Hidden Costs of Bush Budget will soar AFTER he leaves office

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by Lux

That would be to assume that all military roles involve fighting off giant men. Women can fire rifles, and suprise surprise, they can make decisions and give order. I agree that women are not as useful for on the ground endurance but is that all the military is.

Also you said that because of these scandles, women should not be allowed in the military. That has nothing to do with the physical build of females.

I didn't say singularly because of that one issue with scandals. I just said that that the scandals is another reinforcement.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by The Tower

How about Henry Waxman???

Well, c'mon, it was a bit of an exaggeration, dear, but the fact remains the the Democratic party can get nothing done. They're incompetent fools and more dangerous than the Republicans because they're too willing to compromise in order to save face. No backbones, I tell ya.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by The Tower

I never once got any impression that Clinton "gloated" over Don't Ask Don't Tell. I think he was very disappointed and saddened that he couldn't do what he wanted to do. He apologized to the gay community many times in different articles, etc., if my memory serves me correct.

I never thought Clinton was sincere in his push to allow out people in the military. His record prior to then did not support such an action. But, OI will say that at least he had the sand to breach the issue. As for the DOMA - after signing it, I remember him saying it was good thing blah blah blah - perhaps that is not gloating, but is sure is not contrition.

Originally Posted by The Tower

For me, there was one big difference (and for me, probably the most important one)- I can trust in Kerry to want to do the right thing, whereas Dubya is pure, concentrated evil who is only interested in promoting the interests of the plutocracy. And that, my dear Jason, is a difference that is wider than the Grand Canyon.

Certainly Kerry has differences from W and they are not the same. But, Kerry played it so close to the middle that the starkness of those distinctions was blurred. I mean his whole I believe in the right to chose but not abortion and I belive in civil unions but not marriage - schpeel was a pandering to the moderate voters which I readily admit he needed to win. Remember, I voted for Kerry. I thought he was a liar and a fraud, but I voted for him because I am terrified of the Theocracy ne' plutocracy that will come from the people controlling W. So, we essentially agree here.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

and I submit to you that the question is MOOT because the prospect of any Dem getting anything done in the current Congressional makeup is a fantasy.
And, many of them DONT keep silent! I can think of several Dems from CA alone who have principles: Barbara Boxer, and George Miller. and if I wasnt at work, I'd give you more names. You may be right about a large portion of them and its shameful, but in the long run, its only the Democratic party that gives a **** about the normal everyday American. (between the two Biggies that is. I admire much in the Green party but the truth is, they just arent viable. and until they are, Im not discussing them.)

Democrats aren't viable either, they're Republican-lite and it will take a miracle for them to win the White House back. The Republicans managed to get things done when they weren't in control and successfully turned things around for themselves and came out on top. Why can't the Dems do the same? Because Democrats aren't as suave, they aren't as skilled, and they're too analytical. There's a disonnect there and they have no desire to fix it.

As for the Greens, dear, I'd rather align myself with a party that has integrity and stays true to my liberal beliefs and values and they're the party to go with. Not the ****ing Democrats. They're losers and if they keep it up, they deserve to lose in '08.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Lux

Oh goody. What am doing now without my knowledge?

Diss. often moons his computer monitor after reading my posts here. So, suggested that seeing as how we discussed tantamount polygamy - he should let us in on the mooning. Now Tower wants in - Oh Well, the more the merrier I say - though I will have to wire for the expedited return of my vacationing friends if I am to have any effect other than a vocal hello

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by dissention

Democrats aren't viable either, they're Republican-lite and it will take a miracle for them to win the White House back. The Republicans managed to get things done when they weren't in control and successfully turned things around for themselves and came out on top. Why can't the Dems do the same? Because Democrats aren't as suave, they aren't as skilled, and they're too analytical. There's a disonnect there and they have no desire to fix it.

As for the Greens, dear, I'd rather align myself with a party that has integrity and stays true to my liberal beliefs and values and they're the party to go with. Not the ****ing Democrats. They're losers and if they keep it up, they deserve to lose in '08.

I think you're going to be surprised....Dems may be down but they're certainly not OUT, and this last campaign proved that to me. The grassroots swelling that Kerry got behind him surprised EVERYONE. We are NOT silent, and we are NOT going down. I think it is a mistake for the Dems to go any more to the right, I think we need to (instead) go back to our roots, and be true to our historical positions. If the Dems ever stop representing choice, or the environment, Im cutting all ties. Until that time, I will continue to support them any way I can, because they are our only line of defense at this point. Your disgust may be deserved but I hope you have the balls to praise the Dems when they turn this party around and be again the bastion of the working man that they once were.

ps: based on the original post in this thread, I hope the Dems wise up and let some poor Republican sucker have the Presidency after Bush leaves....

[amber]

Originally Posted by dissention

Democrats aren't viable either, they're Republican-lite and it will take a miracle for them to win the White House back. The Republicans managed to get things done when they weren't in control and successfully turned things around for themselves and came out on top. Why can't the Dems do the same? Because Democrats aren't as suave, they aren't as skilled, and they're too analytical. There's a disonnect there and they have no desire to fix it.

As for the Greens, dear, I'd rather align myself with a party that has integrity and stays true to my liberal beliefs and values and they're the party to go with. Not the ****ing Democrats. They're losers and if they keep it up, they deserve to lose in '08.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

The grassroots swelling that Kerry got behind him surprised EVERYONE. We are NOT silent, and we are NOT going down.

You mean the grassroots swelling that he inherited from Howard Dean, right? There was no conscious grassroots effort for Kerry, there was a grassroots effort to get Bush out. And Howard Dean is the father of it all.

