? for dems

D

DJ

Guest
Re: ? for dems

would be the same reason republicans will hide in an alchohol rehab center instead of ponying up.

Do you mean instead of driving off a bridge with an innocent young woman?

Let's see, who is still around?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Answer: TEDDY!
 

Skinnywater

Commander
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Messages
2,065
Re: ? for dems

Just because I don't agree with some of the righty philosophy that doesn't make me a lefty.
The problem is that the Republican philosophy isn't a "righty" philosophy. Especially as you descibed.
 

QC

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
22,783
Re: ? for dems

Wow Jason . . .

I consider myself (or the world does) fairly conservative. However, I am not a registered Republican, or Democrat for that matter. From that perspective, your list is frankly pretty offensive. Maybe you do need to inhale buddy . . .

Ya know I think first and foremost, conservatives believe "in their heart" that nudging people to help themselves is 100 times more compassionate than locking them into a cycle of dependence, not:

"You must, in your heart, believe that living in a society that helps each other and takes care of its own is somehow deficient and lowly compared to a society that places making money first over care of your fellow man"

And why do you feel compelled to continually connect religion with what appears to me to be nothing but bad stuff? Dude, you are a very intelligent guy, and a very honest and hard working one, your anger and contempt for religion seems misplaced to me, and I am not a church goer BTW . . . :confused:

I'll ask you a simple question and please think about this honestly before answering: If you are walking alone on a dark street, late at night, and you see a group of 10 young men (mostly shadows) walking your direction, would you be comforted to know that they were coming from bible study? That should help turn the light on for you . . .

Yes, many people take the connection of Religion and politics too far. And yes the so called "Religious Right" are generally connected with Republicans and conservatives, but I have not heard you (or anyone else) refer to anyone as the "Secular Left" yet that would appear to be the honest direct correlation. Do you not think their agenda is equally dangerous? Maybe you should rant about them and their agenda once in a while if you are as independent as you claim.
 

woodrat

Ensign
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
949
Re: ? for dems

"The phrase "If you are not with us, you are against us" was aimed squarely at the people of our own country, and if you cannot see that, then the delusion is complete."

jasonj, well said and thank you!

umm... I would think that you "righties" would have something more recent than Chappaquiddick to hang on the dems. As if Chappaquiddick defines the democratic party somehow.

Personally, I think all sides in the political arena should be secular. I don't want to see religion used as a political tool or an arm or branch of the government, or as a test for true citizenship. Of course, that makes me a whacko, mutant america-hater, I know..

If this thread wasn't started as a blatant (and inept) troll, I sure don't know what thread ever was.
 

QC

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
22,783
Re: ? for dems

woodrat said:
"The phrase "If you are not with us, you are against us" was aimed squarely at the people of our own country, and if you cannot see that, then the delusion is complete."

jasonj, well said and thank you!

You guys are flippin' paranoid. Never mind, don't inhale, it only makes the paranoia worse . . .
 

Skinnywater

Commander
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Messages
2,065
Re: ? for dems

Good stuff QC.

I beleive on a scale of 1-10, 1 being as liberal as can be and 10 being as conservative as it gets, a mainstream Democrat is a 3.5. Todays mainstream Republican is a 4.5.
I'm a 6.8.
 

crunch

Commander
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
2,844
Re: ? for dems

If this thread wasn't started as a blatant (and inept) troll, I sure don't know what thread ever was.

Careful who you're calling a troll there buddy... we have a union and a PAC... we'll shut you down in a heart beat.
 

12Footer

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Mar 25, 2001
Messages
8,217
Re: ? for dems

PW2 said:
These threads are always wonderful to find out what dems think! All you have to do is listen to Rush, Hannity, and all the rest to find out what dems think.
They sure are. These threads are ideal to have what youl listen to from Rush and Hannity be litterally place into print, thus vetting your sources daily.
The dems in this forum love to single-out any spokesperson of the right they can find, and attempt to discredit them.. Hey, don't get me wrong, PW. I would expect that, and be worried about libs if they DIDN'T. Because just like ecery other human being, they must justify their ideology.

PW2 said:
Sadly, the dems don't have a voice like Rush to tell them what they should think. Most of them foolishly think they are capable of forming their own thoughts all by themselves!

I noticed that... And it hasn't been for lack of trying, that's for certain!
I think you may be on to something, PW. Maybe the libs simply cannot form any semblence of unified thought or ideology by their very nature. I have noticed some of the traits which common amoung liberals, as expressed daily by the right wing talkin heads, to be transparent. These traits seem primal within their personalities...Things like;

The desire to be different than anyone else in the room. They cannot adopt a label of ANY kind, and will revolt at what they see as being "pigeon-holed".

