Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From:
Date: Sun, Feb 12 2006 5:48 pm Email: Hopefully they'll figure out that thte Libertarians want lower taxes and private schools, where you can have whatever curriculum you are willing to pay for I'd join the KKK first, since they at least admit what they are, unlike the libertarians. Failing that they will likely figure that the I.D. question will be sorted out by the courts and they can still have the lower taxes. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. What are we going to do the next time there is an economic slowdown? The time after that? Temporarily stimulating the economy by lowering revenue and borrowing more is fine. I think the long-term reduction in revenue with the resultant increase in borrowing that will make the debt impossible to ever pay off is irresponsible at best. |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Date: Sun, Feb 12 2006 5:48 pm Email: Hopefully they'll figure out that thte Libertarians want lower taxes and private schools, where you can have whatever curriculum you are willing to pay for I'd join the KKK first, since they at least admit what they are, unlike the libertarians. Failing that they will likely figure that the I.D. question will be sorted out by the courts and they can still have the lower taxes. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... and what has federal involvement in public education really done for it? What are we going to do the next time there is an economic slowdown? The time after that? Temporarily stimulating the economy by lowering revenue and borrowing more is fine. I think the long-term reduction in revenue with the resultant increase in borrowing that will make the debt impossible to ever pay off is irresponsible at best. So which perfect candidate of yours ever stopped stealing the SS trust fund? ScottW |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
Time for some remedial civics yapping. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. and what has federal involvement in public education really done for it? In your case, no difference. |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in
allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... and what has federal involvement in public education really done for it? Um, because the job of the SCOTUS is to interpret the Constitution? That's a bit higher-level than local school boards. Since it appears that you don't know about it, they also perform the same function for laws passed by Congress and the states. So which perfect candidate of yours ever stopped stealing the SS trust fund? Mr. Straw Man, there is no perfect candidate. That is not what I said or implied. Your devotion to dogma blinds you to reality. |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Time for some remedial civics yapping. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. You mean you wouldn't have preferred a Florida court pick the pres? and what has federal involvement in public education really done for it? In your case, no difference. I'll bet you went to a catholic school and was tutored by a priest. ScottW |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... and what has federal involvement in public education really done for it? Um, because the job of the SCOTUS is to interpret the Constitution? That's a bit higher-level than local school boards. Since it appears that you don't know about it, they also perform the same function for laws passed by Congress and the states. Oh well **** it then... why do we need school boards, or city councils or even state government when we have the SCOTUS? So which perfect candidate of yours ever stopped stealing the SS trust fund? Mr. Straw Man, there is no perfect candidate. That is not what I said or implied. Your devotion to dogma blinds you to reality. You implied because we have to choose we have to support positions we don't support.... talk about dogma.... ScottW |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From: ScottW
Date: Sun, Feb 12 2006 9:01 pm Email: "ScottW" Mr. Straw Man, there is no perfect candidate. That is not what I said or implied. Your devotion to dogma blinds you to reality. You implied because we have to choose we have to support positions we don't support.... talk about dogma.... No, what I said was that if you support (republicans or Democrats) because of a single issue (lower taxes, for example), you get the whole package whther you like it or not. You end up supporting religious issues, military issues, civil liberties issues, and so on. A vote for bushie is a vote in support of the candidate and his positions. That is so true as to be axiomatic: If you support the republicans then you support the republicans. If you support a candidate, then you support a candidate. Say, for example, that you send a contribution to the RNC. That money could end up helping an ID state legislative candidate, or funding a pro-Alito advertising campaign, whether you personally agree with those positions or not. So you end up *supporting* positions that you may not personally *agree* with. That's not dogma. That's reality. And that's why single interest groups and single issue voters are, IMO, very destructive overall. |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: ScottW Date: Sun, Feb 12 2006 9:01 pm Email: "ScottW" Mr. Straw Man, there is no perfect candidate. That is not what I said or implied. Your devotion to dogma blinds you to reality. You implied because we have to choose we have to support positions we don't support.... talk about dogma.... No, what I said was that if you support (republicans or Democrats) because of a single issue (lower taxes, for example), you get the whole package whther you like it or not. You end up supporting religious issues, military issues, civil liberties issues, and so on. A vote for bushie is a vote in support of the candidate and his positions. That is so true as to be axiomatic: If you support the republicans then you support the republicans. If you support a candidate, then you support a candidate. Its always the lesser of evils... hey since Al invented the internet maybe we can do away with a representative republic and become a pure democracy . ScottW |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From: ScottW
