Ledge Republicans?

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Just curious to know if any republicans post on the Ledge. None ever speak up, possibly because of the abundance of Democrats, I don't know. Certainly there are a good many here. I'm an in-between myself, so I would be interested to hear from the Republicans out there on this thread...as well as your thoughts on current situations...Reagan's Presidency (not current, but currently in the news), Iraq War, John Kerry, etc..

so post away because I know you are all out there hiding somewhere.


Chris

[darklinensuit]

I'm not a Republican, but I am glad that there are people here from both ends of the spectrum. Nancy often posts thoughtful comments with what I might consider a Republican bent, but I'll let her speak for herself. I have no idea what she or anybody else is actually registered as.

- Jake

[Hawkeye]

I know Dissention is a registered republican!

[ShangriLaTroubl]

I'm a registered republican myself, although I vary on many issues..

Chris

[wondergirl9847]

I know Dissention is a registered republican!

Yep, he is a DIE HARD REPUB!! Aren't ya, Dis?

:laugh:

[Hawkeye]

Yep, he is a DIE HARD REPUB!! Aren't ya, Dis?

:laugh:

OK that's like the 4th time this week I've seen Dissention called he. I was always under the impresssion he was a she. Can you clarify this Dissention. Until I hear for a fact your a he, I'm still picturing you sitting on the beach in a lawn chair throwing your head back in a red dress typing a laptop abput how much ypu hate Buch and thrown Down.

[littlelies7]

I'm a Repub, but I'm not for the war that much.

[darklinensuit]

OK that's like the 4th time this week I've seen Dissention called he. I was always under the impresssion he was a she. Can you clarify this Dissention. Until I hear for a fact your a he, I'm still picturing you sitting on the beach in a lawn chair throwing your head back in a red dress typing a laptop abput how much ypu hate Buch and thrown Down.

You got it right, but Dissention is still a he. :laugh: ;)

- Jake

[strandinthewind]

I am a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. I am unsure what that makes me, if anything but confused :laugh:

[GypsySorcerer]

I am a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. I am unsure what that makes me, if anything but confused :laugh:


Well, Lindsey always reminds us that "nothing falls into a simple set of labels." ;) :wavey:

[darklinensuit]

I am a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. I am unsure what that makes me, if anything but confused :laugh:

Obviously you're a fisconsolib. :wavey:

- Jake

[estranged4life]

Republican (Thanks to Oklahoma's stupid ass law for not allowing one as an independent to register to vote) but I am a diehard/hardcore Moderate Independent...I vote for whomever I feel is best qualified for the job (Moreso for those running for office in my homestate than nationally)

Brian j.

[darklinensuit]

Republican (Thanks to Oklahoma's stupid ass law for not allowing one as an independent to register to vote) but I am a diehard/hardcore Moderate Independent...I vote for whomever I feel is best qualified for the job (Moreso for those running for office in my homestate than nationally)

Brian j.

That is a dumb law. What other states have it, anyone know?

- Jake

[sodascouts]

I'm a registered Republican. For a brief time I posted on political threads, but it upset me how quickly people became angry, accusatory, and overtly hostile. I also got tired of hearing the same rhetoric over and over. Encyclopedic posts that were all paraphrases of the same talking points, interspersed with back-slaps and high-fives from various members who thought alike and derision of those who didn't. Tiresome, to say the least.

The futility of it all finally registered during one thread where I tried again and again to get the Democratic party stance on reparations explained to me, but all I got was a bunch of laughing emoticons and disparaging comments. None of the resident Democratic experts were interested in informing me, but you can bet some were interested in mocking me. I realized then no one was really discussing anything, just ping-ponging party lines back and forth with enough vitriol in the mix to sour me on it real quick. I guess I'm too soft to enjoy that kind of "exchange."

[CarneVaca]

The futility of it all finally registered during one thread where I tried again and again to get the Democratic party stance on reparations explained to me, but all I got was a bunch of laughing emoticons and disparaging comments.

Oooops. Was I involved in that?

I pride myself on being neither. I'm too radical for either party, and there's no way I could ever be a Republican. The way it's been going, there's no way I can be a Democrat either. It makes for interesting conversations, and it certainly gives me an appreciation for the dangers of thinking differently. I don't say that out of self-pity for it doesn't scare me; it just is.

[strandinthewind]

I pride myself on being neither. I'm too radical for either party, and there's no way I could ever be a Republican. The way it's been going, there's no way I can be a Democrat either. It makes for interesting conversations, and it certainly gives me an appreciation for the dangers of thinking differently. I don't say that out of self-pity for it doesn't scare me; it just is.

I agree. AND - both sides wind up attacking you when you dare not to tow the party line. But, I am a happy go lucky kind of guy and pretty much an eternal optimist - so I just sort of smile throught it after stating what I think!!!!!

[dissention]

Yep, he is a DIE HARD REPUB!! Aren't ya, Dis?

:laugh:

I should bust out the "ASSHOLE" emoticon for that one, Christy ;)

I'm a registered Democrat, even though I'm too radical even for that party. :wavey:

[dissention]

I'm a registered Republican. For a brief time I posted on political threads, but it upset me how quickly people became angry, accusatory, and overtly hostile. I also got tired of hearing the same rhetoric over and over. Encyclopedic posts that were all paraphrases of the same talking points, interspersed with back-slaps and high-fives from various members who thought alike and derision of those who didn't. Tiresome, to say the least.

The futility of it all finally registered during one thread where I tried again and again to get the Democratic party stance on reparations explained to me, but all I got was a bunch of laughing emoticons and disparaging comments. None of the resident Democratic experts were interested in informing me, but you can bet some were interested in mocking me. I realized then no one was really discussing anything, just ping-ponging party lines back and forth with enough vitriol in the mix to sour me on it real quick. I guess I'm too soft to enjoy that kind of "exchange."

I'm sorry you feel that way, but that is a bit unfair and is a good example of raining on the parade. People like to make the conversations lighthearted while still talking about the issues, I apologize if you don't like it. After all, we can't be serious all the time. :xoxo:

As for reparations, if I remember correctly, a lot of us Democrats stated that the Democratic party really hasn't taken a stance on them and that support for reparations varied with each person wildly. Some support them, some do not. The most liberal ones do, the most moderate don't. That's the best we could do to inform you, once again I apologize if it wasn't a good enough answer. We can't make lemonade out of potatoes, after all.

