheads. Party before country. We’ve had enough of you trashing the place. The final irony is, the nail in the coffin, you’re going to down in history as actually sucking worse than the Clintons. Chew on that dog food, pooch.
I’m voting for Obama or Bloomberg. Hopefully both. Time to turn the page.
February 10, 2008 at 3:04 PM #151208gandalfParticipantI support moderate, slightly conservative positions. I’m a decline-to-state voter who is looking forward to throwing the bums (yes, republicans) out of office.
You have to admire the sheer hypocrisy of the republican partisans complaining about the socialism of democrats when the current republican crew is presiding over the greatest wealth redistribution program (read: WELFARE) we have ever seen in the history of this country. The beneficiaries aren’t poor though, but large corporations, foreign investors and those in the higher income brackets who truly have no need for it.
Serious question for you republican ‘socialists’ out there: How do you rationalize the ENORMOUS subsidies being given away right now to the financial industry and MBS investors including the Saudi and Chinese governments? What’s the difference between welfare for the poor and welfare for corporations, millionaires and foreign governments? What happens to our country when the only way we can pay our debts is through inflation and devaluation of our currency?
Is there an honest one among you who can explain this with a straight face? How did we get to this point? Surely Nancy Pelosi is to blame. Unbelievable.
After a decade of supporting republicans, most of us in this country think you morons on the right are a bunch of ranting full-of-sh*t bumper-sticker crapheads. Party before country. We’ve had enough of you trashing the place. The final irony is, the nail in the coffin, you’re going to down in history as actually sucking worse than the Clintons. Chew on that dog food, pooch.
I’m voting for Obama or Bloomberg. Hopefully both. Time to turn the page.
February 10, 2008 at 3:04 PM #151226gandalfParticipantI support moderate, slightly conservative positions. I’m a decline-to-state voter who is looking forward to throwing the bums (yes, republicans) out of office.
You have to admire the sheer hypocrisy of the republican partisans complaining about the socialism of democrats when the current republican crew is presiding over the greatest wealth redistribution program (read: WELFARE) we have ever seen in the history of this country. The beneficiaries aren’t poor though, but large corporations, foreign investors and those in the higher income brackets who truly have no need for it.
Serious question for you republican ‘socialists’ out there: How do you rationalize the ENORMOUS subsidies being given away right now to the financial industry and MBS investors including the Saudi and Chinese governments? What’s the difference between welfare for the poor and welfare for corporations, millionaires and foreign governments? What happens to our country when the only way we can pay our debts is through inflation and devaluation of our currency?
Is there an honest one among you who can explain this with a straight face? How did we get to this point? Surely Nancy Pelosi is to blame. Unbelievable.
After a decade of supporting republicans, most of us in this country think you morons on the right are a bunch of ranting full-of-sh*t bumper-sticker crapheads. Party before country. We’ve had enough of you trashing the place. The final irony is, the nail in the coffin, you’re going to down in history as actually sucking worse than the Clintons. Chew on that dog food, pooch.
I’m voting for Obama or Bloomberg. Hopefully both. Time to turn the page.
February 10, 2008 at 3:04 PM #151298gandalfParticipantI support moderate, slightly conservative positions. I’m a decline-to-state voter who is looking forward to throwing the bums (yes, republicans) out of office.
You have to admire the sheer hypocrisy of the republican partisans complaining about the socialism of democrats when the current republican crew is presiding over the greatest wealth redistribution program (read: WELFARE) we have ever seen in the history of this country. The beneficiaries aren’t poor though, but large corporations, foreign investors and those in the higher income brackets who truly have no need for it.
Serious question for you republican ‘socialists’ out there: How do you rationalize the ENORMOUS subsidies being given away right now to the financial industry and MBS investors including the Saudi and Chinese governments? What’s the difference between welfare for the poor and welfare for corporations, millionaires and foreign governments? What happens to our country when the only way we can pay our debts is through inflation and devaluation of our currency?
Is there an honest one among you who can explain this with a straight face? How did we get to this point? Surely Nancy Pelosi is to blame. Unbelievable.
After a decade of supporting republicans, most of us in this country think you morons on the right are a bunch of ranting full-of-sh*t bumper-sticker crapheads. Party before country. We’ve had enough of you trashing the place. The final irony is, the nail in the coffin, you’re going to down in history as actually sucking worse than the Clintons. Chew on that dog food, pooch.
I’m voting for Obama or Bloomberg. Hopefully both. Time to turn the page.
February 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM #150944Allan from FallbrookParticipantgandalf: If that comment was directed my way, I’d be happy to respond. I don’t consider Bush a conservative, and I never have. I didn’t vote for him in either election, especially after watching what a hash he made of his time as governor of Texas. His days at Harkin Energy were just as enlightening, if for no other reason than showing the dangers of nepotism and cronyism.
I don’t support any of what he has done as of late, including the stimulus package. Among true conservatives, he’s considered a joke, both in terms of politics and economics. And it isn’t party before country, at least not in my case. It never has been. As I said, I didn’t vote for him in either election.
As to the two charges of moron and being worse than the Clintons, well, I’ll cheerfully take my chances against you on the first, and History will make a much more objective call on the second.