Date: Sun, Feb 12 2006 10:15 pm Email: "ScottW" Its always the lesser of evils... hey since Al invented the internet maybe we can do away with a representative republic and become a pure democracy . Interestingly, many of the original framers of the Constitution were very wary of 'true' democracy. The President was not elected, but appointed. I'm actually not sure how I'd stand on that one. As a representative republic, we've done pretty well for 230 years. I think there are areas that need reform (campaigns, as you brought up, are an example). I do think that Constitutional issues need to be determined by the Supreme Court and that amendments need the ratification process. My gut tells me that after an initial rush, people would get bored with voting on absolutely everything (do you vote in all elections? Every school board, referendum, park commissioner, etc.?). Then it would be which group could get the most people to vote. We wouldn't gain anything, and we'd lose the time now spent on debate. Special interests would be even more rampant. So I'd say that initially I'd be opposed to a 'true' democracy. One thing I hope for is another valid party or two. I think that the extremes of the right and left are not what the country wants or needs. (I do think that the extreme left is much less damaging than the extreme right overall, though.) Another party or two would mean having to form coalitions, which would perhaps bring things more to the center. If you look at a bell curve, I'd be willing to bet that most Americans fall in the center. The two parties seem to be a couple of standard deviations to the right or left. I'd think that there are some possibilites with Internet voting, though. You could vote online, print off a unique ticket, and drop it off at a polling place, which could then verify and tally it. It would be like a double-entry accounting system. Immediate results with a paper trail and confirmation a few days later. No lines (except at libraries or other polling places for people with no Internet access). |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: ScottW Date: Sun, Feb 12 2006 10:15 pm Email: "ScottW" Its always the lesser of evils... hey since Al invented the internet maybe we can do away with a representative republic and become a pure democracy . Interestingly, many of the original framers of the Constitution were very wary of 'true' democracy. The President was not elected, but appointed. I'm actually not sure how I'd stand on that one. As a representative republic, we've done pretty well for 230 years. I think there are areas that need reform (campaigns, as you brought up, are an example). I do think that Constitutional issues need to be determined by the Supreme Court and that amendments need the ratification process. My gut tells me that after an initial rush, people would get bored with voting on absolutely everything (do you vote in all elections? Every school board, referendum, park commissioner, etc.?). Then it would be which group could get the most people to vote. We wouldn't gain anything, and we'd lose the time now spent on debate. Special interests would be even more rampant. So I'd say that initially I'd be opposed to a 'true' democracy. I wasn't really serious... I agree...only activist would likely vote while the majority would probably not educate themselves enough to make an intelligent decision. I do use the 'net a lot to spout my opinion to my reps..I've read they actually use that on swing issues... I've received enough replies that were sufficiently detailed to know somebody read my message. It wasn't just a canned respone. Feinstein's staff is actually pretty good about that and I bitch at her a lot. One thing I hope for is another valid party or two. I think that the extremes of the right and left are not what the country wants or needs. (I do think that the extreme left is much less damaging than the extreme right overall, though.) Another party or two would mean having to form coalitions, which would perhaps bring things more to the center. If you look at a bell curve, I'd be willing to bet that most Americans fall in the center. The two parties seem to be a couple of standard deviations to the right or left. I think they cater to an activist base in primaries and then make a mad dash to the center to win the elections. I'd think that there are some possibilites with Internet voting, though. You could vote online, print off a unique ticket, and drop it off at a polling place, which could then verify and tally it. It would be like a double-entry accounting system. Immediate results with a paper trail and confirmation a few days later. No lines (except at libraries or other polling places for people with no Internet access). Even in major turnout elections I haven't had to wait more than 10 minutes to vote..ever. Still...I see no reason why we can't vote on line... if they'll take my tax return on line they should take my ballot. ScottW |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From: ScottW
Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 12:21 am Email: "ScottW" I do use the 'net a lot to spout my opinion to my reps..I've read they actually use that on swing issues... I've received enough replies that were sufficiently detailed to know somebody read my message. It wasn't just a canned respone. Feinstein's staff is actually pretty good about that and I bitch at her a lot. I let my rep and Senators know that I was against drilling in the ANWR. As it turned out, none of them went for it. My rep wrote back and said he was opposed to it too. I think we need to get the national vehicle fleet average much higher and emphasize alternative fuels. I do not believe that science will suddenly pull some magic rabbit out of the hat. 