Text 13214, 185 rader
Skriven 2008-03-19 13:23:37 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
Kommentar till text 13074 av Jeff Bowman (1:229/500)
Ärende: Bush Vetoes Waterboarding Bill
======================================
17 Mar 08 16:47, Jeff Bowman wrote to Roy Witt:
RW>> Well, as an Independant, I can see why TN doesn't have any Dems in
RW>> the Congress, if that's how it works there.
JB> I didn't know you were independant, actually.
I lean to the right a lot, but have been known to vote left.
JB> Which is interesting to me, because I don't really know any, I don't
JB> believe! People around here have an obvious tendency to lean
JB> conservative. And ironically enough, even many of my internet
JB> friends turned out to be Republican as I came to find out, regardless
JB> of none of them even living in the same state as me.
I think you'll find more of them, come November.
JB> The folks I know tend to really lean one way or another. I admit I
JB> lean the Democratic way, but they've done plenty I've been opposed
JB> to, just as conservatives have supported things I agree with. Which
JB> obviously makes it hard come voting time, when you have to try and
JB> decide which person you dislike the least.
An old timer told me many years ago to never vote for the incumbant. I
keep that in mind when deciding whom to vote for, but I don't follow it as
closely as he did.
RW>> And AlGore must have somebody there who likes/liked him, or he
RW>> wouldn't have been elected to Congress so many times before he
RW>> became VP...At least Walter Mondale, 1984 Prez candidate, won his
RW>> own state when he ran. Of course, that was the ONLY state he won.
JB> I wasn't old enough to have any hand or even any interest in him back
JB> during his congress days. As for Mondale, I did notice that he
JB> managed to win just one state, which must have been pretty
JB> depressing. At least it was his.
AlGore acted like John Kerry does now.
RW>> Oh? I kinda thought your states' 2008 Presidential offering did a
RW>> fine job when he was a Senator.
JB> If you're referring to Fred Thompson, he just rubs me the wrong way
JB> sometimes. He tries to tread certain lines of issues very carefully.
JB> It makes me feel like he doesn't want to put any opinion on record to
JB> avoid making anyone vote against him, and/or so that he can change it
JB> whenever he wants without having to outright admit he was wrong.
I found some of his opinions were close to mine on several items.
JB> He's done some things I approve of, in terms of like abortion issues,
JB> but at the same time, he's still generally against it, which I can't
JB> say I agree with overall. He sounds like he possibly would consider
JB> invading Iran, but again, he treads the line with careful words.
JB> He's "skeptical" about human-induced global warming, backing some of
JB> the (in my opinion) more ridiculous arguments against it. He opposes
JB> leaving Iraq but admits made a bunch of mistakes. These and other
JB> things just don't sit right with me. Everyone has an opinion. Just
JB> say it and let the cards fall where they may.
See, we think alike. I'm generally against abortion, but would consider a
woman's right to choose as her own right. I wouldn't agree with him on
invading Iran, I'd just nuke the whole place and let God sort it out.
Global warming is a hoax perpetrated by politicians and stupid Europeons.
There's plenty of scientific evidence against it. This past winter being
the coldest in quite some time seems to be against the hoax. I oppose
leaving Iraq unfinished. And everyone makes mistakes, so we can't fault
him there.
RW>> JB> For president, it's Bush.
RW>> Not this election.
JB> No, but we picked him the last two.
Considering the alternative, that was the right thing to do.
RW>> Is that the same Lamar Alexander who ran for President one year?
JB> A couple times, it would seem.
I never liked him very much.
RW>> Hmmmm. That's usually why Democrats fail to get elected. Unless they
RW>> keep their mouths shut about raising your taxes before he gets
RW>> elected.
JB> I just always find it kind of silly that the public still assumes
JB> it's only Democrats that'll raise your taxes, since anyone taking a
JB> look at any of the last several presidents, and probably their own
JB> state governers, would see that Republicans are just as guilty.
Kennedy, Johnson and Carter raised taxes. Reagan gets derided by Dems for
'lowering' taxes, yet the Dem congress had a hand in doing so. Bush 1
raised taxes under pressure from the Dem controlled congress. Clinton
raised taxes, retro-actively. i.e. people paid taxes on income they had
before the taxes were raised (a precedent). Bush 2 lowers taxes and the
Dem Congress bitches about it and promises to raise them again 'if' they
take the White House in January. Who raises taxes?
Promising to raise taxes is 'why' Walter Mondale' didn't win the 1984
election and only won his home state in that losing effort.
JB> It just tends to be for different reasons. Taxes are usually to our
JB> benefit anyway, so unless it's for some crazy inappropriate reason, I
JB> don't worry about it.
Paying taxes doesn't benefit my bank account. When I was a working stiff
and had to work overtime to feed the family, paying more taxes wasn't to
our advantage. The better approach is for Congress to stop spending and
giving it away to foreign countrys.
Clinton comes along, raises taxes and the next guy in the White House
inherits a recession. The next person to inherit a recession won't have
higher taxes to blame it on, it's going to be the cost of oil.
RW>> JB> How does the news network affect how many crimes the Republican
RW>> JB> party has committed?
RW>> It's not that, it's the crimes the Dems have done that go
RW>> unreported. How many times has NBC mentioned that Spitzer is a
RW>> Democrat? I'll bet it wasn't mentioned once, or at least not until
RW>> it was mentioned on conservative talk radio.
JB> I never paid any attention to whether they called him a Democrat or
JB> not, but I would assume somebody on those channels did at some point.
JB> I do however know that some of those other channels don't call out
JB> someone as being Republican everytime they mention them, either.
8% of all journalists are conservatives, the rest are admitted liberals.
The 8% will tell you the truth, "he's a democrat, or he's a republican"
while the rest won't. That is, unless there's a reason to bring it up.
Like he did something good, like raising your taxes retro-actively. Let
him be a conservative politician and it gets mentioned all the time.
RW>> Not that I know of...Fox News lables all those crooks by their
RW>> crimes.
JB> There's more than one incident where they did "accidently" label
JB> Republicans in trouble as Democrats. I can even find you the footage
JB> of it, if you're hesitant to believe it.
If it's something from a liberal website, it wouldn't prove anything,
except that liberals are liars.
RW>> They can't help but mention it, now that it's a major story. They
RW>> would just as soon keep it under wraps if the could.
JB> I really doubt it. News is news. When all you've got to report is
JB> Iraq most days, anything different to latch onto is a hot story.
JB> That's why they're going as far as to look into the callgirl herself
JB> that he was paying for. People like that sort of dirt.
What was the 'major story'
RW>> That's because they smooze you into thinking they're the greatest.
JB> I feel Democrats are far from greatest, but when put on a scale of
JB> crimes one party has committed vs the other over the last few years
JB> alone, Democrats come out far on top.
LOL! On top of the 'most crimes committed' heap.
JB> In one of the newest bit of news, the former treasurer of the
JB> National Republican Congressional Committee apparently pocketed
JB> upwards to a million dollars. Will that see much news, now that
JB> Spitzer's prostitute is the talk of the town? I'm betting it'll just
JB> get a casual mention on some evening news programs, if that.
Not if you're watching an alphabet news channel. From the Washington Post;
"The largest confirmed political fraud in the modern campaign finance era,
after a 1974 law set strict contribution limits, is believed to be the
embezzlement of $1 million from the 1992 presidential campaign of the late
Sen. Paul Tsongas (D-Mass.)."
Apparently Ward had nothing to do with that embezzlement.
R\%/itt
--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
* Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:397/22)
|