Sure, we ping-pong party lines back and forth, show me someone interested in politics who doesn't. I've seen you and everyone else do it, including me. I was always under the impression that you took everything personally when it came to discussing politics; maybe it's true, maybe it isn't, I don't know. But, those of us who do like these discussions have no issues with how they take place, we just enjoy them. I do know that you're probably the most staunch Republican around these parts and made for a good contributor to the threads, even if the majority of us disagreed all the time. But, I guess not everyone can partake in political discussions.

[CarneVaca]

We can't make lemonade out of potatoes, after all.

Hmm... Potatade! :wavey:

[dissention]

Hmm... Potatade! :wavey:

"Coming soon to a supermarket near you, from the makers of Tang."

:rolleyes: ;)

[wondergirl9847]

I should bust out the "ASSHOLE" emoticon for that one, Christy ;)

I'm a registered Democrat, even though I'm too radical even for that party. :wavey:

:D

WHY can we not vote on doing away with the parties? It's the biggest whippin anyways listening to 600 year old white men get up and talk about issues that they don't know shiz about anyways.

[Violet]

I avoid political conversations as much as possible, but I will say I'm a registered Republican. But I'm a liberal one, if that makes sense. for example, I don't have a problem with gay marriage or abortion, depending on the circumstances. And I don't know who I'm voting for yet, either. And I agree with Nancy on the tone of some of the political posts on this board. Especially the Reagan-bashing one. That one really upset me. But that's all I'll say. Like I said, I don't like to get involved in political discussions.

Carol

[dissention]

And I agree with Nancy on the tone of some of the political posts on this board. Especially the Reagan-bashing one. That one really upset me.

I see what you're saying, but I think the name of the thread speaks for itself:

"I came to bury Caesar, not to praise him."

None of us are glad the man died, far from it. Some of us just didn't like the guy. The fact that he died doesn't erase his hateful policies or the things he did in life. If people want to discuss Reagan, they must be able to take the criticism leveled against him along with the rosy picture painted of him by the media.

Personally, I found Nancy's post to be a bit condescending and meanspirited, to tell you the truth. I didn't see the point to it, but it is what it is.

[Violet]

along with the rosy picture painted of him by the media.

Trust me, I know about the media. My husband has worked in television news for 17 years, and I KNOW the media sucks. Even though he feels the need to watch it 24/7, I just can't. Things that happened at the station he worked at in FL just soured me on the whole business...and I actually agree with you about the rosy picture being painted of Reagan. It's too sappy, and even as someone who liked Reagan :ducks and hides: I'd rather see balanced coverage of his life, showing the bad stuff alongside the positive.

Carol

[wondergirl9847]

The futility of it all finally registered during one thread where I tried again and again to get the Democratic party stance on reparations explained to me, but all I got was a bunch of laughing emoticons and disparaging comments. None of the resident Democratic experts were interested in informing me, but you can bet some were interested in mocking me. I realized then no one was really discussing anything, just ping-ponging party lines back and forth with enough vitriol in the mix to sour me on it real quick. I guess I'm too soft to enjoy that kind of "exchange."

That all sounds like elementary, middle and high school to me. The "cool" kids making fun of the "uncool" (not calling you uncool, Nancy, just using it as an example) kids for being different. Folks, we ALL have opinions and they are ALL valid. This is only ONE reason I'd love to see a NO PARTY America.

FTR, I am not a registered voter. Don't ask me why, I just don't vote. LOL

[Johnny Stew]

I actually like Ron Jr. & Patti... and I always thought Nancy was pretty cool.

I just didn't care for Ronald Reagan as a president.

Anyway, that was off-topc. *lol*

[Johnny Stew]

This is only ONE reason I'd love to see a NO PARTY America.

A friend of mine laughed at me a few years ago, when I said that presidential candidates should run without a running-mate... and whoever the "runner up" in the election is, should then be vice-president. To balance things.

Ok, yeah, I guess it is a ridiculous idea. :laugh:

[face of glass]

OK that's like the 4th time this week I've seen Dissention called he. I was always under the impresssion he was a she.
I've also seen Dissention being called "Joe". It's another of those cases where they choose an avatar of the opposite sex in order to confuse some people (including me). ;)

And thanks to Live In Boston, we'll soon see what he looks like too! Obviously the anonymous days for Dissention are over soon. :lol:

[dissention]

Trust me, I know about the media. My husband has worked in television news for 17 years, and I KNOW the media sucks. Even though he feels the need to watch it 24/7, I just can't. Things that happened at the station he worked at in FL just soured me on the whole business...and I actually agree with you about the rosy picture being painted of Reagan. It's too sappy, and even as someone who liked Reagan :ducks and hides: I'd rather see balanced coverage of his life, showing the bad stuff alongside the positive.

Carol

Exactly. Everything is just so homogenized to the point that it's not edible. Just look at local affiliates and the folks who own them. or Faux News and MSNBC. Big business dictates what is presented and in what manner; it's terrible.

[dissention]

That all sounds like elementary, middle and high school to me. The "cool" kids making fun of the "uncool" (not calling you uncool, Nancy, just using it as an example) kids for being different. Folks, we ALL have opinions and they are ALL valid. This is only ONE reason I'd love to see a NO PARTY America.

It does in the way that it was presented. But that simply isn't how it is and it's a bit of a generalization of the political discussions on this board. Liberals disagree with conservatives, conservatives disagree with liberals, etc. Unfortunately, some people just can't be involved in political conversations and feel as if they are being made fun of every time one of their views is challeneged (note: I'm not referring to Nancy, I'm speaking about lots of people.) :)

Again, if people don't like the conversation, don't join in. Why rain on everyone elses parade?

[dissention]

And thanks to Live In Boston, we'll soon see what he looks like too! Obviously the anonymous days for Dissention are over soon. :lol:

In leather pants and a checkered shirt, no less. :eek: :laugh:

[Mad4stevie]

I am registered Republican, but do not necessarily ascribe to the "right" philosophy on alot of things (such as capital punishment - I oppose it).