'Hey! We just invented a portable power source that nobody thought of!" So we need to conserve. Brazil is a major ethanol producer and has just placed a national focus on converting their fleet to ethanol. There's no reason we couldn't do that. I think we could do some other things, perhaps like tax credits for shipping via rail. I was a rep in consumer electronics for a few years. Stereo stores would order and the order would come in via truck from LA or NY. It would seem with barcoding and so on that we could ship most things via rail which is far more fuel efficient with no delay. The problem is that each railway has their own little kingdoms. They charge a ton to switch lines. Even in major turnout elections I haven't had to wait more than 10 minutes to vote..ever. I haven't either. I mentioned that because it seemed to be an issue in parts of Ohio and some other places during the last election. |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:59:03 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote: In your case, no difference. I'll bet you went to a catholic school and was tutored by a priest. I'm sure that even THEY got Federal money. BTW, did you get your education off of the back of a matchbook or somethin'? If so, you should demand your money back. |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:59:03 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote: I'll bet you went to a catholic school and was tutored by a priest. I'll bet he was at least taught some grammar... |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
dave weil said: I'll bet you went to a catholic school and was tutored by a priest. I'll bet he was at least taught some grammar... Scottie will tell you that good grammar doesn't pay enough taxes. |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message ups.com... From: Date: Sat, Feb 11 2006 1:22 pm Email: nob, you are simply underwhelmed. Don't worry, the uneducated republicans still want you. Are you saying a Liberal distorted the truth? Again? I'm, I'm, positively, underwhelmed. Not at all: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer The more interesting data is income. The Dems represent the 'average' American, the republicans the upper 1%. Being that there are a lot more more 'average Americans' than those in the 'upper 1%', you would think the Dems would win a lot more elections. I think we'll see an even bigger swing here as people start figuring out that lower taxes= intelligent design with those bozos. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. They didn't. they picked the method by which the vote was recounted in Florida. Don;t forget, when the newspapers recounted it Gore's way, he still lost. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"ScottW" wrote in message news:5AVHf.113156$0G.79284@dukeread10... Still...I see no reason why we can't vote on line... if they'll take my tax return on line they should take my ballot. "At least" three times. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Date: Sun, Feb 12 2006 5:48 pm Email: Hopefully they'll figure out that thte Libertarians want lower taxes and private schools, where you can have whatever curriculum you are willing to pay for I'd join the KKK first, since they at least admit what they are, unlike the libertarians. And what exactly are the Libertarians in your view? Failing that they will likely figure that the I.D. question will be sorted out by the courts and they can still have the lower taxes. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. What are we going to do the next time there is an economic slowdown? The time after that? If we had a proper economic system, there would be veryt little problem with economic slowdowns. Temporarily stimulating the economy by lowering revenue and borrowing more is fine. I think the long-term reduction in revenue with the resultant increase in borrowing that will make the debt impossible to ever pay off is irresponsible at best. And who exactly started that? The current debt is not anywhere near being impoossible to pay off. Note that until the GOP made it an issue that the public finally understood, did the Dems ever give a damn about deficit spending. |
#59
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Time for some remedial civics yapping. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. and what has federal involvement in public education really done for it? In your case, no difference. |
#60
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Time for some remedial civics yapping. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. They didn't, the voters did, the Dems just didn't like losing in such a close race. You need to check the facts, Bush won every single ballot count done by anybody. |
#61
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote: "George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. They didn't. they picked the method by which the vote was recounted in Florida. Don;t forget, when the newspapers recounted it Gore's way, he still lost. When all ballots statewide were reviewed, he "won." Stephen |
#62
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"MINe 109" wrote in message ... In article , "Clyde Slick" wrote: "George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. They didn't. they picked the method by which the vote was recounted in Florida. Don;t forget, when the newspapers recounted it Gore's way, he still lost. When all ballots statewide were reviewed, he "won." In only one out of three counts, by different newspapers. The only mix and match scenario out of many that he actually had a victory Statewide, that's not what he asked for. Actually, that was the methodology BUSH asked for. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#63
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
wrote in message hlink.net... "George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Time for some remedial civics yapping. I wonder how long the new makeup of the Supreme Court will take in allowing ID to be taught in public schools. I wonder why the SCOTUS is deciding what to teach in our schools rather than local school boards... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. They didn't, the voters did, the Dems just didn't like losing in such a close race. You need to check the facts, Bush won every single ballot count done by anybody. Of all the different organizations doing it, and each doing it an a variety of mux and match styles, there was only one scenario out of many that favored Gore. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#64
