I quote you from your first post:

"well, not really - just some horse crap to show the ignorance of another thread of simaler name."

The other thread "of a simaler (sic)" name was talking about liberals and conservatives as they apply to OUR political system.

That is not the Taliban. That is not women covering their faces. That is not even the KKK anymore (although a stretch and you seem to have your facts mixed up about it). It was very specific in it's content that it was referring to how the terms liberal and conservative apply to our society and our politics.

So if you want to be taken seriously and actually show a point/counterpoint relationship between the two, it seems to me it would be logical to keep things pertinent to our political system, as the other thread has done.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: I didnt know "conservatives" or "liberals" were registered US parties either. and, I also did not know that liberals or conservatives could not exist outside the USA. I guess this means Nazi's were neither liberal or conservative either, eh? oops - that was left or right. can people be "left or right" outside the USA? will you allow that? and - yes - I mentioned more than enough times, this is just to show the idiocy of blanket statements about "liberals" or "conservatives", as if they are some form of species of humans. and, isnt it fun to adjust how things can be discussed, depending on content?

quote Originally posted by jstricker: I don't know how familiar you are with US history regarding the KKK. In the '50's and '60's, it was dominated by members of the Democratic party. It was also a powerful voting force in the deep south. As the Democrats turned away from it, the party withered and died. It was never a bastion of the Republican party, then or now.

John, although I admit I really wasn't really aware until recently of the Democrats involvement in the KKK, my post had little to do with the KKK itself and who might've supported it. My post was more in reference to the foolishness of 82-T/A's (why can't people use real names!) blanket comment, in this case about racism.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I'm VERY impressed that the Democrats were able to "shake" their racist past, and embrace the black population of America like the Republicans always have.

Not exactly true. If you re-phrased it:

The KKK is not a part of the Democratic Party. Just because it has members in it that claim to be Democrats does not make it a Democratic group.

The difference is that one way you're making it a part, or wing, of another organization, the other way you are not.

I'm sure there were a LOT of Democrats, especially up north, that loathed the KKK.

The KKK while it's membership was espoused to be of Christian people (although I beg to differ that anyone that could lynch another for no crime other than the color of their skin could be a Christian person) it was not a "Christian" organization.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Would the following have been fair comment back in the "old days" then? I'm just asking, I'm not proposing anything. The KKK are not Democrats. Just because it has members in it that claim to be Democrats does not make it a Democrat group. I'm hoping someone doesn't now quote me out of context. I'm not about to get into a debate about the KKK.

once upon a time
and not very long ago
the KKK was 100% democrats and protestant christan
they shot or hung the blacks jews catholics and GOP members on sight
GODDAMMREPUBICAN was one word in dixie
intil nixon

the few who didnot quit are now all in the GOP
along with many who gave up the KKK as a lost cause
but still are racist SOB's who live to hate

sorry but the conservative cause was racist
and mostly still is
just the names/labels changed
so instead of anti black it became anti welfare
the hate is still there

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

quote Originally posted by jstricker: PS: I do agree with you that the picture was in poor taste, at best.

Picture removed because someone who's opinion I respect found it to be in poor taste.
My apologies, John.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 06-06-2009).]

You know, whenever someone exploits the mentally handicapped to make another feel stupid and small, I just think of how proud that kid must be to know that his moment of pride and happiness is being used to hurt others.

No class, John.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: you got it. I am trying to show this whole concept of grouping everyone into either one of two groups is non-sensical. so, how about you? do you think women sure hide their faces in public? yes or no? no - you are a liberal, yes - you are a conservative. see how ignorant this kind of grouping is? that is what this thread is about.

No.
This thread is about you running away from other threads when pressed into a corner with cogent and substantiated rebuttals to your inane claims.

"nazi's were right wing", civil war political history, conservative vs liberal political ideology,... you name it, and the same pattern seems to happen over and over again.
You, or one of our other purveyors of gibberish, spews forth with some nonsense or parrots some memes from a blog and then when confronted with enough intelligent and coherent argument with supporting documentation, gets themselves in over their head and suddenly you disappear from the debate only to pop up again elsewhere with more of your self admitted "horse crap".