Sometimes I post on political threads, but I agree with Nancy that it can be somewhat disheartening when the threads disintigrate into personal attacks.
I think everyone has the right to an opinion, but I don't think that gives anyone the right to express it however they damn well please. Words can be weapons. I personally have a very open mind and welcome information from opposing viewpoints because it helps me learn more about why I have the opinions that I have. I don't think you can really have an educated opinion until you take the time to think through why you think the way that you do, and that means considering all points of view.

For me, an opinion is much more credible when it is communicated in a logical, non-threatening way. As soon as someone starts using personal attacks, the focus shifts to the tone of the opinion, instead of the substance of the opinion.

[Violet]

It does in the way that it was presented. But that simply isn't how it is and it's a bit of a generalization of the political discussions on this board. Liberals disagree with conservatives, conservatives disagree with liberals, etc. Unfortunately, some people just can't be involved in political conversations and feel as if they are being made fun of every time one of their views is challeneged (note: I'm not referring to Nancy, I'm speaking about lots of people.) :)

That's pretty much why I don't get involved. I'm not a confrontational person AT ALL and am not very good at getting my point across. It doesn't help things that I'm a bit airheaded and don't always understand political mumbo jumbo! :rolleyes: But I do read quite a few of the political threads here and do find them interesting, at times. ;)

Carol

[gldstwmn]

I avoid political conversations as much as possible, but I will say I'm a registered Republican. But I'm a liberal one, if that makes sense. for example, I don't have a problem with gay marriage or abortion, depending on the circumstances. And I don't know who I'm voting for yet, either. And I agree with Nancy on the tone of some of the political posts on this board. Especially the Reagan-bashing one. That one really upset me. But that's all I'll say. Like I said, I don't like to get involved in political discussions.

Carol

Just the facts ma'am. I'll let them speak for themselves.

[dissention]

Sometimes I post on political threads, but I agree with Nancy that it can be somewhat disheartening when the threads disintigrate into personal attacks.

It's usually only me, Jason, Chris, sparky, Le Stew, DeeGeME, and Carne that participate in those threads for the most part, so please, tell me how we personally attack each other. Examples, please. :xoxo: I think that sometimes friendly ribbing gets mistaken for "attacking," for the most part.

[GypsySorcerer]

It's usually only me, Jason, Chris, sparky, Le Stew, DeeGeME, and Carne that participate in those threads for the most part, so please, tell me how we personally attack each other. Examples, please. :xoxo: I think that sometimes friendly ribbing gets mistaken for "attacking," for the most part.

I'd be lost without the dialogue between you and Jason. :xoxo: You both get me thinking.

[dissention]

I'd be lost without the dialogue between you and Jason. :xoxo: You both get me thinking.

Why, thank you, my lady. :D I aim to please. And hopefully we get you thinking liberally. :laugh:

[sodascouts]

Personally, I found Nancy's post to be a bit condescending and meanspirited, to tell you the truth. I didn't see the point to it, but it is what it is.

Which one? The one in this thread? You thought that was mean-spirited? Maybe you're talking about the one in the Reagan thread?

[sodascouts]

Oooops. Was I involved in that?


I honestly don't remember. Is that thread still accessible? Maybe we can look it up! lol

[sodascouts]

Again, if people don't like the conversation, don't join in. Why rain on everyone elses parade?

I'm not trying to be a wet blanket - I just figured I owed it to my fellow Republicans to explain why I'm not out there getting their back in poltical threads. I haven't gone back and posted further on the Reagan thread, for instance, because I know it would upset me to see him ripped apart.

[wondergirl9847]

I think alot of the Repubs on the board feel uhhhh....overpowered (not the right word, but my mind is mush right now. LOL) by you and the other Dems/Libs on the board. You guys are so vocal (not a bad thing), it's kinda harsh to some people, I guess. :shrug:

JMO.

[sodascouts]

As for reparations, if I remember correctly, a lot of us Democrats stated that the Democratic party really hasn't taken a stance on them and that support for reparations varied with each person wildly. Some support them, some do not. The most liberal ones do, the most moderate don't. That's the best we could do to inform you, once again I apologize if it wasn't a good enough answer. We can't make lemonade out of potatoes, after all.

Well, I remember it kind of like I made the statement that moderate Democrats don't go for reparations. I was then asked to back this statment up - a reasonable request, if my statement was incorrect. However, was it? According to your above answer, it wasn't (this answer was never given to me at the time). At any rate, I admitted that I didn't have numbers, but that I guessed it was true due to what Democratic candidates themselves were saying. I was then given laughing emoticons. At that point I appealed to someone simply to give me a guess as to whether moderate Democrats supported reparations. Around then Jason informed me that he could find no statement on the issue at all.

But thank you for being polite and informative in your reply here. :)

[sodascouts]

I always thought Nancy was pretty cool.

Why thank you! lol ;)

[ShangriLaTroubl]

It's usually only me, Jason, Chris, sparky, Le Stew, DeeGeME, and Carne that participate in those threads for the most part, so please, tell me how we personally attack each other. Examples, please. :xoxo: I think that sometimes friendly ribbing gets mistaken for "attacking," for the most part.


I must say I have been involved in quite a few of these political discussions, and while Dissention and others know my views are pretty different than theres, they HAVE ALWAYS been respectful of my opinions, and I've never been bashed by anyone for having different views...I just thought this would be a good thread for the republicans on the board to express their views, since we DO get a lot of democrat-based views here...and not much republican..
Chris

[gldstwmn]

I'm not trying to be a wet blanket - I just figured I owed it to my fellow Republicans to explain why I'm not out there getting their back in poltical threads. I haven't gone back and posted further on the Reagan thread, for instance, because I know it would upset me to see him ripped apart.

That's just the thing though. No one ripped him apart. We discussed him using historical fact. :confused: :shrug:

[gldstwmn]

I must say I have been involved in quite a few of these political discussions, and while Dissention and others know my views are pretty different than theres, they HAVE ALWAYS been respectful of my opinions, and I've never been bashed by anyone for having different views...I just thought this would be a good thread for the republicans on the board to express their views, since we DO get a lot of democrat-based views here...and not much republican..
Chris

You still don't have ovaries. :lol:

[markolas]

A friend of mine laughed at me a few years ago, when I said that presidential candidates should run without a running-mate... and whoever the "runner up" in the election is, should then be vice-president. To balance things.