February 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM #151207Allan from FallbrookParticipantgandalf: If that comment was directed my way, I’d be happy to respond. I don’t consider Bush a conservative, and I never have. I didn’t vote for him in either election, especially after watching what a hash he made of his time as governor of Texas. His days at Harkin Energy were just as enlightening, if for no other reason than showing the dangers of nepotism and cronyism.
I don’t support any of what he has done as of late, including the stimulus package. Among true conservatives, he’s considered a joke, both in terms of politics and economics. And it isn’t party before country, at least not in my case. It never has been. As I said, I didn’t vote for him in either election.
As to the two charges of moron and being worse than the Clintons, well, I’ll cheerfully take my chances against you on the first, and History will make a much more objective call on the second.
February 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM #151213Allan from FallbrookParticipantgandalf: If that comment was directed my way, I’d be happy to respond. I don’t consider Bush a conservative, and I never have. I didn’t vote for him in either election, especially after watching what a hash he made of his time as governor of Texas. His days at Harkin Energy were just as enlightening, if for no other reason than showing the dangers of nepotism and cronyism.
I don’t support any of what he has done as of late, including the stimulus package. Among true conservatives, he’s considered a joke, both in terms of politics and economics. And it isn’t party before country, at least not in my case. It never has been. As I said, I didn’t vote for him in either election.
As to the two charges of moron and being worse than the Clintons, well, I’ll cheerfully take my chances against you on the first, and History will make a much more objective call on the second.
February 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM #151231Allan from FallbrookParticipantgandalf: If that comment was directed my way, I’d be happy to respond. I don’t consider Bush a conservative, and I never have. I didn’t vote for him in either election, especially after watching what a hash he made of his time as governor of Texas. His days at Harkin Energy were just as enlightening, if for no other reason than showing the dangers of nepotism and cronyism.
I don’t support any of what he has done as of late, including the stimulus package. Among true conservatives, he’s considered a joke, both in terms of politics and economics. And it isn’t party before country, at least not in my case. It never has been. As I said, I didn’t vote for him in either election.
As to the two charges of moron and being worse than the Clintons, well, I’ll cheerfully take my chances against you on the first, and History will make a much more objective call on the second.
February 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM #151303Allan from FallbrookParticipantgandalf: If that comment was directed my way, I’d be happy to respond. I don’t consider Bush a conservative, and I never have. I didn’t vote for him in either election, especially after watching what a hash he made of his time as governor of Texas. His days at Harkin Energy were just as enlightening, if for no other reason than showing the dangers of nepotism and cronyism.
I don’t support any of what he has done as of late, including the stimulus package. Among true conservatives, he’s considered a joke, both in terms of politics and economics. And it isn’t party before country, at least not in my case. It never has been. As I said, I didn’t vote for him in either election.
As to the two charges of moron and being worse than the Clintons, well, I’ll cheerfully take my chances against you on the first, and History will make a much more objective call on the second.
February 10, 2008 at 3:59 PM #150956AnonymousGuestAllan, Clinton’s integrity is lacking. His convictions depend on what he can get away with. Bush is just plain evil, heartless, ridiculous, the lowest of the low.
Do you think if Obama gets the nomiation he would choose Hillary as a running mate? With that type of historical ticket, I’m sure the Dems would win the election. What do you think? I just don’t want Hillary (and Bill) at the helm. It is > time for something new. The clintons had their chance.
Aside from and despite who gets the nomination, I’d still like to see a national healthcare system. Canada has one. Money on that would be better spent than war in Iraq, right?
February 10, 2008 at 3:59 PM #151217AnonymousGuestAllan, Clinton’s integrity is lacking. His convictions depend on what he can get away with. Bush is just plain evil, heartless, ridiculous, the lowest of the low.
Do you think if Obama gets the nomiation he would choose Hillary as a running mate? With that type of historical ticket, I’m sure the Dems would win the election. What do you think? I just don’t want Hillary (and Bill) at the helm. It is > time for something new. The clintons had their chance.
Aside from and despite who gets the nomination, I’d still like to see a national healthcare system. Canada has one. Money on that would be better spent than war in Iraq, right?
February 10, 2008 at 3:59 PM #151223AnonymousGuestAllan, Clinton’s integrity is lacking. His convictions depend on what he can get away with. Bush is just plain evil, heartless, ridiculous, the lowest of the low.
Do you think if Obama gets the nomiation he would choose Hillary as a running mate? With that type of historical ticket, I’m sure the Dems would win the election. What do you think? I just don’t want Hillary (and Bill) at the helm. It is > time for something new. The clintons had their chance.
Aside from and despite who gets the nomination, I’d still like to see a national healthcare system. Canada has one. Money on that would be better spent than war in Iraq, right?
February 10, 2008 at 3:59 PM #151241AnonymousGuestAllan, Clinton’s integrity is lacking. His convictions depend on what he can get away with. Bush is just plain evil, heartless, ridiculous, the lowest of the low.
Do you think if Obama gets the nomiation he would choose Hillary as a running mate? With that type of historical ticket, I’m sure the Dems would win the election. What do you think? I just don’t want Hillary (and Bill) at the helm. It is > time for something new. The clintons had their chance.
Aside from and despite who gets the nomination, I’d still like to see a national healthcare system. Canada has one. Money on that would be better spent than war in Iraq, right?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.