I have yet to see you, Rayb or Neptune construct a well researched, documented and intelligently presented argument to any debate.

You claim; "History is available to all, no sphincters required."
Well, it's available to you too, but not once have I witnessed a shred of evidence that you have availed yourself of it.
The evidence is overwhelming however that you rely principally on pulling your arguments straight out of your own rectum.
You throw wild claims around like a chimp in the zoo flings poop. The sole difference between you and the chimp is that you seem to believe that your rhetorical fecal matter is some sort of intellectual gold.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 06-06-2009).]

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: You know, whenever someone exploits the mentally handicapped to make another feel stupid and small, I just think of how proud that kid must be to know that his moment of pride and happiness is being used to hurt others. No class, John.

You giving others lessons on class?
Now THAT's comedy.

Jeff,

Are you referring to me or is Formula88's first name John as well?


I don't believe I said or posted anything degrading the mentally handicapped. If I did, point it out and I'll be happy to apologize.

John Stricker

PS: I do agree with you that the picture was in poor taste, at best.

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: You know, whenever someone exploits the mentally handicapped to make another feel stupid and small, I just think of how proud that kid must be to know that his moment of pride and happiness is being used to hurt others. No class, John.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Looks like it's time to put on the gumboots as the BS is really starting to pile up here. Are you suggesting that within the ranks of "Republicans", there have never been nor are there presently any white people who have ever entertained racist beliefs? With all due respect, it’s ridiculous to make a blanket statement like that regarding ANY group of people. Given enough numbers, every forum has their bigots, every political party has their bigots, and yes, every race (black, white, yellow) has their bigots.

Nope, I never said anything of the sort. David Duke was a Republican.

However, the KKK movement, and anti-civil rights movement had always been championed by the Democrats. The KKK was started (competely) by Democrats.

If you look up any civil rights act in history (at any time), you'll discover that it was passed by either by a Republican president, or under a Republican majority senate / house. In EVERY instance, MORE Republicans voted FOR THEM, than Democrats did (by percent of their own party). This includes EVERYTHING from the emancipation proclimation, to the denizen of civil rights acts first passed under the Eisenhower Administration (championed by him) the education desegregation act, the civil rights acts in the 60s were ALL passed by Republicans, had it been up to strictly Democrats, it wouldn't have passed. Every point in history shows that the Democrats had tried to thwart the passage of the civil rights acts.

99% of our population today is totally oblivious to this... for the same reaso why Cuba's youth believe that Castro and his brother mean well. The only explaination that the Democrats have tried to come up with is that Republicans and Democrats have switched sides... as if to suggest that Dwight D. Eisenhower was really a Democrat, and that all the Republican senators in the 50s and 60s were Republicans also and that really, all of the Democrat senators were Republican.

This isn't possible for many many reasons (which I will outline):

Lincoln (needs no introduction)
Eisenhower, he was a hard-core capitalist, also VERY pro-military (if you don't know his history, I suggest you look it up)
Senator McCarthy (among others at the time) were VERY anti-socialist / communist. They were pro-civil rights, and big-time capitalist.
Senator Byrd, still a Democrat then and now (still makes racist comments, by accident, now and then, and refers to blacks as negros)
Senator Gore, was a Democrat his entire life, and Al Gore (his son) is also a Democrat. His father, like Byrd, voted against all the civil rights acts.
Senator Prescot Bush, always Republican, pro capitalist, and voted for all of the civil rights acts.

(quick quote here because I know you don't believe me)

quote “They should also be entitled to representation in the Congress. Indeed, representation in the Congress would be much more valuable to the citizens of the District of Columbia than the simple privilege of voting for President and Vice President of the United States. I believe the effectiveness of representation in the Congress, in the interest of the citizens of the District of Columbia, would be much greater.” U.S. Senator Prescott Bush (R-CT), grandfather of President George W. Bush, May 11, 1961

He was referring to blacks (and women).