Ok, yeah, I guess it is a ridiculous idea. :laugh:

Actually, until 1804, that's exactly the way it worked.

[Mad4stevie]

I think alot of the Repubs on the board feel uhhhh....overpowered (not the right word, but my mind is mush right now. LOL) by you and the other Dems/Libs on the board. You guys are so vocal (not a bad thing), it's kinda harsh to some people, I guess. :shrug:

JMO.

I think there is a ring of truth to this.

I will be the first to admit that all the facts, figures, articles and websites that Dissention et al. post are enough to make my head spin!

Personally, I appreciate Jason's posts and links - he brings a sense of balance to alot of the "left" fact, figures and articles. So, THANK YOU, Jason! :)

And it is true that the general nature of politics on this board is liberal. Other boards are more moderate. The same is true when it somes to the S & L romantics. Most people will gravitate to where they feel most comfortable.

[sodascouts]

That's just the thing though. No one ripped him apart. We discussed him using historical fact. :confused: :shrug:

Hmm, I guess I shouldn't have assumed the worst, then. I apologize. :)

[dissention]

I'm not trying to be a wet blanket - I just figured I owed it to my fellow Republicans to explain why I'm not out there getting their back in poltical threads. I haven't gone back and posted further on the Reagan thread, for instance, because I know it would upset me to see him ripped apart.

Like Reagan or not, there's no denying the truth and that's what was posted in the Reagan thread. The liberals on this board simply said that he was not the saint that people portray him to be and we posted the truth to back it up. Feel free to take any one of our posts and research it, you'll come to the conclusion that it is fact. :)

[dissention]

Well, I remember it kind of like I made the statement that moderate Democrats don't go for reparations. I was then asked to back this statment up - a reasonable request, if my statement was incorrect. However, was it? According to your above answer, it wasn't (this answer was never given to me at the time). At any rate, I admitted that I didn't have numbers, but that I guessed it was true due to what Democratic candidates themselves were saying. I was then given laughing emoticons. At that point I appealed to someone simply to give me a guess as to whether moderate Democrats supported reparations. Around then Jason informed me that he could find no statement on the issue at all.

But thank you for being polite and informative in your reply here. :)

So, you pretty much got the same answer? :laugh:

And you're welcome.

[dissention]

Well, I remember it kind of like I made the statement that moderate Democrats don't go for reparations. I was then asked to back this statment up - a reasonable request, if my statement was incorrect. However, was it? According to your above answer, it wasn't (this answer was never given to me at the time). At any rate, I admitted that I didn't have numbers, but that I guessed it was true due to what Democratic candidates themselves were saying. I was then given laughing emoticons. At that point I appealed to someone simply to give me a guess as to whether moderate Democrats supported reparations. Around then Jason informed me that he could find no statement on the issue at all.

But thank you for being polite and informative in your reply here. :)

So, you pretty much got the same answer both times? :laugh:

And you're welcome. :)

[dissention]

I must say I have been involved in quite a few of these political discussions, and while Dissention and others know my views are pretty different than theres, they HAVE ALWAYS been respectful of my opinions, and I've never been bashed by anyone for having different views...I just thought this would be a good thread for the republicans on the board to express their views, since we DO get a lot of democrat-based views here...and not much republican..
Chris

Thank you for that, Chris. It was very much appreciated. :nod:

[dissention]

I will be the first to admit that all the facts, figures, articles and websites that Dissention et al. post are enough to make my head spin!

Facts and figures don't lie, Shrubya does. :laugh: :wavey:

[gldstwmn]

I will be the first to admit that all the facts, figures, articles and websites that Dissention et al. post are enough to make my head spin!



Just think, I've read most of those articles and what I've learned about our current administration is enough to make my head spin like Linda Blair's in the Exorcist. :)

[strandinthewind]

I think there is a ring of truth to this.

I will be the first to admit that all the facts, figures, articles and websites that Dissention et al. post are enough to make my head spin!

Personally, I appreciate Jason's posts and links - he brings a sense of balance to alot of the "left" fact, figures and articles. So, THANK YOU, Jason! :)

And it is true that the general nature of politics on this board is liberal. Other boards are more moderate. The same is true when it somes to the S & L romantics. Most people will gravitate to where they feel most comfortable.

Why thanks you - And thank you GypstSocrerer as well :wavey:

I LOVE to discuss things. I think Glodie, Dissention, and I (mainly) give each other hell because while we think what we do, it is said in a joking manner. So, all who read "us" please know that we are friends!!!!

[The Tower]

Well, I'm not a Democrat. I usta be, but I haven't been for a long time. I really am a Libertarian, but I can't handle the "I get guns no matter what" side of Libertarianism. Whatever.

I think that most republicans are in severe denial. I don't think they understand what their party is doing to the majority of America. Taking away rights- rolling back social advances- giving FAR too much money to the criminal wealthy (why the f**k do billionares need more money anyway??? Jeez to f**king christ???)

Speaking of christ- why all the overt influx of religion lately?? Especially for a country that was founded on the idea of religious freedom? Why the f**k do I have to be a christian and judge all those around me?? It's bull****.

I just try to insulate myself away from all the evil in society today.

I am currently typing this email from my vacation in Palm Springs, CA. I am staying at a "clothing optional" resort with my partner.

We went on the air-tram-way to San Jacinto Mountain.
For those who don't know, the tram takes you from the 500 ft above sea level depot to the 9,000 ft above sea level "almost" top of the mountain range. The whole world is really, really high. You can see all the desert hillsides that rumble up from the ground here in California.

All I could think of was....

"Well, I live below a great, red mountain
In the shade of a great, huge beast
In a place the Indians call, "Paradise Valley"
Well, well, this has always been my sanctuary-

I send that to you, too
You're on the other side of the world
In the desert........."

We're all the same really. However, those in power in the republican party are truly evil. And if you don't want to believe it, then live in your ostrich hole for the rest of your life.

I choose to side with kindness and empathy. Most politicians suck ass. But I will still strive for a politic that does not espouse judgement and elitism.

