That's what some folks are saying, eh?
Let's see....
1) I'm for rounding up every illegal immigrant and sending them home, at gunpoint if necessary
2) I'm for an across the board 10% cut in government spending, and a balanced budget amendment
3) I'm for killing or jailing every islamist we can find (note - not islamic - islamist - know the difference)
4) I'm pro-business, and big-time pro-big-oil - go ConocoPhillips!
5) I'm 100% against Hillary Clinton, and like McCain
So, folks, at least the ignorant Sean Hannity / Rush Limbaugh dolts out there, let me sum it up. If you're against the incompetence of this administration, if you realize we're on the wrong track, it does not, definitely does not, make you "liberal" or a "democrat". It makes you AWAKE.
At the same time, anyone who calls themselves a "Republican" should be disgusted with the goings-on in Washington these days. Lower spending? HA! Get the government off the backs of the people? HA! Sane military policy? HA! No nation building, clear exit strategies? HA! Hate gays, arabs and abortion? Ok, that's all you do now. But good god, get control of your party. At least the economic side of it. 'Cause it's a joke now, and nothing like the party of Reagan.
And for you "liberals" and Democrats who think I'm Dick Cheney in disguise? Same story. Your party is pathetic, stands for nothing, has no leaders, and is powerless. Is that a party you want to be a part of? Does that party have ANYTHING to do with JFK?
Bottom line - there are many more of me out there. The majority. We're called Independents. Folks who realize both parties are bought and sold and soul-less. And are calling for a change.
So throw the bums out. Revolt. Stand up. Stop with the labeling, and start with the change.
The housing-bubble-fueled financial meltdown underway may serve as the catalyst for a change. If you turn off your Fox News and New York Times and start thinking for yourself.
Cheers.
April 09, 2006
HousingPanic is a liberal, democrat site
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
32 comments:
Here's a good explanation of why the Busheviki think you're a godless commie:
Link
an excerpt....
It used to be the case that in order to be considered a "liberal" or someone "of the Left," one had to actually ascribe to liberal views on the important policy issues of the day – social spending, abortion, the death penalty, affirmative action, immigration, "judicial activism," hate speech laws, gay rights, utopian foreign policies, etc. etc. These days, to be a "liberal," such views are no longer necessary.
Now, in order to be considered a "liberal," only one thing is required – a failure to pledge blind loyalty to George W. Bush. The minute one criticizes him is the minute that one becomes a "liberal," regardless of the ground on which the criticism is based. And the more one criticizes him, by definition, the more "liberal" one is. Whether one is a "liberal" -- or, for that matter, a "conservative" -- is now no longer a function of one’s actual political views, but is a function purely of one’s personal loyalty to George Bush.
Exactly Keith! Well said.
"Now, in order to be considered a "liberal," only one thing is required – a failure to pledge blind loyalty to George W. Bush."
This is so true!
George W. Bush is not a conservative.
Conservatives do not go running up 500 billion gubbermint deficts. Conservatives do not trash our constitutional rights. Conservatives do not get us involved in all kinds of foreign entanglements. And conservatives do not embrace unthinking acceptance of religious ignoramuses like Tom Delay and Pat Robertson. And conservatives do not support the type of deep corruption evident in the GOP today.
Gee - I thought this was a conservative site. Silly me.
The neocons have hijacked and disgraced the conservative movement. Unfortunately, I think the left-wingers will be seizing control as the neocons are thrown out and we will all suffer.
Traditional conservatives should have never let this happen IMO.
We haven't tried Communism yet. Please give it a chance
So true ;))
I think I'm conservative:
1) small government,
2) minimum taxes (maybe just some with idea to encourage entrepreneurship),
3) less regulations and laws, but the one on the books *should* be enforced (e.g., we already have immigration laws - don't we?),
But I'm portrayed as "liberal" because I don't think republicans are not delivering on the above. Maybe "republicans" are basically democrats that go to church?
Maybe "republicans" are basically democrats that go to church?
anyone arguing that democrats and republicans are exactly the same have obviously not paying too much attention to world events for, oh, say, the last 5 years.
if I ran into Ralph Nader on the street one day, I'd cockpunch him.
