This is hilarious!!! Off-topic: So are you going to do an Aaron Glenn song like he asked on 610 yesterday?
First off Hayestreet, I have been on the BBS since 2000 with various UserNames. Were should I start??? When you post quotes from Economic luminaries such as from Belgium and Canada, your arguement is null. Were would Canada be without the US... All countries as much as they hate to admit it try to base there economies on the America way of doing things... A market economy will always beat a socialist economy, just read Adam Smith to figure that one out. Should we listen to France, Netherlands or Canada to learn how to have the perfect society? Please, by you stating parts of a articles that bashes a market economy doesn't hold water and does dumb down your arguement and in turn makes us dumber since you have not added to the debate! Bush did increase taxes in 90', he was de-elected for that! Clinton produced the largest tax increase in America History!!! Its a fact, you can't retort it don't even try...
Hayes: Not referring to you. I'm enjoying your and Jorges disagreement concerning supply side economics. I agree with you, of course. I'm slightly astonished, though, since I always assumed you were a conservative/libertarian following our many previous disagreements. You post-modernists always surprise me .
Wow. Thanks DS. I guess the sentiment expressed by yourself, haven, and DaDa is probably the correct one. Republicans took the day, although I'm at a loss to explain how other than Democratic ineptitude. Congrats to the Republicans (I was one myself once). I hope I'm wrong and this 'mandate' is more desirable than undesirable.
According to reports, 37 to 38 percent of registered voters turned out for the general election. Most voter registration analysts believe that about half of Americans who are eligible to vote actually register. That figure varies from state to state based on voting laws. The motor voter bill increased that but it is still hovering around 50 percent overall. So, as a result, about 18-20 percent of eligible voters in America actually voted in the general election. In the biggest elections (usually presidential), that number increases to around 25 percent. In fact, we probably haven't heard what the majority of Americans actually think at the polls in over 100 years and even then women and African Americans were excluded from the process. I always find it hilarious when people - dems, repulbicans, etc - stand around beating their chests proclaiming their collective greatness after winning an election. Until our country actually turns out to the polls, no one has any business proclaiming they know what the American people really want.
This sarcastic little bit is awful presumtious. You are acting exactly the way the Democratic leadership wants you to act. For God's sake, do you really think the average everyday voting Republican is against: a. rape/incestual abortions b. education support c. worthy loans/grants d. rebuilding communities e. civil rights f. respsonsible government spending??? Chance
how much of the government do the Republicans have to control before we start calling it mandate? how many Republicans have to get elected for office before we can credit them for it, rather than say it was a product of the ineptitude of the competiton? i agree that the dems had little or no message...propose very few solutions for any problems...but whether or not GWB has inspired confidence in you, he clearly has for a good number of Americans...a lot like Clinton that way. again...after the election, Bill Clinton and GWB met at the White House...Clinton immediately told the democratic leadership, "you better stop underestimating this guy, or he'll kill you." they continue to do just that...
exactly...the scare tactics clearly don't work anymore...time for plan b...and it will be interesting to see how the dems campaign from here on out...i'm guessing you may not see anymore DNC funded ads showing cartoons of bush rolling old ladies down the stairs in wheelchairs anymore. that's so tired...
Hayes: "Ineptitude" is the key word. The disparity between the Republican and Democratic leadership is unbelievable. I mean, I disagree with their politics... but the Republican leadership is fantastic right now, in terms of organization and strategy. They hit the issues they can win, they force issues they'd lose on to the backburner, and then they actually make attempts to show leadership qualities. Democrats... are running scared. The party leadership has to change. McAullife isn't just a failure... he's an inauthentic sell-out as well. I'm embarrassed by the quality of our candidates compared to theirs in general, right now. If there's one positive to take from this, it's the possibility of making the Democratic leadership strong and sincere again. Russ Feingold, anybody?
Damn...my paranoia acting up again. Hah! That's funny in relation to a conversation I once had with a friend about the post-modern 'movement.' He said 'yeah, quite a movement. It moves in every direction!' I guess that may be a more accurate description of me than you meant to make! (edit: I took out those redundant exclamation points, B-Bob).
I have read this entire thread with contributions from some of my favorite posters, and I must say, independent of political leanings, that you, Phi83, are bringing the discussion down. I think people from across the political spectrum will agree. Please quit using redundant punctuation. Please spell at least 75% of your words correctly. And please have something to contribute before posting so many times in one thread. As for the topic, my greatest worry is the one pointed out by bigtexxx (sp) earlier. Bush can fill the judiciary with Ashcroft clones, and this horrifies me. The system of checks and balances will become a system of "blank cheques and imbalances." That seems very negative to me.
it's called representative democracy...those whom we elect have the job of appointments...if it were democrats with the power, i doubt you'd be concerned.
With the judicial nominees, the Republican party is on the verge of making great strides in the affirmative action, tort reform, family/Christian values, and possibly even abortion arenas.
Originally posted by Trader_Jorge With the judicial nominees, the Republican party is on the verge of making great strides in the affirmative action, tort reform, family/Christian values, and possibly even abortion arenas. 'Great strides'...oh great.
MadMax: Surely, as a lawyer, the Rehnquist court frightens you just a smidgeon? It's the first activist conservative court we've had in our nation's history. The current court is not representative of America, already. This is due to the fact that, from 80-92, the electorate was very indecsive as to whether they liked liberals or conservatives more... but preferred to divide power with Democrats in congress and Republicans in the White House. Since the White House dominates judicial apointments... this resulted in an extremely conservative judicial system as well. Already, it's apparent that they current court is not only conservative... but the most conservative court in history! One recent opinion concerning gun control revealed that we have a Supreme Court... that for the first time in history... believes that the 2nd Amendment applies to the individual, not simply states! That's not the strict constructionism of which conservatives are supposedly so fond. I don't really care that much about Roe v. Wade. I know that's odd coming from a liberal, but I just don't think it's that big of a deal. But I am very concerned with Scalia's (and his sidekick, Thomas's) radical opinions concerning contract law, landlord-tenant law, the 4th Amendment, and Miranda Rights. Just as a lawyer, don't some of these things bother you?