[sparky]

Well, I'm not a Democrat. I usta be, but I haven't been for a long time. I really am a Libertarian, but I can't handle the "I get guns no matter what" side of Libertarianism. Whatever.

I think that most republicans are in severe denial. I don't think they understand what their party is doing to the majority of America. Taking away rights- rolling back social advances- giving FAR too much money to the criminal wealthy (why the f**k do billionares need more money anyway??? Jeez to f**king christ???)

Speaking of christ- why all the overt influx of religion lately?? Especially for a country that was founded on the idea of religious freedom? Why the f**k do I have to be a christian and judge all those around me?? It's bull****.

I just try to insulate myself away from all the evil in society today.

I am currently typing this email from my vacation in Palm Springs, CA. I am staying at a "clothing optional" resort with my partner.

We went on the air-tram-way to San Jacinto Mountain.
For those who don't know, the tram takes you from the 500 ft above sea level depot to the 9,000 ft above sea level "almost" top of the mountain range. The whole world is really, really high. You can see all the desert hillsides that rumble up from the ground here in California.

All I could think of was....

"Well, I live below a great, red mountain
In the shade of a great, huge beast
In a place the Indians call, "Paradise Valley"
Well, well, this has always been my sanctuary-

I send that to you, too
You're on the other side of the world
In the desert........."

We're all the same really. However, those in power in the republican party are truly evil. And if you don't want to believe it, then live in your ostrich hole for the rest of your life.

I choose to side with kindness and empathy. Most politicians suck ass. But I will still strive for a politic that does not espouse judgement and elitism.

I've been on that silly tram ! Actually I lived in PS for awhile. An ex bought one of those hotels and I was there for about a year.

I think people in both parties are in denial. A lot of Dems are so damned Pollyanna that they don't see the reality for the good intentions.

There is a severe lack of balance in both parties. It is so black and white - and we do NOT live in a black and white world. The truth almost always lies somewhere in between. That being said, I simply cannot support a party that puts forth slime like Santorum, Frist, and Helms. No one in the Dem party is nearly as outright horrible as any of these men. I have issues with the Dems. I think most of the men are wimps. They are worthless. Afraid to speak their minds, if indeed their minds even work anymore. The women have all the power and balls in that party. But there isn't much to choose from. I would vote for a muppet before a Republican. I can't support a group who thinks I am a second class citizen because of who I sleep with. They are more obsessed with my sex life than I am ! Ridiculous.

Pretty sad state of affairs, when you are reduced to voting AGAINST something and not FOR something.

[dissention]

I am currently typing this email from my vacation in Palm Springs, CA. I am staying at a "clothing optional" resort with my partner.

I always felt bad for the midget patrons of those resorts. ;)

Have a good time and I agree with a lot of what you said. I do think that a lot of Republicans these days don't have a grip on what they really are supporting. But I also think that people like Rush and Hannity are so vocal and so conservative that many Republicans feel that they have to side with them if they are going to be a true Republican. My way or the highway sort of thing. But, I can only hope that the neocons wake up and see what the Republican party is doing to this country; it's being decimated as we speak.

[gldstwmn]

Why thanks you - And thank you GypstSocrerer as well :wavey:

I LOVE to discuss things. I think Glodie, Dissention, and I (mainly) give each other hell because while we think what we do, it is said in a joking manner. So, all who read "us" please know that we are friends!!!!

Truly. And what kind of friendship has anyone had where you don't growl at each other once in a while? Even dissention and I disagree once in a while. :lol:

[dissention]

Truly. And what kind of friendship has anyone had where you don't growl at each other once in a while? Even dissention and I disagree once in a while. :lol:

:nod: I still think you should be using the "Bite This!" sig I sent you instead of the one you're using! :laugh:

[gldstwmn]

No one in the Dem party is nearly as outright horrible as any of these men. I have issues with the Dems. I think most of the men are wimps. They are worthless. Afraid to speak their minds, if indeed their minds even work anymore. The women have all the power and balls in that party. But there isn't much to choose from.

I think a large part of the problem here is that people are basing their opinions on who to vote for on ten second sound bites from a right wing media. The only way to see the feisty dems in action is to watch CSPAN, which a lot of people find boring because again, we've been conditioned by the tube to have a ridiculously short attention span. (I know I'm generalizing here but you get the picture.) I wouldn't call Senators Kennedy, Biden, Leahy, Schumer, Byrd or Feingold wimpy. We all know Hillary's got a set. I could go on but the fact of the matter is alot of these people aren't really seen in the ten second sound bites. And when you've got people as smarmy as DeLay and Rove coordinating for the other side...well, I truly believe there will be a special place in hell for them.

[dissention]

I do recognize the Party is moving further to the right. Perhaps it's a loyalty thing for some. I think the Republican party is generally more united than the Democratic Party, or at least they put on that front. If the Democrats could agree more, there probably wouldn't be a Republican party. ;)

But that just proves one thing: in the Democratic party, you can be outspoken or oppose something and you won't be punished for it, whereas you would if you were in the Republican party. :xoxo:

[dissention]

I think a large part of the problem here is that people are basing their opinions on who to vote for on ten second sound bites from a right wing media. The only way to see the feisty dems in action is to watch CSPAN, which a lot of people find boring because again, we've been conditioned by the tube to have a ridiculously short attention span. (I know I'm generalizing here but you get the picture.) I wouldn't call Senators Kennedy, Biden, Leahy, Schumer, Byrd or Feingold wimpy. We all know Hillary's got a set. I could go on but the fact of the matter is alot of these people aren't really seen in the ten second sound bites. And when you've got people as smarmy as DeLay and Rove coordinating for the other side...well, I truly believe there will be a special place in hell for them.

Very well said. I have my TV programmed to go to CSPAN when it turns on and I rarely watch any other source for cable news. And if you really want the pulse on what people think across the coutnry, nothing beats Washington Journal.

[GypsySorcerer]

But that just proves one thing: in the Democratic party, you can be outspoken or oppose something and you won't be punished for it, whereas you would if you were in the Republican party. :xoxo:

Perhaps, but looked what happened to poor Howie Dean. :wavey:

[dissention]

Perhaps, but looked what happened to poor Howie Dean. :wavey:

People fell in love with him, but smartened up to the fact that ChimpCo could use a lot against him, notably the records he had sealed concerning his stint as governor...