The failure of the Republicans to adhere to Reaganite principles has really exposed the hollow partisans on the Republican side. Many have resorted to knee-jerk defense of Bush and his crew no matter how f*cked up their performance. Watch 30 minutes of Fox News to see whaqt I mean. They'll never turn against Bush because their partisan instincts are so much stronger than any core beliefs they may once have had.
Are the Democrats willing to cut spending? They actually want to expand government with socialist healthcare and even bigger MediCare. They even opposed the Welfare to work program. Therefore Conservatives are left with no choice but to go with the corrupt Republicans over the corrupt Democrats.
Are the Democrats willing to cut spending?
Nobody can spend borrowed money better than the Busheviki. Even Lyndon Johnson would recoil in horror at Bush's fiscal policies.
Let's not forget, the only president to run a surplus since the days of JFK was Clinton.
Democrats can cut spending just enough to fool the voters, just look at Clinton. Don't worry, you'll hear lots of fiscal Dems this year.
I will be voting against all incumbents this year. By just voting for Dems, though, we're are only sending the message to one party. By voting out all incumbents, the message is sent, the power vacuum is created, and the Congress will perhaps pay attention to the people, as opposed to (solely) their campaign contributors. It's the only way as I see it.
Keep it up Keith!
But good god, get control of your party. At least the economic side of it. 'Cause it's a joke now, and nothing like the party of Reagan.
Its exactly the same. The 91 bubble was created under Reagan.
20+ million ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS becoming legal...will result to Massive Social security welfare deficits... will they bankrupt working Americans` SOCIAL SECURITY funds? !!!
before... only our Healthcare funds were over-burdened by illegal immigrants obtaining FREE HEALTH CARE and medicines... and also obtaining FREE SCHOOL benefits...
Now... in addition to the ABOVE... if they become LEGAL and have SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS... ... TAXPAYERS will be paying for their welfare... FREE FOOD AND SHELTER...plus FREE CHILD CARE benefits of $300/child...and etc.
Do taxpayers think that they will work legally and pay taxes and not paid under the table ?
Why work legally if our WELFARE SYSTEM gives them more FREE money from taxpayers ???
THIS IS DOUBLE JEOPARDY...IMHO
We tried a government run by democraps--Didnt work.
We tried a government run by Repukes--Didnt work.
There is a third way: Vote Communist party, 2008.
Nice to hear your back !!!
If you don't love George W. Bush, the terrorists have won!
Wow, there are lots of angry people here.
You' all need to chill out :)
Keith, you next trip should be Amsterdam.
Hopefully, you wont come back.
Happy_Chill.
Bush is pathetic, but what alternative is there? The other side equates tax cuts to being on welfare. They take $18K/yr from my paycheck and refund me $2K/yr and tell me I'm on welfare. They think that businesses are a detriment to society and people on welfare for 4 decades are good for the country. They claim that anyone who is successful became that way because they are are a thief and evil. I've had debates with these people and they are the power behind the Democratic Party. So where is the alternative?
On one hand, you have corruption and incompetence, while on the other hand you have people who belong in an insane asylum.
Why do all the loonies have their own blogs? Aren't there any normal people with normmal views and blogs. Why is everyone such an extremist these days?
Keith's criticsm of the Dems is basically that they are not in power.
Will that can be changed.
The one good thing about Bush is that he has destroyed his own party and will be taking the religious right down with him. Adios. I have been waiting for this specific silver lining two this six-year long dark cloud. This is going to be fun to watch and participate in.
johnb - I like mccain, but as with all incumbents, he's bought and sold. I'm against his immigration bill, and I'm against his recent embrace of the right. he doesn't have my vote. but for a republican, he's not horrific. I can't think of many straight-shooting centrists, except for specter and lindsey graham perhaps
John McCain. Give me a break. The Straight Talk Express jumped track to hook up with Bush's Loose Canon Ball Express because Conductor John thought he saw gravy on that train. Sorry John but that's not gravy. Looks like gravy. But not gravy.
Foobecca - you hit it perfectly. I believe we need four parties in the US - not two. It doesn't work. Look at the basic math.
Take economic and social policy, assume those are the only two things that matter. You can be conservative (+) or liberal (-) for either. So four total choices
++
+-
-+
--
Most Americans I believe are conservative econimically, liberal socially. And there is no party for us. So we are forced to vote for a party or candidates who do not mirror us. The fricking majority. In addition, today's Republican party is so confused on economics, not sure if they're liberal or conservative there these days, as they spend like tip o'neill on a bender.