Other civil rights acts were passed under Reagan, namely anti discriminatory voters rights acts, as well as native American cvil rights acts.


I had this discussion before with one of my Democrat friends, every example he came up with to try to prove it I refuted. He finally, "defeated" said... "are you telling me that the Democrats haven't done ANYTHING positive for this country?"

NO, I am not saying that. As a matter of fact, John F. Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy were the "new breed" of Democrat. Until John F. Kennedy came a long... all black Americans were Republican. Their votes didn't have the full value of white or other immigrants (I think it was counted 1/4th or 1/2 a vote don't remember). Dr. Martin Luther King, and his family were also always Republican, and had always voted Republican. The man that went up against Kennedy was Richard Nixon. Nixon was too green at the time, and while JFK was too... he simply did not have the oratory skills and charisma that JFK had. Both men were pro-civil rights. That's what set JFK apart from most Democrats... he had a lot of opposition initially, but evidently all Democrats supported him because they wanted Democrat power. Because of JFK's strong desire for equality, the black Americans voted for him in droves (as did many dead people in Chicago). So, in the end, JFK, and Bobby Kennedy both gave their lives for the freedom and equality of all black Americans.

But don't think for a second, even one second that the Democrats should be applauded for all time. The pre-JFK era Democrat party was ripe with dozens and dozen of racist leaders. Everyone from Andrew Jackson, to the entire founding of the KKK. Although most names were secret, any professed founder of the KKK was a registered Democrat. The KKK had huge financial support from the southern Democrat party supporters. Many Democrat historians even refer to these people as a completely seperate party, "Southern Democrat Party", even though they were not.

The Democrat party today HAS been able to shake it's racist past. And while it may not make much air time in schools, in the news, or on the politico... the FACT is... that's history, and anything I just said can be looked up.


Anyway, I've voted Democrat a few times, but I have always voted for a Republican president. In the spirit of this thread, I do consider myself conservative. I believe in conserving human rights (of all colors and nationality), I believe in conserving wildlife and natural resources (I'm also an environmentalist) and I believe in fiscal conservatism.


Look, I realize this is a hard pill to swallow, but facts ARE facts... think what you want, but everything I mentioned above is factual, and hasn't changed, and won't change. The Democrats have come a long way. You should be proud of the change they've made.

------------------
Todd,
2006 Pontiac Solstice
2004 Volkswagen Beetle Convt. (Wife's)
2002 Ford Crown Victoria LX
1987 Pontiac Fiero SE / V6
1981 EZ-GO Xi875-A "Miami Dolphins" Medical Cart
1973 Volkswagen Type-2 Transporter
1973 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 350

quote Originally posted by jstricker: randye, I disagree. I enjoy debating with Patrick. With rare exceptions, he keeps his cool and provides thoughtful responses. I also consider him a friend. rayb, while hard to decipher many times, is not the fool his grammar and spelling would initially make one think. His rabid partisanship doesn't help either BUT, most of what he posts is substantially correct, from a certain point of view anyway. Neptune has changed. I actually understood his previous ranting against DeLay but he's been strangely silent about Democrats that have done much, much worse. I'm still waiting for him to start ranting in similar fashions to corruption from the likes of the former IL governor, or even see him take to task the numerous tax cheats in the Obama white house. To each their own, but I do reas what these guys write and give their posts the same (and sometimes more) consideration I do anyone else. John Stricker

Pretty much my viewpoints on them as well.

I agree about Patrick. Although I normally disagree with him, his posting style is enjoyable.

rayb tends to have one or two nuggets of sort-of truth buried under a huge helping of partisanship and simplistic labels.

NEPTUNE has been totally consumed by partisanship, and doesn't even try to present a coherent argument anymore. He's just rhetoric and insults these days.

[This message has been edited by GT86 (edited 06-06-2009).]