[gldstwmn]

People fell in love with him, but smartened up to the fact that ChimpCo could use a lot against him, notably the records he had sealed concerning his stint as governor...

Not to mention that he doesn't have the experience for the job.

[sodascouts]

Facts and figures don't lie, Shrubya does. :laugh: :wavey:

Funny how both sides have different "facts and figures that don't lie"! Ah, politics.

[sodascouts]

Unfortunately, some people just can't be involved in political conversations and feel as if they are being made fun of every time one of their views is challeneged (note: I'm not referring to Nancy, I'm speaking about lots of people.) :)

You may not have been referring to me, but I admit I do take criticism personally - because it's often directed at me! An example earlier - my post is "mean-spirited." Now, I admit I get upset that I come across that way - I'm the one who wrote that post, after all. Perhaps I just didn't express myself in the way I intended, because I wasn't trying to be mean to anyone, and I feel bad that I sounded mean. I can see condescending. I will even go as far as to say it sounds pretty whiny and self-pitying. And I was hoping to inspire twinges of guilt in those who might find it applicable to themselves, and maybe make them think a little bit about the way they're coming across. But I never intended to be mean. :shrug:

[dissention]

You may not have been referring to me, but I admit I do take criticism personally - because it's often directed at me! An example earlier - my post is "mean-spirited." Now, I admit I get upset that I come across that way - I'm the one who wrote that post, after all. Perhaps I just didn't express myself in the way I intended, because I wasn't trying to be mean to anyone, and I feel bad that I sounded mean. I can see condescending. I will even go as far as to say it sounds pretty whiny and self-pitying. And I was hoping to inspire twinges of guilt in those who might find it applicable to themselves, and maybe make them think a little bit about the way they're coming across. But I never intended to be mean. :shrug:

I can't claim to know whether you intended to be mean or not, because I'm not you and I wouldn't want to assume what your intentions were. I just thought it came across that way. And my comment that it was "mean-spirited" really can't factor into the debate over political threads because I was referring to something that I felt was unfair towards a lot of people who involve themselves in those debates. It didn't inspire any guilt in me because when we talk politics, I know that we're doing just that. We're not attacking people and saying "You're such a horrible person, you're a bastard for this and that." Granted, people do not understand how other people can believe such things, and this goes both ways with liberals and conservatives. I just got the impression that when you took part in the political discussions, you would be personally offended if someone disagreed with you and said that something you posted was off-base. I just happen to think that there is a really bold line between attacking someone and disagreeing with someone's politics.

At this point, I'm so staunchly liberal and you're so staunchly conservative that we're going to disagree every time. But that doesn't mean that either of us are attacking the other, we simply disagree (greatly) with how this country should run.

But, it's water under the bridge, IMO. ;)

[strandinthewind]

My largest problem with both parties is the total commitment by some people to it that they canno tever go against it. I certainly do not have that problem :laugh: - but I really do not "fit" in either party. I am socailly liberal and fiscally conservative. I think ALOT of people are like me. They do not want the govt. to tell them what to do in their private lives as long as it does not hurt someone esle and they are or at least to some degree were, tired of seeing over half of their pay going out of the window, etc., to fund the inefficient govt. THEN, both parties essentially talk a great game, but do not vote wildly differently (see Defense of Marriage Act, etc.) In the end, I just make my mind up on the candidates voting record if available and do not really consider the party. But, that is just me.

[dissention]

tired of seeing over half of their pay going out of the window, etc., to fund the inefficient govt.

...with the full knowledge that if they suffered hard times, they'd want those social programs that they don't want to pay for to help them...

[strandinthewind]

...with the full knowledge that if they suffered hard times, they'd want those social programs that they don't want to pay for to help them...


FOUL and you know it :laugh:

I was talling about the $100 hammer at the Pentagon. This is a PRIME example of attacking the rich as all being evil misers who want to see the poor dead rather than pay for them :rolleyes: Stereotypes are just as bad when you are talking about rich people, but that often gets lost in the shuffle. Moreover, NO ONE should have to pay 1/2 of what they make to the govt. period - end of story IMO. That is just absurd. But, people think people maling $200,000 a year are rich beyond reason, automatically evil, and should have to pay pay pay. IT is unfair and you know it, but will NEVER admit it :laugh:

[dissention]

FOUL and you know it :laugh:

I was talling about the $100 hammer at the Pentagon. This is a PRIME example of attacking the rich as all being evil misers who want to see the poor dead rather than pay for them :rolleyes: Stereotypes are just as bad when you are talking about rich people, but that often gets lost in the shuffle. Moreover, NO ONE should have to pay 1/2 of what they make to the govt. period - end of story IMO. That is just absurd. But, people think people maling $200,000 a year are rich beyond reason, automatically evil, and should have to pay pay pay. IT is unfair and you know it, but will NEVER admit it :laugh:

I wasn't referring to the rich, I was referring to everyone collectively. If you were to conduct a poll and ask anyone off the street "Do you want to be taxed less?" the obvious answer is going to be yes. But then ask them what would happen if they fell on hard times and needed government assistance. Who and what would pay for it? Everyone wants to be taxed less but keep the same level of social programs we currently have. OR - they want to curtail social programs so they can have a little bit of extra steak in their pockets. They can't have it both ways. If given the choice between having a few extra bucks in their paychecks or helping a single mother out with putting food on her kids table, they are going to choose the former.

Now, what we should be doing is eliminating every type of waste we have in government spending to fund these ridiculous tax cuts. We need to stop offering tax breaks for SUVs, tax the corporations a helluva lot more, and stop giving oil contracts to companies that are going to steal money from us. There is so much that could be done to save money, but no one wants to put in the effort to save it. People want to bitch about the money being taken form their weekly paychecks, but they don't want to do anything about it. They want to vote for a man who is the collective whore of corporate America.

And no, it isn't necessarily fair that the rich pay half of their income, but it also isn't fair that the poor pay as much as they do. It's so absurd when someone gets ten dollars a goddamn hour BUSTING THEIR ASS and working full time, only to get $300 a week after taxes. Who the hell can live on that?

