Time to put the brakes on the Hillary express

Darla said:
USC isn't an independent.

He is a registered Republican.
Click to expand...
He is a D that registered R because he can actually effect a real vote in a stonghold of the R party.

I have never heard him mention anything even close to an R ideation in the years that I have known him. He is "proud" of that registering as an R so he can "vote for the worst candidate", not because he is actually in agreement with anything republican at all.
 
TheDanold said:
Tell you what Lorax, find me another "independent" who fretted over the health of the Dem party and salivated over them cementing a majority for a decade and I'll believe you.
So good luck with your hopeless quest!
Click to expand...


Hardly "fretting." I'm pointing out that I don't see the sense in Democratic primary voters undermining their own party's chances (pretty much the point of the article I posted, btw).

Face it; I'm much more independent than you, and you know it. Right now, the Democrats are the best hope for change: that's just a fact, and it's completely objective. It would be inane to argue that the GOP - after 6 years of basically creating debt, making us less safe as a nation & otherwise screwing things up, represent positive "change."
 
TheDanold said:
You only "skewered" them because you believed they were damaging the Dem party's chances, I remember your Reid comment well for example, you were worried how what Reid said would play out on talk radio and it boding bad for the Dem party.
Click to expand...

Please. I've had plenty to say about Reid. And he's IN POWER. Aren't hacks supposed to defend those in power, DeMano?

You don't know what a hack is. I see you were scared to take my little challenge, because you know you'll get beaten, and badly....
 
Damocles said:
He is a D that registered R because he can actually effect a real vote in a stonghold of the R party.

I have never heard him mention anything even close to an R ideation in the years that I have known him. He is "proud" of that registering as an R so he can "vote for the worst candidate", not because he is actually in agreement with anything republican at all.
Click to expand...

I was being facetious.
 
Onceler said:
Hardly "fretting." I'm pointing out that I don't see the sense in Democratic primary voters undermining their own party's chances (pretty much the point of the article I posted, btw).

Face it; I'm much more independent than you, and you know it. Right now, the Democrats are the best hope for change: that's just a fact, and it's completely objective. It would be inane to argue that the GOP - after 6 years of basically creating debt, making us less safe as a nation & otherwise screwing things up, represent positive "change."
Click to expand...

I agree, and especially so since their candidates are not even CLAIMING to represent change.
 
Damocles said:
He is a D that registered R because he can actually effect a real vote in a stonghold of the R party.

I have never heard him mention anything even close to an R ideation in the years that I have known him. He is "proud" of that registering as an R so he can "vote for the worst candidate", not because he is actually in agreement with anything republican at all.
Click to expand...



I have never heard him mention anything even close to an R ideation in the years that I have known him


You might want to talk to him about guns, school vouchers, and privitizing schools. Or immigration. He's very conservative on those.

I think he's been registered republican for a long time, and the party left him. But, I could be wrong.
 
Onceler said:
Please. I've had plenty to say about Reid. And he's IN POWER. Aren't hacks supposed to defend those in power, DeMano?
Click to expand...
Not if their overriding concern is the party's power. Put more precisely, you are more interested in the Democrat party being in power, than specific Dems within it being in power....as any good hack would choose.

I would much prefer a solid Conservative majority in Congress than a solid Republican one.
 
Cypress said:

I have never heard him mention anything even close to an R ideation in the years that I have known him


You might want to talk to him about guns, school vouchers, and privitizing schools. Or immigration. He's very conservative on those.

I think he's been registered republican for a long time, and the party left him. But, I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
No, he admits that he only registered "R" to "vote for the worst candidate". Believe me, I have spoken with him on this issue many times in the past.

He is no republican, other than in registration, and never has been.

There are many pro-Amendment 2 Ds, that is not solely an R issue.
 
Damocles said:
Sung to the tune of "I Want Candy"

I want Gridlock,
It's what made the 90s great,
I want Gridlock!

(I'll have to think of the rest of the song later...)
Click to expand...
We have gridlock now, gridlock in the 80's, never stopped Dems from trying to spend more.
 
TheDanold said:
We have gridlock now, gridlock in the 80's, never stopped Dems from trying to spend more.
Click to expand...
We don't have real gridlock now. We have a liberal President and a liberal congress. The only issue we have gridlock on is the 'war'.

Holy crap. Just look at the Kennedy-Bush "immigration reform". Or the Kennedy-Bush NCLB bill. Or the fricking Pill Bill. Or a myriad of other issues that Bush and the Ds agree on.
 
edwards or Obama would be crushed worse than Hillary is crushing them.
The far left whinning about there party leader virtually being at 50% already is comical.
 
TheDanold said:
Not if their overriding concern is the party's power. Put more precisely, you are more interested in the Democrat party being in power, than specific Dems within it being in power....as any good hack would choose.

I would much prefer a solid Conservative majority in Congress than a solid Republican one.
Click to expand...

And I've actually stated many times that I have not always been comfortable with a solid Dem majority, because their worst instincts tend to take over.

That doesn't stop me from wishing for the best instrument of change, which, at this point - particularly when it comes to Iraq - likely comes in the form of a Dem majority. The GOP candidates are talking the same ol', same ol' - we're just not getting any change w/ that route. And, for that matter - as I said in the 1st post - this is something Hillary represents, as well. She is as close to the status quote candidate as you get on the Dem side.

I know; it's real hackish of me to point that out about Hillary...
 
Darla said:
If you want change, and you are not just plain dumb, you know you need the other party to have a majority for years, in order to reverse this damage.
Click to expand...