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message ... In article , "Clyde Slick" wrote: "George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. They didn't. they picked the method by which the vote was recounted in Florida. Don;t forget, when the newspapers recounted it Gore's way, he still lost. When all ballots statewide were reviewed, he "won." In only one out of three counts, by different newspapers. The only mix and match scenario out of many that he actually had a victory The NY Times counted three different "wins" for Gore. Statewide, that's not what he asked for. Actually, that was the methodology BUSH asked for. Whatever. Didn't happen. Stephen |
#65
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"MINe 109" wrote in message ... In article , "Clyde Slick" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message ... In article , "Clyde Slick" wrote: "George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Why did the court pick our President in 2000? I'll bet you didn't see that one coming either. They didn't. they picked the method by which the vote was recounted in Florida. Don;t forget, when the newspapers recounted it Gore's way, he still lost. When all ballots statewide were reviewed, he "won." In only one out of three counts, by different newspapers. The only mix and match scenario out of many that he actually had a victory The NY Times counted three different "wins" for Gore. Statewide, that's not what he asked for. Actually, that was the methodology BUSH asked for. Whatever. Didn't happen. didn't need to -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#66
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From: Clyde Slick
Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 9:52 am Email: "Clyde Slick" The more interesting data is income. The Dems represent the 'average' American, the republicans the upper 1%. Being that there are a lot more more 'average Americans' than those in the 'upper 1%', you would think the Dems would win a lot more elections. Are you always one-dimensional? Do you suppose that people only vote along economic lines? If so, how do you explain that the recent growth in the republican party is in poor, undereducated, very religious regions? Do you find it at all alarming that the President of the United States has limited funding for stem cell research, and further, believes that Intelligent Design should be taught alongside Evolution in public school science classrooms? Do you believe that ID is as scientifically valid as Evolution? |
#67
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From:
Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 11:08 am Email: I'd join the KKK first, since they at least admit what they are, unlike the libertarians. And what exactly are the Libertarians in your view? From what you've said, they are a group of people that think the market will right wrongs such as rascism. Private property rights supercede all others. A la carte menus of government services. No recognition that there are social problems that need solving, or at least legal protection. Temporarily stimulating the economy by lowering revenue and borrowing more is fine. I think the long-term reduction in revenue with the resultant increase in borrowing that will make the debt impossible to ever pay off is irresponsible at best. And who exactly started that? The current debt is not anywhere near being impoossible to pay off. Note that until the GOP made it an issue that the public finally understood, did the Dems ever give a damn about deficit spending. Hm. My understanding is that the two presidencies with the largest deficit spending are Reagan and bushie II. My understanding is that Clinton took large deficits and had surpluses the last four years of his term. Maybe the republicans made it an issue, but then again, they've *really* made it an issue. Are you going to claim that this party, with its track record of ever-increasing debt, are those best qualified to solve it? LOL! |
#68
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message ups.com... From: Clyde Slick Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 9:52 am Email: "Clyde Slick" The more interesting data is income. The Dems represent the 'average' American, the republicans the upper 1%. Being that there are a lot more more 'average Americans' than those in the 'upper 1%', you would think the Dems would win a lot more elections. Are you always one-dimensional? No Do you suppose that people only vote along economic lines? No,and that is even WORSE news for the Dems. You are saying they represent their econmic interests and 'still' can't get there voted. If so, how do you explain that the recent growth in the republican party is in poor, undereducated, very religious regions? They finally realized the Dems are ripping them off, and otherwise don't represent them. Do you find it at all alarming that the President of the United States has limited funding for stem cell research, I find it disconcerting. Though it is not number one on my list of priorities and further, believes that Intelligent Design should be taught alongside Evolution in public school science classrooms? Intellignet design is an abomination against reality. However, it is also an abomination against Fundamental Christianity. I don't know why they want to get such a diluted religious message into public schools. Its certainly against a purist interpretation of the Old Testament. Do you believe that ID is as scientifically valid as Evolution? It is neither scientifically, nor religiously valid. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#69
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From: Clyde Slick
Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 8:14 pm Email: "Clyde Slick" Are you always one-dimensional? No Do you suppose that people only vote along economic lines? No,and that is even WORSE news for the Dems. You are saying they represent their econmic interests and 'still' can't get there voted. I thought you said you weren't always one-dimensional. LOL! |
#70