[CarneVaca]

If you call yourself a Republican or a Democrat, all you've done is agree to play, or rather spectate at, a game controlled by people intent on keeping you down.

[strandinthewind]

If you call yourself a Republican or a Democrat, all you've done is agree to play, or rather spectate at, a game controlled by people intent on keeping you down.


Preach on Brother Carne - Preach On!!!!!!!!!!!

[strandinthewind]

I wasn't referring to the rich, I was referring to everyone collectively. If you were to conduct a poll and ask anyone off the street "Do you want to be taxed less?" the obvious answer is going to be yes. But then ask them what would happen if they fell on hard times and needed government assistance. Who and what would pay for it? Everyone wants to be taxed less but keep the same level of social programs we currently have. OR - they want to curtail social programs so they can have a little bit of extra steak in their pockets. They can't have it both ways. If given the choice between having a few extra bucks in their paychecks or helping a single mother out with putting food on her kids table, they are going to choose the former.

Now, what we should be doing is eliminating every type of waste we have in government spending to fund these ridiculous tax cuts. We need to stop offering tax breaks for SUVs, tax the corporations a helluva lot more, and stop giving oil contracts to companies that are going to steal money from us. There is so much that could be done to save money, but no one wants to put in the effort to save it. People want to bitch about the money being taken form their weekly paychecks, but they don't want to do anything about it. They want to vote for a man who is the collective whore of corporate America.

And no, it isn't necessarily fair that the rich pay half of their income, but it also isn't fair that the poor pay as much as they do. It's so absurd when someone gets ten dollars a goddamn hour BUSTING THEIR ASS and working full time, only to get $300 a week after taxes. Who the hell can live on that?

While I agree this is a good theory, in application, this is neither a D or R theorem. I mean W's tax cuts passed by an overwhelming majority, which means MANY D's voted for it. In the end, I am hard pressed to say W is more of a corporate whore than any other politicans. But, you will NEVER admit that :laugh:

Also, taxing corps. more reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of almost all economic theory on how to stimulate the economy and keep the economy going. But, people think saying it means it is the right thing to do because it is easy to villfy the corps. I am NOT talking about corps. that use shell corps to avoid paying any taxes - although perfectly legal and with the blessing of the corp. whore politicians in Congress and the White House over the last 15 or so years, I think that is just wrong - but again it is legal and with D and R blessings. I am solely talking about corps. that "reside" in America and use the tax code to expand, etc. Expansion of corps. is the fundamental backbone of the US economy. Thus, the govt.'s use the tax code to promote this expansion by offering tax rebates, depreciation, etc. Increasing the taxes on these corp.'s would retard that growth and, thus, the economy.

Finally, you and you SUV obsession :rolleyes: :laugh:

Also, and I just cannot resist this, Clinton spending millions of taxpayer dolalrs to first try to stifle and then try to perpetuate his lie is a prime example of govt. waste (not to mention obstruction of justice) :laugh: :D :shrug: :p Imagine how those millions could have helped social programs :cool:

[dissention]

Clinton

I won't touch that with a ten foot pole.

[strandinthewind]

I won't touch that with a ten foot pole. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:woohoo: :woohoo:

[Violet]

We need to stop offering tax breaks for SUVs

Showing my ignorance here....What tax breaks for SUVs? I drive one and, whether right or wrong :shrug: , would like to know if I'm entitled to one...
At the same time, I'm curious to know what the basis is for it? I know I'm probably going to get the democratic point of view on this, but educate me...

Thanks,

Carol

[strandinthewind]

Showing my ignorance here....What tax breaks for SUVs? I drive one and, whether right or wrong :shrug: , would like to know if I'm entitled to one...
At the same time, I'm curious to know what the basis is for it? I know I'm probably going to get the democratic point of view on this, but educate me...

Thanks,

Carol

In general, the idea is that people having a small business or farm that need a SUV to haul things around in should get a tax break to promote starting up a business, etc. On its face, this is a laudable goal because it will promote commerce and help boost the economy from many angles. The problem is anyone essentially can say with a little effort that they are a small business and thus qualify for the tax break, which was not the original intent of the tax code.

Here are some articles:

http://4wheeldrive.about.com/cs/drivingtipssafety/a/aa041603a_3.htm

http://www.selfemployedweb.com/suv-tax-break3.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2002-12-18-suv-tax-break_x.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/Business/hybrid_suv_tax0301001.html

www.irs.gov

[Violet]

In general, the idea is that people having a small business or farm that need a SUV to haul things around in should get a tax break to promote starting up a business, etc. On its face, this is a laudable goal because it will promote commerce and help boost the economy from many angles. The problem is anyone essentially can say with a little effort that they are a small business and thus qualify for the tax break, which was not the original intent of the tax code.

Here are some articles:

http://4wheeldrive.about.com/cs/drivingtipssafety/a/aa041603a_3.htm

http://www.selfemployedweb.com/suv-tax-break3.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2002-12-18-suv-tax-break_x.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/Business/hybrid_suv_tax0301001.html

www.irs.gov

Thank you! Technically, I am self-employed, so this may apply to me, but considering my equipment would fit in the trunk of any car, I wouldn't use this deduction. I can totally see how it could be abused. I think one of the articles said something about possible tax breaks for more environmentally friendly vehicles. That's something I'd support. Incidentally, I'd love to get a new car that's not such a gas hog, but can't afford that right now.

Thanks again for enlightening me!
Carol

[strandinthewind]

Thank you! Technically, I am self-employed, so this may apply to me, but considering my equipment would fit in the trunk of any car, I wouldn't use this deduction. I can totally see how it could be abused. I think one of the articles said something about possible tax breaks for more environmentally friendly vehicles. That's something I'd support. Incidentally, I'd love to get a new car that's not such a gas hog, but can't afford that right now.

Thanks again for enlightening me!
Carol
You are welcome!!!!

And - Ford, Lexus, and other auto makers are beginning the first parts of mass production of hybrid SUV's. www.ford.com indicates the new Escape miniSUV hybrid will get around 40 MPG and Lexus indicates the new RX330 hybrid SUV will get in the mid 20's MPG. So, that is promising and, to me, a clear indication that this is where the auto industry is going. Although this will not end our dependence on oil, when in plae 100%, it will lessen out consumption by about 2/3 in this sector, which is a good thing IMO even though we will still be burning fossil fuels.