82-T/A did you ever read Eisenhower's fairwell address?? it was not very pro military or pro capitalist

tail gunner joe was not in favor of civil rights esp for leftests

the fractional counts was for the census and for non voting slaves pre 1860's
there never ever was a 1/4 or any other split vote for blacks
terror was used by the KKK to prevent blacks from voting mostly

yes the KKK and the more numerious nonmember supporters were democrats
the point you neo-conned keep missing what happened next
to the hard core racist after the 60's
is most of those same people changed to the GOP
the same racist A-holes became the core of the new GOP in the old south

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

quote Originally posted by ray b: 82-T/A did you ever read Eisenhower's fairwell address?? it was not very pro military or pro capitalist tail gunner joe was not in favor of civil rights esp for leftests the fractional counts was for the census and for non voting slaves pre 1860's there never ever was a 1/4 or any other split vote for blacks terror was used by the KKK to prevent blacks from voting mostly yes the KKK and the more numerious nonmember supporters were democrats the point you neo-conned keep missing what happened next to the hard core racist after the 60's is most of those same people changed to the GOP the same racist A-holes became the core of the new GOP in the old south

Actually that is untrue. What happened was that the GOP members DEFEATED the racist Democrats of the South and since then they racist Democrats haven't been able to regain any prominence again, with the exception of the racist Democrats that are still in power, such as Robert Byrd.

If any racism that goes on today, it is perpetuated through Democrats and Liberals who have constantly use racial politics as a whipping post against the anti-racist Republicans and trying to paint them with that label. Today's Democrats are worse than the slave owning plantation owners of the old south. This time they promise racial minorities everything, yet never deliver and have a policy to keep racial minorities in complete victim and dependent status. In a sense, it is a caste system that Democrats have established all for the purpose of keeping minorities in their column.

The Democratic Party have always had a very ugly history. And for the life of me, I cannot understand why people still belong to this party, unless they agree with their racist and elitist ideology. Most Democrats are actually just ignorant, and even those on PFF will admit that Democrats have an ugly history but they are changed now? How? That is like saying the Nazi Party is a caring, loving and helping-to-all political party.

[This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 06-06-2009).]

quote Originally posted by Formula88: You giving others lessons on class? Now THAT's comedy.

I guess that must be saying something if a classless person like myself (who works with handicapped kids, btw.) thinks that post was tacky and tasteless.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: randye, I disagree. I enjoy debating with Patrick. With rare exceptions, he keeps his cool and provides thoughtful responses. I also consider him a friend. rayb, while hard to decipher many times, is not the fool his grammar and spelling would initially make one think. His rabid partisanship doesn't help either BUT, most of what he posts is substantially correct, from a certain point of view anyway. Neptune has changed. I actually understood his previous ranting against DeLay but he's been strangely silent about Democrats that have done much, much worse. I'm still waiting for him to start ranting in similar fashions to corruption from the likes of the former IL governor, or even see him take to task the numerous tax cheats in the Obama white house. To each their own, but I do reas what these guys write and give their posts the same (and sometimes more) consideration I do anyone else. John Stricker

Thank you John,
Reviewing my post, I'm not sure why I included Patrick in it, and I apologize as he does present his opinions in a coherent manner.
While I may frequently disagree with him, he is indeed one of the few that appears to have given some thought to the issues.

I'll stand by my assessment of the rest though.
As I and others have pointed out on numerous occasions in various threads, they have a propensity for throwing out opinions based on unbelievably garbled or erroneous history or facts that even a minimum of study reveals as such.
For example; Rayb , not even 2 posts earlier, has succeeded in garbling Senator Joseph McCarthy into "civil rights" issues. While, undeniably, McCarthy was a relentless anti-communist, to even intimate in any manner that he had anything to do with "civil rights" in the context that term is used in American politics is utter nonsense.
It's either ignorance, an attempt at intellectual deception, or both.

I appreciate anyone's opinion if it is arrived at, and supported by, intellectually honest inquiry and study and based on verifiable fact.
Simply tossing out *assumptions* and claiming them as "fact" is lazy and dishonest, especially in debate.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 06-06-2009).]

quote Originally posted by randye: I appreciate anyone's opinion if it is arrived at, and supported by, intellectually honest inquiry and study and based on verifiable fact. Simply tossing out *assumptions* and claiming them as "fact" is lazy and dishonest, especially in debate.