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Clyde Slick Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 8:14 pm Email: "Clyde Slick" Are you always one-dimensional? No Do you suppose that people only vote along economic lines? No,and that is even WORSE news for the Dems. You are saying they represent their econmic interests and 'still' can't get there voted. I thought you said you weren't always one-dimensional. LOL! Go get some votes. You have plenty of time to lay the groundwork, for Hillary, John Warner, or whoever. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#71
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From: Clyde Slick
Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 10:20 pm Email: "Clyde Slick" Go get some votes. You have plenty of time to lay the groundwork, for Hillary, John Warner, or whoever. Sounds to me like someone who realizes the wheels are coming off their party's wagon. I'll enjoy the next few months while bushie and crew continue to try to start sounding like Democrats. Otherwise they'll lose big in November. Go Brownback! Go Frist! LOL! |
#72
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Clyde Slick Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 10:20 pm Email: "Clyde Slick" Go get some votes. You have plenty of time to lay the groundwork, for Hillary, John Warner, or whoever. Sounds to me like someone who realizes the wheels are coming off their party's wagon. I'll enjoy the next few months while bushie and crew continue to try to start sounding like Democrats. Otherwise they'll lose big in November. Go Brownback! Go Frist! LOL! They have as much charisma as Elizabeth Dole, who didn't get very far in the primaries. But, maybe, if you pray hard enough, they will be your opponents -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#73
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
From: Clyde Slick
Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 11:37 pm Email: "Clyde Slick" Go Brownback! Go Frist! LOL! They have as much charisma as Elizabeth Dole, who didn't get very far in the primaries. But, maybe, if you pray hard enough, they will be your opponents So who, in your opinion, has the 'charisma' to get through the primaries? I'll leave the praying to Frist and Brownback. And I'll wait to see whom God annoints as our next republican presidential candidate. Pat Robertson, maybe? He's a republican... |
#74
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
OT Possible Democrat Platform
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Clyde Slick Date: Mon, Feb 13 2006 11:37 pm Email: "Clyde Slick" Go Brownback! Go Frist! LOL! They have as much charisma as Elizabeth Dole, who didn't get very far in the primaries. But, maybe, if you pray hard enough, they will be your opponents So who, in your opinion, has the 'charisma' to get through the primaries? Unfortunately for them (and me) the best charisma candidates are more or less prochoice. Of what's left, there is George Allen. I'll leave the praying to Frist and Brownback. And I'll wait to see whom God annoints as our next republican presidential candidate. Pat Robertson, maybe? He's a republican... Something else for you to pray for. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#75
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Rigged Primaries
I am not gonna pin this as being a democratic party only issue.
But this idea that the parties can bypass primaries and put their candidate straight into the general election just sucks. We;re like a two commie party country. In either party increasingly the party picks their candidates and bypasses the primary system. I wonder how the people of Ohio feel about Reid of Nevada and Schumer of NY deciding who should be their representative. This is one of the best examples I can think of for why we need cleanmoney campaigns. Hackett should tell Reid and Schumer to pound sand and let the democrats fo Ohio choose their candidate. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/po...=1&oref=slogin ScottW |
#76
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Rigged Primaries
"ScottW" wrote in message oups.com... I am not gonna pin this as being a democratic party only issue. True enough, something similar happened to Republican Jean Piro in NY But this idea that the parties can bypass primaries and put their candidate straight into the general election just sucks. We;re like a two commie party country. In either party increasingly the party picks their candidates and bypasses the primary system. I wonder how the people of Ohio feel about Reid of Nevada and Schumer of NY deciding who should be their representative. This is one of the best examples I can think of for why we need cleanmoney campaigns. Hackett should tell Reid and Schumer to pound sand and let the democrats fo Ohio choose their candidate. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/po...=1&oref=slogin ScottW -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#77
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Rigged Primaries
From: ScottW
Date: Tues, Feb 14 2006 11:09 am Email: "ScottW" http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/po...=1&oref=slogin I'd still run if I was in his shoes. Someone who bows to the pressure, then whines about it, probably shouldn't be in national office anyway. I think the voters might rally behind someone like this, assuming that his views weren't way out of the constituents' box. I'm not saying what the Dems did is right, just that I think he could still have won. I'd even vote republican in some cases if the robots were ever willing to say "**** you" when the situation demanded it. As I said earlier, I have a pretty moderate republican congressmen in my district, but he follows the party line way too much for my liking. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
which is best digital recording platform for $1K-2K? | Pro Audio | |||
Hard Disk Recording platform options - seeking advice | Pro Audio | |||
What it means to be A Democrat | Audio Opinions | |||
ANY Scope Fusion Platform users out there into STS program creation? | Pro Audio | |||
Bombfactory Plug-Ins Cross Platform...? | Pro Audio |