They see rich people as their sworn and hated enemy, even if they must hide their own wealth to express that hatered. They don't like werk and feel like they are entitled to wealth, so when they see sucessful buinesses, they feel the urge to tear them down by any means at their hands... And often do. In the past, they had more powerfull weapons to wealth, like the courts to bare-upon their enemies. The resnetment is clearly seen in the way their reps fought against ALL Bush's court nominees to a man!
Scarey.

And this is but one branch of the chief tool they used -- the very gubment they now trash. The gubment of the United States. Blind to the war losses ,or additional casulties it propagates by their propaganda, they would rather see taliban in an American ditch outside Bush's ranch, than to unify with ANYONE united against those who threaten our common interest --- (they even claim their AREN'T ANY!) -- much less, American right wingers.

They used to control all three branches of gubment, and as Rush and hanitty have often stated, "they are desperately trying to regain that grip of power they lost".


I'll have to folllow this thread carefully. It is very educational. And i am serious about that, not being funny ,or trying to be flippant.



 

12Footer

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Mar 25, 2001
Messages
8,217
Re: ? for dems

itwontletmein said:
how come as a group dems don't feel people aren't responsably for there actions. and it's not my fault i cant write its the keyboards
And like i always say, don't worry about your ability to hit these keys... We hear ya just fine. Your opponents will often use that as a dig, or belittle you.. but as a true trooper, you have see it for the last-resort effort these cutdowns are , and keep on keepin on. A very interesting thread, and You da man!
toast.gif




 

woodrat

Ensign
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
949
Re: ? for dems

"Careful who you're calling a troll there buddy... we have a union and a PAC... we'll shut you down in a heart beat. "


??
 

Speedwagon

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
389
Re: ? for dems

woodrat said:
umm... I would think that you "righties" would have something more recent than Chappaquiddick to hang on the dems. As if Chappaquiddick defines the democratic party somehow.

It kind of does. I mean, the dude drove off a bridge, the woman died, and he didn't report it immediately! AND he's still IN OFFICE! Now how can the party that allowed someone like that to remain among their ranks, go around calling the opposite party horrible for things like Foley? There's really no ground to stand on!

Both of the situations are appalling, to say the least. Even if the Kennedy thing was 30 some years ago, they still allowed him to remain a US Senator! It would be nice to think that those in the highest of public offices, would have some moral obligation to our country. Apparently this isn't true, on either side. It's really quite a shame.
 

itwontletmein

Petty Officer 3rd Class
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
92
Re: ? for dems

Ok now that you’ve insulted me and got that out of the way you think I’m dumb... So answer the? Or would that be taking responsibility
 

itwontletmein

Petty Officer 3rd Class
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
92
Re: ? for dems

Ok now that you’ve insulted me and got that out of the way you think I’m dumb... So answer the? Or would that be taking responsibility oh and if i'm a troll so be it at least i'll answer a ?
 

12Footer

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Mar 25, 2001
Messages
8,217
Re: ? for dems

I fail to see the troll also. I think you just hurt someone's feelings, IWLMI -- (which aint hard to do around here).
They'll get over it in time to post a troll of their own, trust me.


 

woodrat

Ensign
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
949
Re: ? for dems

itwontletmein said:
Ok now that you’ve insulted me and got that out of the way you think I’m dumb... So answer the? Or would that be taking responsibility oh and if i'm a troll so be it at least i'll answer a ?


Sorry. I don't need to take responsibility for the democrats and what they stand for because I'm not one. Personally, I'm pretty into taking as much responsibility as comes my way, so you'll have to find someone who fits your description if you want democrat-specific answers.

I would hope that the Abramhoff scandal and all the other scandals lately are not what define the republican party. Some of them scammers are still in office too. Best to hold everyone to the same standard huh?
 

Skinnywater

Commander
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Messages
2,065
Re: ? for dems

itwontletmein said:
Ok now that you’ve insulted me and got that out of the way you think I’m dumb... So answer the? Or would that be taking responsibility
It's hypocritical to expect resposibility from others if you fail to recognize your own shortcommings.

In one thread you've lumped all democrats into a bundle. And you haven't acknowledged the same flaws present in the opposing party. Both have been brought to your attention throughout and yet you continue to fail to take responsibility for being (at least)unreasonable.
 

JB

Honorary Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Mar 25, 2001
Messages
45,907
Re: ? for dems

I think the original question has been debated and abandoned in favor of silly insults.

End of thread.
 

JasonJ

Rear Admiral
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
4,163
Re: ? for dems

"Not agreeing and calling it a reign of terror are two different things."