The other issue, as evidenced in my "examining liberals" thread, is how liberals tend to be led by the heart and passions, rather than logic and facts. The global warming issue is classic. Despite there being no warming for over 10 years now, they continue to insist that global warming is accelerating. There is NO evidence to back that up. In fact, Obama recently rattled off a list of alleged effects of global warming, NONE of which are true.

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: I guess that must be saying something if a classless person like myself (who works with handicapped kids, btw.) thinks that post was tacky and tasteless.

Have you told those kids any Dirty Sanchez jokes yet?
So Stimpy went out and got himself a shiny new moral. Break it in slowly, cupcake. You don't want to strain yourself.

Maybe I don't have any class or morals, I just thought that you did. Continue on, as you were.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: Actually that is untrue. What happened was that the GOP members DEFEATED the racist Democrats of the South and since then they racist Democrats haven't been able to regain any prominence again, with the exception of the racist Democrats that are still in power, such as Robert Byrd. If any racism that goes on today, it is perpetuated through Democrats and Liberals who have constantly use racial politics as a whipping post against the anti-racist Republicans and trying to paint them with that label. Today's Democrats are worse than the slave owning plantation owners of the old south. This time they promise racial minorities everything, yet never deliver and have a policy to keep racial minorities in complete victim and dependent status. In a sense, it is a caste system that Democrats have established all for the purpose of keeping minorities in their column. The Democratic Party have always had a very ugly history. And for the life of me, I cannot understand why people still belong to this party, unless they agree with their racist and elitist ideology. Most Democrats are actually just ignorant, and even those on PFF will admit that Democrats have an ugly history but they are changed now? How? That is like saying the Nazi Party is a caring, loving and helping-to-all political party.

where do you think all those new GOP guys came from???
did they drop out of the sky ?????????
no the racist old south demo's didnot mostly get defeated
they switched partys in mass and became the new GOP overnite
values did not change just the partys the same racist ideas stayed
they just learn new names for them
while many stopped in wallace's camp briefly but moved on to the GOP
once even the hard core saw that was a lost cause
as many liberal and black former GOP members went to the democrats
I LIVED THRU ALL THIS BS
I supported AuH2O in 64 and nixon in 1960 as a dumb kid
sorry but you cannot spin events I watch happen

quote Originally posted by ray b: well I guess you like far tooo many on the rightwing donot think any one on the left has any civil rights but tail gunner joe sure did stomp on the civil rights of many people esp if he thought they had ever been in the same room with those he call commies or even fellow travelers tail gunner joe was totally about distroying the civil rights of any one on the left white people have civil rights too

quote Originally posted by randye:

Photo caption:
Rather than wasting the time to decipher, deduce and debunk yet another ray b post, here is a picture of a monkey taking a crap

quote Originally posted by ray b: where do you think all those new GOP guys came from??? did they drop out of the sky ????????? no the racist old south demo's didnot mostly get defeated they switched partys in mass and became the new GOP overnite values did not change just the partys the same racist ideas stayed they just learn new names for them while many stopped in wallace's camp briefly but moved on to the GOP once even the hard core saw that was a lost cause as many liberal and black former GOP members went to the democrats I LIVED THRU ALL THIS BS I supported AuH2O in 64 and nixon in 1960 as a dumb kid sorry but you cannot spin events I watch happen

Hmmmm. Since the inception of the Republican Party that have all taken a stance of equal rights to all people. They abolished slavery, overturn Dread Scott and Plessy vs. Ferguson, they brought women's suffrage, they passed the Civil and Voting Rights Act.

Barry Goldwater was very much so against segregation, which the Democrats were segregationist and Barry broadly supported Civil Rights. Barry Goldwater was no racist. Either was Nixon. Although Barry Goldwater never trusted Nixon.

LBJ on the other hand was a racist.