Originally Posted by irishgrl

I think it is a mistake for the Dems to go any more to the right, I think we need to (instead) go back to our roots, and be true to our historical positions. If the Dems ever stop representing choice, or the environment, Im cutting all ties. Until that time, I will continue to support them any way I can, because they are our only line of defense at this point. Your disgust may be deserved but I hope you have the balls to praise the Dems when they turn this party around and be again the bastion of the working man that they once were.

They won't turn the party around, they'll run it even mroe into the ground than they already. They're a joke. Clinton was the worst thing to happen to the Democrats, he turned them sour, yet everyone praises him as the God of Liberalism. He's not. They haven't represented the working man for years, it'll take a miracle for them to do it again. Howard Dean will kick ass, but I don't think it will be enough. But if and when he does, I hope you'll have the balls to praise him and the not the spineless wimps we call Democrats.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by amber

Thank you, dear.

I know most people don't want to admit it because it really is scary to think that not one of the big party's has their best interest at heart or represents them, but call a spade a spade. The Democrats represent liberalism as much as Republicans represent atheism and that's the truth. How can any true self-respecting liberal align themselves with that party? Why not stay true to your beliefs instead of just wanting to win?

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by Lux

I know that. The point I was making was that you were joyously speaking of killing others and it's no better than being joyous about the killing of those people.



You speak to those of other nations the way you did, causing a hatred of yourself, and then declare that because of hatred you caused, you will slaughter them. You really don't see what you're doing do you? Is it ok for them to kill you because they hate you? This even before mentioning that you caused this hatred.

Why do I care about American politics so much? Oh jesus. That just shows your ignorance. Firstly, blackmailing other nations into aligning with your country and then putting us in the same position as America, for some reason sparks an interest for me. We're in Iraq because of America. We're hated in our region because we align ourselves with America and part of the reason we do this is because of trade. The other factor in my reason for showing an interest is that I'm actually human and when we witness atrocities and injusticies, no matter what country we may be in, as humans, we tend to show a concern. To think it's just your business to go around killing others is absurd. Why do I care if somebody murders my neighbour?

Stop wasting valuable typing energy trying to use logic on someone who has no ability to think logically.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by dissention

You mean the grassroots swelling that he inherited from Howard Dean, right? There was no conscious grassroots effort for Kerry, there was a grassroots effort to get Bush out. And Howard Dean is the father of it all.



They won't turn the party around, they'll run it even mroe into the ground than they already. They're a joke. Clinton was the worst thing to happen to the Democrats, he turned them sour, yet everyone praises him as the God of Liberalism. He's not. They haven't represented the working man for years, it'll take a miracle for them to do it again. Howard Dean will kick ass, but I don't think it will be enough. But if and when he does, I hope you'll have the balls to praise him and the not the spineless wimps we call Democrats.

I have no problem giving a Democrat praise! if its Dean or Kerry or Kucinich its all good!

fyi: I was part of the grassroots movement for KERRY. He may be lackluster as a speaker, but I think he has good ideas and I believe we would have been better served as a nation to have HIM rather than Dumbya ANY day. As for your opinion of Clinton, you're welcome to it. I happen to like the man. Whether you do or not makes no difference to me. He was pro-choice, and pro-environment, two of my biggest issues, so whats not to like?

[dissention]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

I have no problem giving a Democrat praise! if its Dean or Kerry or Kucinich its all good!

Kucinich is too radical to be called a Dem, but if he likes being called one, more power to him. He's a helluva man.

Originally Posted by irishgrl

fyi: I was part of the grassroots movement for KERRY. He may be lackluster as a speaker, but I think he has good ideas and I believe we would have been better served as a nation to have HIM rather than Dumbya ANY day. As for your opinion of Clinton, you're welcome to it. I happen to like the man. Whether you do or not makes no difference to me. He was pro-choice, and pro-environment, two of my biggest issues, so whats not to like?

What's not to like? I won't live long enough to list all the things, my love. He's a swine, one look at his record proves as much.

As for Kerry, we'd be in the same boat we're in now. He wasn't an alternative, he was part of the problem. Another rich white guy with big aspirations and a remarkable disconnect from the average people in this country. And you're the first person I've ever spoken to who will admit to thinking Kerry was a good candidate with an actual grass movements behind him.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by Lux

I love that song, and the filmclip for some reason. It's true, for many who don't live amongst it, it's scary. Maybe that's why I love the song, not for the song itself.

Um, it scares the bejesus out of me.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

I always wish gay children upon total right wingers - that they may finally know compasion or something...though I guess that could backfire and then the kid would be treated like absolute ass by their parent...

LOL, I do too! May your children be gay, and may you lose all your money and be poor, amen.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by dissention

Kucinich is too radical to be called a Dem, but if he likes being called one, more power to him. He's a helluva man.



What's not to like? I won't live long enough to list all the things, my love. He's a swine, one look at his record proves as much.

As for Kerry, we'd be in the same boat we're in now. He wasn't an alternative, he was part of the problem. Another rich white guy with big aspirations and a remarkable disconnect from the average people in this country. And you're the first person I've ever spoken to who will admit to thinking Kerry was a good candidate with an actual grass movements behind him.

I find myself to be the lone voice quite often, and thats ok with me. I LIKE Clinton. I was behind Kerry. Does that mean I think we as a party couldnt do better? NO. I would have preferred Kucinich, but he didnt have the numbers behind him. Its too bad, too, because he is the one candidate who most closely represents what I always believed the Democratic party to be about. As for Kerry's grassroots movement, whether he got his headstart from Dean, or whether the movement was actually a desire to get Bush out is a minor detail to my way of thinking.