Food for Thought.

[Violet]

You are welcome!!!!

And - Ford, Lexus, and other auto makers are beginning the first parts of mass production of hybrid SUV's. www.ford.com indicates the new Escape miniSUV hybrid will get around 40 MPG and Lexus indicates the new RX330 hybrid SUV will get in the mid 20's MPG. So, that is promising and, to me, a clear indication that this is where the auto industry is going. Although this will not end our dependence on oil, when in plae 100%, it will lessen out consumption by about 2/3 in this sector, which is a good thing IMO even though we will still be burning fossil fuels.

Food for Thought.

Wow! That's very cool. I didn't know ford was doing that. I've always been a ford girl! 40 mpg sounds much better than the 14 I get now!

Thanks again!
Carol

[sparky]

FOUL and you know it :laugh:

I was talling about the $100 hammer at the Pentagon. This is a PRIME example of attacking the rich as all being evil misers who want to see the poor dead rather than pay for them :rolleyes: Stereotypes are just as bad when you are talking about rich people, but that often gets lost in the shuffle. Moreover, NO ONE should have to pay 1/2 of what they make to the govt. period - end of story IMO. That is just absurd. But, people think people maling $200,000 a year are rich beyond reason, automatically evil, and should have to pay pay pay. IT is unfair and you know it, but will NEVER admit it :laugh:

I think that the government is insanely wasteful, and spends money on a number of ridiculous things. Nonetheless, I wouldn't mind paying more taxes. The tax system really ought to be overhauled - but I doubt it will ever happen. The more you make, sometimes the less you pay. When you own a business, homes, have business expenses, etc., the write-offs just add up like crazy. I am shocked at how much I can deduct. But, my accountant isn't cheating - just following the tax code.
BTW - 200k a year isn't really all that much money. UNLESS, you live far beneath your means. The thing about most people is, the more they make, the more they spend. The average person making 200 can all of a sudden have two new cars, plus insurance, an expensive house, and all the attending expenses, send the kids to private schools, have a nanny, gardener, maid, pool man, buy designer clothing, eat out more, take nice vacations. You make more, you just keep upgrading. Soon enough, they NEED that 200 ! And would like more.
I don't live beyond my means, usually, and am happy about every buck I make. Don't think I am the norm, though. I knew that, in so many ways :laugh:

[dissention]

The more you make, sometimes the less you pay.

Yup, let's not forget that Cheney paid less in taxes than Shrub this year, even with those multi-million severance checks he cashes from Halliburton.

[strandinthewind]

There is an old axiom that tax rates do not ever reflect actual tax collection :laugh:

In other words, no one, inlcuding the poor, ever pay their actual inital stated rate, if they make enough money to have one. Everyone gets a decuction, be it standard or itemized. Actually, the standard deduction allows people with no valid deductions to have some they would never be able to have, etc. So, in that sense it is a "gift" from the govt.

I get that the tax code is complex because it is an effective tool to promote growth in certain sectors. In other word, money put into some retirement plans is taken out of the taxable amount, etc., and that is a good thing because it adds incentive for people to put money away for their retirement, which in theory means they will be less of a burden on the govt. in their old age and still be able to contribute to the economy in their old age. Same thing goes for the deduction of mortgage interest in that investment in real property is a good and strong stimulus for the economy.

But, in general, if you make enough money (somehere around $200,000 a year by most estimates), you can have all the deductions in the world and not be able to use them after a certain point due to the alternative minimum tax (AMT). The AMT system eliminates many of the deductions and personal exemptions taxpayers are entitled to under the regular tax system, and instead automatically applies a Federal Income Tax rate of 26-28% - which does not include the additional taxes like state taxes, OASDI, Medicare, etc. So, no matter how much money you make personally, almost all people making somewhere around $200,000 or more a year that have alot of deductions are going to pay somewhere around 40% of the taxable income to some govt. entity. This is a conundrum because it obviates the incentives in the tax code that are there to stimulate certain sectors of the economy. In other words a hig income and tax minded person could chose not to do something or to prolong a decision based on the tax advantage of it. But, in the end and IMO, the AMT should be kept and the bar to activate it raised because while a blessing and relatively rare, $200,000 is not alot of money relative to today's cost of living.

Here is the IRS' line on AMT.

( http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=107843,00.html )

Alternative Minimum Tax

Tax Tip 2004-51, March 15, 2004

Before mailing your federal income tax return, check to make sure you aren’t subject to the alternative minimum tax. In recent years, more and more people have found themselves subject to the AMT.

The tax law gives preferential treatment to some kinds of income and allows special deductions and credits for some kinds of expenses. Taxpayers who benefit from these provisions of the law may have to pay an additional tax called the alternative minimum tax. It is a separate tax computation that, in effect, eliminates many deductions and credits and creates a tax liability for an individual who would otherwise pay little or no tax.

For 2003, the exemption amounts for figuring the AMT have increased. The amount depends on your filing status. You may have to pay AMT if your taxable income for regular tax purposes, combined with certain adjustment and tax preference items, is more than the exemption amounts below:

$58,000 if you are married filing a joint return or a qualified widow(er),
$40,250 if you are single or head of household, or
$29,000 if you are married filing a separate return.

The adjustments and tax preference items include such things as: standard or certain itemized deductions, taxable state and local tax refunds, accelerated depreciation of certain property, intangible drilling costs, certain tax exempt interest and the difference between AMT and regular tax gain or loss on the sale of property, treatment of incentive stock options and depletion allowances.

If you meet the criteria noted above and have several of the listed tax preference items, you should determine whether you might be liable for AMT. For details, see the instructions for line 42 of Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, as well as Form 6251, Alternative Minimum Tax—Individuals, and its instructions.

The forms and their instructions are available on this Web site or can be ordered by calling toll free 1-800-TAX-FORM (1-800-829-3676).

Here are some other general articles on it:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107246,00.html

http://money.cnn.com/pf/101/lessons/18/page8.html

http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/gale/20040121amt.htm

Food for Thought!!!!!!!