Southern Conservative Democrat voters started voting for Republicans, because they felt that the Democratic Party was becoming too liberal (leftist). But the racist Democrats still had control of the South. The Congress of the South Delegation did not flip to Republican until 1994. The Racist Democrats still controlled the South up until that time. For almost 200 years, the Racist Democratic controlled the South. The Old Racist Democrats of the 50's and 60's, the KKK type just started to get old and die off.

There was little or no flipping of racist to the Republican Party. Only that some Democrat voters in the South were more conservative.

Since the South flipped Republican only 15 years ago, you cannot say that it was because of race. It's because the South became less racist. If the South were still racist as it was in the Democratic control time, the Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in winning any seats in the South. Racist people HATE Republicans. Racist home is in the Democratic Party and it will always be.

[This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 06-07-2009).]

quote Originally posted by Wichita: Hmmmm. Since the inception of the Republican Party that have all taken a stance of equal rights to all people. They abolished slavery, overturn Dread Scott and Plessy vs. Ferguson, they brought women's suffrage, they passed the Civil and Voting Rights Act. Barry Goldwater was very much so against segregation, which the Democrats were segregationist and Barry broadly supported Civil Rights. Barry Goldwater was no racist. Either was Nixon. Although Barry Goldwater never trusted Nixon. LBJ on the other hand was a racist. Southern Conservative Democrat voters started voting for Republicans, because they felt that the Democratic Party was becoming too liberal (leftist). But the racist Democrats still had control of the South. The Congress of the South Delegation did not flip to Republican until 1994. The Racist Democrats still controlled the South up until that time. For almost 200 years, the Racist Democratic controlled the South. The Old Racist Democrats of the 50's and 60's, the KKK type just started to get old and die off. There was little or no flipping of racist to the Republican Party. Only that some Democrat voters in the South were more conservative. Since the South flipped Republican only 15 years ago, you cannot say that it was because of race. It's because the South became less racist. If the South were still racist as it was in the Democratic control time, the Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in winning any seats in the South. Racist people HATE Republicans. Racist home is in the Democratic Party and it will always be.

Lets not forget the huge industrial and demographic shifts in the south for the past 20+ years Wichita.
The influx of more business and industry fleeing the taxation, burdensome unions and stagnation of the "rust belt", and the attendant influx of people has had a very certain impact on the political landscape. Florida and Georgia have been prime examples.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 06-07-2009).]

quote Originally posted by randye: Lets not forget the huge industrial and demographic shifts in the south for the past 20+ years Wichita. The influx of more business and industry fleeing the taxation, burdensome unions and stagnation of the "rust belt", and the attendant influx of people has had a very certain impact on the political landscape. Florida and Georgia have been prime examples.

The huge influx of educated populace to the South is a large part of it. You're absolutely right.

Sort of related...

Europe leaning right ahead of EU Parliament voting

The decent into the abyss of lberalism may be ending.

Conservatives score wins in EU parliament voting

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/european_elections

quote Originally posted by randye: The decent into the abyss of lberalism may be ending. Conservatives score wins in EU parliament voting http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/european_elections

WOW! Who knew the *Europeans* would get tired of liberals? And so *quickly*? Funny thing, when you vote liberal and find out they don't have a clue how to run an economy. Maybe there *is* hope for this country, despite Obama's efforts to cement socialists in power through stuff like "community service organizations" and ACORN.

Kinda reminds me of a great line by a comedian, when eastern European communism collapsed: "Who knew communism would fail because there's no money in it?" Looks like people are wising up to liberal socialists.

Republican and Democrat are ideals. Most people who call themselves these things today do not even qualify.

To me, talking about these poor examples today as if what they are somehow defines something is looking at it backwards.

monkeys fit the neo-conned ideals very well
esp the three monkeys the self imposed deaf blind and mute ones
see no evil hear no evil say no evil about them selfs only

they can not see their ideas FAILED
they will not hear their ideas FAILED
they will not say their ideas FAILED even to them selfs
and they can not wait to try gain harder will the very same
FAILED IDEAS

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

quote Originally posted by ray b: monkeys fit the neo-conned ideals very well esp the three monkeys the self imposed deaf blind and mute ones see no evil hear no evil say no evil about them selfs only they can not see their ideas FAILED they will not hear their ideas FAILED they will not say their ideas FAILED even to them selfs and they can not wait to try gain harder will the very same FAILED IDEAS

Ironic that a guy who seemingly can't post a coherent sentence is comparing others to monkeys.