True. My reference to Reign Of Terror was a comment on how the current administration is governing us. Every time the national attention starts to shift towards a problem with the administration, they deftly turn our attention away with fear. If it hasn't been one thing, it has been another. If you were to believe everything they try to tell us, there is a terrorist in every basement of every house just wating to suicide bomb us. Yes, terrorism is a problem, and we should be concerned, but it has been the sole platform the administration has been focused on, which is exactly what the terrorists want. Maybe we should, as a country, try focusing on some other issues as well as terrorism. When we prioritize terrorism over the function of our country, they win.

"Not sure what you mean about the "Lets Throw Anything Out There And See What Sticks technique of the righties is way better" "

How 9/11 was handled, how the economy is handled, how the environment is handled, how future energy needs are handled. Or should I say not handled. I don't have to even go on about the Iraq war, it says it all by itself. The economy, well, the tax cuts and interest rate cuts did stimulate the economy, just like sugar stimulates the body. The downside is that it is all short term. You cannot cut taxes, and spend like crazy, and expect a good long term outcome. Now, if cutting taxes is implemented with reduced spending, then that is a good thing. Unfortunately, I can't say I have ever seen a republican administran do this. They always go on about the big taxes and big government that democrats create, but the republicans just reduce the taxes without reducing the spending. Where is this money going to come from?

Future energy needs. I saw yesterday how SUV sales are going up because gas is going down. Now, I am not going to say this is Bushes fault. It is the people who are so short sighted that they don't understand the fuel price reduction is only temporary. The administration could do a better job of encouraging people to use their brain instead of their instant-gratification gene. Just because gas went down 30 cents dosn't mean we somehow ended up with more gas. The purpose of intelligent use and conservation is so the resource lasts longer. Savings in personal finances are a side benefit. This is not just a Righty problem, I don't want you to think I am singling out. Lefties are running out and lapping up the gas suckers too.

There is little to no discussion of environment by the administration so either they think its just fine or they don't care. But I am rambling. By saying they throw anything out and see what sticks, I am basically saying they have no cohesive, functional long term plan. They are focused on the short term, the next few years, and that is basically how most republican administrations run. Democrat administrations claim to focus on the people, on the long term. Maybe they do, but it is hard to say they accomplish anything because republican administrations undo everything the dems did when they come into office.

QC, I am hard on religion. The worst things mankind does is in the name of religion. I have found the most hypocritcal people I have dealt with are also the most religious people I have dealt with. I don't have a problem with religion in and of itself, it is how it is used by a large portion of society that I have a problem with. The air of superiority, the continously being told that those who don't believe will go straight to the hot place down below by people whos only basis of information is a book they read that was written by man, not God. For me, religion is a guideline for people to follow.

Maybe I am wrong, but according to religion, we are supposed to be kind to each other, be helpful and generous, and the care of your fellow man is supposed to be of utmost importance, only superceded by the faithful belief in God himself. Isn't that the basic crux of it? So, when I refer to religion with righties, I am refering to those who are out to abolish every program the government has in place to help those in need and then come up with crap like eliminating minimum wage. That is hypocracy, plain and simple.

Telling someone who lost their job due to downsizing to go out and get a job and get off of welfare is all fine and good until you realize that they jobs they can get do not pay as well as the welfare system does. Yes, we can blame welfare, and we can blame lazy breeders, but why isn't anyone blaming the employers who pay the shyte wages that end up driving people to stay on the welfare system in the first place.

But I digress....The Religious Right is the most brutally hypocritical, and they will always deny it and shift blame away from themselves. That should sound familiar, because they always say the Left does the same thing. There are some on this board that do it. They will whine and whine and whine, all the while badmouthing the other side stating that they whine too much. Hypocracy.

Am I better than anyone else because I don't subscribe to the things I myself complain about? Nope, I am better than no one else. I drive a gas sucker truck, I go out and spend money on fishing gear when I could be donating to charity. I do not do volunteer work. But I come from a family that ran into savage financial problems in the early 80s and we struggled from the bottom back up. We did not sit on welfare, we got jobs. I do stop and help the lady on the side of the road with a flat tire after the BMW crowd has driven by, too busy with self preservation to help their fellow man. I do conserve as best I can through intelligent use of my resources. I might have a gas sucker truck, but I spend about $100 in gas per month for the thing, and it is paid for.

Would I feel better if I came upon ten men at night by myself and I knew they just came from bible study? Nope. They are as capable of misdeed as anyone else. I'm sure those 9/11 terrorists did some solid Koran reading just before implementing their plan. Some nutjob who decides to blow up an abortion clinic usually spend some quality time with the Good Book. Tell me again why religious people should be free of suspicion?
 
Top