Then the two parties create election laws to ensure there will only be two parties
But perhaps the internet will change things. The ability for a national candidate to raise a lot of money $10 at a time and run straight against the major parties and their fat cat fundraisers and massive overhead.
We'll see... Until then, we're screwed
The reason there is not four viable parties is the same reason ther aren't ten.
After two more months of housing market declines the burst of the bubble will be obvious to even the most deluded real estate investor.
This is when the Bush job rating goes from the 30's to the 20's. This is going to be fun to watch indeed.
Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice and McCain are now on a runaway train to neocon hell and Dr. Strangelove is driving.
sky - thanks for the comments. I actually have no clear position on healthcare, but am trying to formulate one.
Here's my basic beliefs:
* Everyone should be able to get basic healthcare to a point
* As a society we cannot afford exotic and expensive cures and care for everyone. We can afford quality basic care for all however
* We should crack down hard on lawyers, lawsuits and fraud - this is what is driving up costs for everyone
* Private insurance should form the base of our healthcare solution. Government should be an add-on only
* We should immediately repeal the horrific prescription drug benefit, and start over from scratch on a comprehensive revenue-neutral health solution
* We should provide no healthcare to any non-US citizen. Harsh? Yes. But necessary if we are to protect and care for OUR citizens. The government should not do it, but private individuals and charities could
* The republicans scored political points for killing what Hillary was trying to do. However, in the end, nothing happened and now we're in a big ol' mess. The only way to solve the problem is for the parties to work together (same as social security). Since that will not happen, period, the only way to move forward is for a strong independent president, with a popular mandate, to be elected
thoughts?
Actually I thought there was a crackdown on lawyers already. There has been plenty of tort reform and capped damages already, only insurance costs went up anyway. I believe one of the big advocates for capping damages and limiting malpractice in the Bush admin was a multiple malpractice offender himself.
Didn't Medicare, if it hadn't been continually cut, actually prove that government could run general health insurance much more efficiently and cheaper than a private company?
I guess it comes down "to privatize or not to privatize." Shift the focus of a social issue from "service" to "profit" and you tend to get "what's the most I can do for you for the least amount of $" vs "what's the least I can do for you for the most amount of $." Anyway, dispelling the idea that government is bad at everything, I think there are some things which noone could do better.
I saw an old SNL the other night with Pearl Jam - from when their first album came out. Eddie Vedder had a t-shirt that read "CHOICE". He went on about it a little in one song. Seem so absolutely f-ing trivial. It was comical. A f-ing drama queen in need of a cause. "Help, help, I'm being repressed. Now we see the violence inherent in the system."
Govenment is always corrupt. Even though the Republicans have let me down, it's still better than the Freakazoid Democrats. It's like a crazy alien abduction nightmare. For me the far left is way worse than the far right.
I agree w/ most of keiths positions. BTW, Communists are terminally stupid.
Even though the Republicans have let me down, it's still better than the Freakazoid Democrats. It's like a crazy alien abduction nightmare. For me the far left is way worse than the far right.
Does this mean that you value your money more than your civil liberties?
Keith said . . .
"We should crack down hard on lawyers, lawsuits and fraud - this is what is driving up costs for everyone . . . ."
Keither, you're wrong about this. Malpractice awards account for a tiny fraction of insurance pay-outs, so small, in fact, as to be negligible. You are simply repeating the disinformation put forth by insurance companies to justify their outrageous malpractice insurance premiums while making bigger profits than ever.
There are many terrible doctors practicing in this country, and only one in hundred cases of malpractice is litigated. Most bad doctors never experience any negative consequences for their quackery.
The cost of medicine in the United States is high because insurance companies, drug companies, medical equipment companies, hospitals, and doctors are all raking in fortunes. It has nothing to do with malpractice. This is a straw man invented by the insurance companies, who resent every cent spent, but never spend anything out of their own pockets. They simple raise everybody's rates to cover whatever costs they have and then some.
Malpractice is harder than any other form of personal injury to litigate because of the powerful insurance and medical lobbies. In Florida, one has to go through a medical review board first, and it is stacked 100% in favor of doctors. Moreover, the malpractice must result in a permanent debilitating injury or a death before it can be litigated; injuries from which patients recover are excluded, and there is virtually no possibility of fraud.
Post a Comment