What ideas specifically do you think failed?

[This message has been edited by GT86 (edited 06-08-2009).]

quote Originally posted by ray b: monkeys fit the neo-conned ideals very well esp the three monkeys the self imposed deaf blind and mute ones see no evil hear no evil say no evil about them selfs only

Nothing mean about that of course.
what--no "Mean people suck"?

Are you kind?

quote Originally posted by GT86: What ideas specifically do you think failed?

"neoconned bush2 biglie"

quote Originally posted by GT86: Ironic that a guy who seemingly can't post a coherent sentence is comparing others to monkeys. What ideas specifically do you think failed?

randy is the one who posted the monkey picture
I just ran with his idea

what ideas failed?
in the last 8 years
all of them
stocks prices crashed
more people out of work and pay rates flat or down
balance of payments out of wack so much for ''free'' trade!!!
home prices crashed
repo's up
debts up both personal and the governments
voodoo tax policys failed again
both afgan and iraq wars a mess
more stupid laws and ever more more more people in prisons
more states broke

better question is did the neo-conned do anything right at all
they had total power all three parts of the governments under their control
and totally blew it big time

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

quote Originally posted by ray b: what ideas failed? in the last 8 years all of them stocks prices crashed more people out of work and pay rates flat or down balance of payments out of wack so much for ''free'' trade!!! home prices crashed repo's up debts up both personal and the governments voodoo tax policys failed again both afgan and iraq wars a mess more stupid laws and ever more more more people in prisons more states broke better question is did the neo-conned do anything right at all they had total power all three parts of the governments under their control and totally blew it big time

Take off your partisan blinders (if that's even possible for you) and re-examine every item on your list. Do you truly believe the Democrats played no part?

yes - the KKK is christian - just ask them. while YOU personally do not have the power to kick people out of "the chistian club". just as the "good" muslims dont have the power to kick out the extremists. yes, I agree what they do just dont seem like christians. but, that is to us. to them - they are doing Gods work. all you can do is voice your displeasure at them claiming themselves to be christian. like abortion center bombers. doing Gods work. or at least what they have been BS'ed into thinking was Gods work.

yes - the KKK was formed by democrats
yes - them democrats who formed the KKK were conservatives

the fun of stereotyping. psycho killers & idiots. thats what conservatives & liberals are. and everyone is one or the other.

OK, ray, can you tell us HOW Bush managed the following?

stocks prices crashed
more people out of work and pay rates flat or down
balance of payments out of wack so much for ''free'' trade!!!
home prices crashed
repo's up
debts up both personal and the governments
voodoo tax policys failed again
both afgan and iraq wars a mess
more stupid laws and ever more more more people in prisons
more states broke

?

Yes, he started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Aside from that, what about the other points? How did he cause the stock market to tank? And if he did, how do you explain the big run-up of stocks prior? And if he had such power, why would he crash them BEFORE he left office, rather than waiting until the next president was in office?

How about "more stupid laws and ever more more more people in prisons"? Presidents don't pass laws, congress does. The Democrats were in power in congress the last 2 years of Bush's presidency. They didn't pass any laws? Oh, and what "stupid laws" did the Republicans pass? Can you name one or two?

OK, now THIS one is downright comical..."debts up both personal and the governments". The Democrats PROMPTLY outspent every other president and congress in the history of this country in less than 100 days. Care to explain that one, ray?

"home prices crashed...repo's up" - We've already covered this one. Carter, Clinton, the CRA, fannie and freddy, Barney Frank...proven to be caused by Democrats.

"oodoo tax policys failed again" - again, proven wrong. Tax revenues when UP with Bush's tax cuts.

Man, this is so much fun, and so easy, I could go on and on. But, like a good conservative, I have work to do.