:)
So you're going to reverse:
Sarbanes-Oxley
The largest ever federal education increase
NCLB
Campaign Finance Reform
The Pill Bill
NEA spending increase
Transportation Bill Pork
Other spending increases


That's just great Darlalaling! I'll vote Dem just so they can reverse all that extra spending and get the budget back on track, so they can do real CHANGE, after all it will take years to cut back all that extra spending, sorry "damage" that the Repub "majority" did.


Oh wait the Dems just want more giant new social welfare spending like universal healthcare and "free" college tuition.
Voting Dem for change on the budget is like voting for the bus driver to shift into high gear going down the same road.
 
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/12/bloomberg/bxoverhaul.php

SAN FRANCISCO: For Silicon Valley venture capitalists eager to weaken the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate governance law, Nancy Pelosi may prove to be a useful ally.

Pelosi, a Democrat, already has identified revising the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley law as a priority when she becomes speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives in January.


Democrats have also talked - very openly & forcefully - about overhauling No Child Left Behind, which has completely backfired. They've taken the 1st proactive steps against pork in years, and clearly represent not just the best, but the ONLY change when it comes to Iraq policy & policy in the WOT.

DanoOWNED
 
Both major political parties know that Americans are trapped in a two-party quagmire. Whether one likes Hillary or not, come election most Americans are going to hold their noses and vote for her. Such is the American version of "democracy" in which virtually all Americans are political hacks and dummies to the system. A system that perpetually pimp-slaps Americans into line and keeps them on their knees in fear.

The truth is that Americans get the government we deserve. We deserved George Bush and we'll deserve Hillary Clinton. Both are proponents of mass-murder in the name of "freedom" .. not freedom for humans, but freedom for the corporate will.

Mass-murder has been normalized to the American people and the fact that we've mass-murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people including women, children, and babies is hardly an issue to the American people.

"Hillary doesn't represent American values .. and she's mean" .. Bullshit. Yes the fuck she does represent the war-mongering nation that America has always been and she represents the mean-spirited testosterone-driven cowboy Heston/Stallone image that is America. Her perfect running mate would be Homer Simpson and you'd have a more complete image of testosterone and apathy. We don't give a damn about the plight of our own citizens nor do we care that slavery is both legal and practiced in the US.

Hillary is what we'll get because Hillary is what we deserve. Americans lack the courage to challenge and defeat the two-party system trap and lack the humanity to care about mass-murder or the plight of many of our own.

"Cry me a river" .. of Iraqi blood.
 
Onceler said:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/12/bloomberg/bxoverhaul.php

SAN FRANCISCO: For Silicon Valley venture capitalists eager to weaken the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate governance law, Nancy Pelosi may prove to be a useful ally.

Pelosi, a Democrat, already has identified revising the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley law as a priority when she becomes speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives in January.


Democrats have also talked - very openly & forcefully - about overhauling No Child Left Behind, which has completely backfired. They've taken the 1st proactive steps against pork in years, and clearly represent not just the best, but the ONLY change when it comes to Iraq policy & policy in the WOT.

DanoOWNED
Click to expand...
Some talk and a step to reduce pork, we'll wait and see the results for that. The Dems were the kings of pork in the 60's to 80's because they really had no other way to get business to support them and I don't see that changing:

Dems stuffed the Iraq bill with pork.
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2...p://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17887549/&frame=true

"Sixteen congressmen scored a perfect 100%, voting for all 50 anti-pork amendments. They are all Republicans.
The average Republican score was 43%. The average Democratic score was 2%.
The average score for appropriators was 4%. The average score for non-appropriators was 25%.
Kudos to Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) who scored an admirable 98%-the only Democrat to score above 20%. "
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08/the_2007_club_for_growth_repor.php

I stand by my "change" comment earlier with the bus driver analogy. The Democrats BY VOTING RECORD (not Lorax's perception) are terrible with pork and the Republicans are ok (not great).

See Lorax I see things the way they are, not because I'm smart but because I take the time to actually look at how people vote, you just go by perception, it's why I will always be leagues ahead of you in debate.
 
blackascoal said:
Both major political parties know that Americans are trapped in a two-party quagmire. Whether one likes Hillary or not, come election most Americans are going to hold their noses and vote for her. Such is the American version of "democracy" in which virtually all Americans are political hacks and dummies to the system. A system that perpetually pimp-slaps Americans into line and keeps them on their knees in fear.

The truth is that Americans get the government we deserve. We deserved George Bush and we'll deserve Hillary Clinton. Both are proponents of mass-murder in the name of "freedom" .. not freedom for humans, but freedom for the corporate will.

Mass-murder has been normalized to the American people and the fact that we've mass-murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people including women, children, and babies is hardly an issue to the American people.

"Hillary doesn't represent American values .. and she's mean" .. Bullshit. Yes the fuck she does represent the war-mongering nation that America has always been and she represents the mean-spirited testosterone-driven cowboy Heston/Stallone image that is America. Her perfect running mate would be Homer Simpson and you'd have a more complete image of testosterone and apathy. We don't give a damn about the plight of our own citizens nor do we care that slavery is both legal and practiced in the US.

Hillary is what we'll get because Hillary is what we deserve. Americans lack the courage to challenge and defeat the two-party system trap and lack the humanity to care about mass-murder or the plight of many of our own.

"Cry me a river" .. of Iraqi blood.
Click to expand...
So, who do you support in her stead?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top