Political Affiliation

[Killer Joe]

"Blue Dog" is an old term used in Washington as someone who is a Democrat but usually votes Republican.
I believe in public assistance as a transitional phase of someone's poor unforseen luck but NOT AS A WAY OF LIFE!!!!
I believe in world trade but not to country's who continually treat their citizen's as slaves and are oppressed.
I believe Congress should be ruled by the Republican's but that a Democrat should be President.
I believe in a stronger Police presence on our streets but I hate "Gated Communities".
I believe in a diverse culture but I hate oinkholes!
I play Blue/Green decks but playing mono-Black is just out of the question .

 

[Turtlewax Joe]

how can you want to change something, when you don't like any of the choices that are presented. It's all bad im veiw...politics are s***. Live your life according to you and not what some one says you do.

Laws and rules are ment to be broken. They are your confines, you are meant to break out and breath fresh air.

T.J.

Spidey-You don't vote? I haven't met you in person but you don't seem like the person who would not excersize the right to vote, WoW, cool.

 

[Multani]

"...What you must learn is that these rules are no different than the rules of a computer system. Some of them can be bent. Others can be broken. Understand?"
-Morpheous

Sorry, just couldn't resist.

 

[Azreal the Soulmaster]

well first off...........RIGHT ON ARHAR!!!!

and laws and rules aren't meant to be broken......are you an idiot?

and if you think america would be better without a government of any type, I hope you like complete and utter chaos, cause thats what it would be.

 

[Spiderman]

Originally posted by Turtlewax Joe

Spidey-You don't vote? I haven't met you in person but you don't seem like the person who would not excersize the right to vote, WoW, cool.

Yeah, I feel I just don't really know enough about the various issues that the candidates platform on to make an "informed" vote. And to be honest, I don't really have the inclination to learn... I guess I just see what they do when they're actually IN office.

 

[Zadok001]

I don't like politics. If someone wants to be the President, chances are they aren't bright enough to do the job right. As far as voting is concerned, I just turned 18, and therefore won't get to vote 'til next year. Too bad. I really would have liked to vote aginst good ol' Shrub...

 

[Svenmonkey]

I don't think that any gov. is better than the others, they're all flawed in the fact that people are in charge of them. But no government at all is just silly.

Oh yeah, and the idiotic "anarchy movement" has barely anything to do with anarchy. It's just a bunch of stupid friendless teens who want to break other people's stuff.

 

[Mr_Pestilence]

Good topic!

I think Communism would work fine, in small, ALL VOLUNTEER groups.

I'm not really fond of Democrats, but I will never vote for another Republican.

Consider:

Every Republican since Nixon has started or continued a war -

Nixon - Vietnam (True, this did end under Nixon - 6 YEARS LATER).

Reagan - Grenada; just about every country south of Mexico.

Bush I - Desert Storm; Somalia

Bush II - Afghanistan

Every Republican since Nixon has had at least one recession or economic crisis -

Nixon - Energy Crisis

Reagan - recessions in '81 and '86, $500 billion S&L bailout, $3 trillion added to national deficit

Bush I - recession in 91-92

Bush II - current recession

In addition, Republicans since Reagan have an incestuous relationship with Right wing religious nuts, gun nuts, anti-abortion nuts, and all around enemies of government like the nuts that bombed Oklahoma City.

Think the Republicans are interested in YOUR well being? You are being lied to! Republicans are only interested in the rich and big businesses.

One final thought - If voting could change anything, it wouldn't be legal

 

[Spiderman]

Those are rather misleading statements... there's only been two Democratic presidents since Nixon for a total of 12 years. 4 Republican presidents including Nixon for a total of 20 years. And I'm not aware that the presidents have a direct force on the economony, whether they'd like to believe it or not. Thus the statements about recessions are pretty irrelevant.

 

[Mr_Pestilence]

These are not "misleading statements", they are facts.

It is probably true that presidents get too much credit (or blame) for the economy, but it is still their responsibilty to do something if the economy is bad.

Incidentally, the economic stimulus package that preceded the longest economic growth in history was proposed by a democrat (Clinton), and passed into law without single republican vote. That's also a fact.

 

[Spiderman]

It's misleading if you don't cover ALL of the presidents. Why restrict it to just Nixon? Anyone can manipulate numbers for their own benefit.

And what the heck is the president supposed to do if the economy goes bad? Pass those tax cuts? I would like to see something that ties tax cuts or whatever you're referring to to the economy recovering. We got our tax rebate check but you still see the economy faltered since then. The only "government body" that I would say has some measure of control is the Fed Reserve Board and even then it takes 6-18 months for its effects to kick in.

 

[Mr_Pestilence]

Whatever, dude.

You want to take into consideration every president since Washington? Knock yourself out.

I'm sticking to the timeframe in which I've lived - 1965 to the present. And during that time, the association between Republican administrations and military conflicts and economic collapses are a matter of fact, not opinion.

 

[Spiderman]

Welp, and I say that's meaningless because it just captures a small portion of the US history.

Obviously you're drawing your own conclusions about whether the Republicans are responsible for the military conflicts. And I say unless you can show that EVERY Republican president has done so, it's just a matter of circumstance.

Especially the economic crisis. You only point out TWO years out of EIGHT during Reagan, half of Bush 1, and we're not even done with Bush 2 (which is only a year anyway). S&L bailout pretty much had nothing to do with Reagan unless he was in charge of those S&L's that I don't know about. And how much debt was added in past president's? If Ford had, say, $5 trillion, Reagan's is nothing.

"Facts" without context are nothing, just statements that have no meaning.