Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Hate America First"
So many incorrect statements - so little time.
"felton" wrote in message news Perhaps, but I think most people are profoundly concerned about the Iraq fiasco. The majority of Americans don't view Iraq as a fiasco. Couple that with the deficits, foreign policy disasters, the job situation and the general distrust of the current administration and things don't look good for George. Deficits are of little concern to the average American, most especially the relatively small deficits the govt. is running nowadays. Would that the average American family had so little debt percentage wise. Polls show the majority of Americans trust the present administration. Most Americans are solidly behind this President concerning foreign policy issues. Although the Dow has recovered, in large part, I don't think that is the measuring stick of the economic well being of the average voter. It may reflect the well being of the average multinational corporation, which seems to be the constituency of this administration, but not the average voter. Most people are wage earners, not investors. Wrong! Well over half of American families have stock market investments such as 401Ks, individual stocks, bonds, etc. Trickle down economics has never worked. It simply widens the divide between the few at the top and the many at the bottom. Wrong. The Reagan years proved trickle-down economics worked then and the recent Bush tax cuts prove they work now. Bogus gerrymandering and the right wing propaganda machine won't prop this up forever. Bogus gerrymandering? Why is it bogus when the Republicans do it but when the Democrats had the majority and they were doing it it was right. Ya can't have it both ways. Things have to swing back to the middle. I would probably be just as uncomfortable if things swing too far left, but the ice is pretty thin where this team has taken us. Things ARE swinging back to the middle. If you think Bush is a conservative you're nuts. He's anything but. He has some conservative views that are good like a strong military and reluctance to cowtow to such pathetic organizations as the United Nations. He stands firm against terrorism and he has good morals personally and respects the office of President (a welcome change from Clinton). On the other hand, he certainly is no conservative when it comes to working for smaller government and smaller government spending and less government intrusion in our lives. Even so, he's no worse than the liberal crowd - far better in fact. What's happening and you and the liberals are too stupid to see it is Mr. Bush is re-defining the political parties. He is moving the Republican party away from strict conservativism and more towards the liberal end of the party spectrum. He is stealing long-time Democrat 'sacred cow' issues and bringing into the Republican fold many moderate Democrats who are fed up with the way left tilt of their own party. President Bush is slaying the dragon and the dragon is a Democrat Party out of touch with reality. I would like to see smaller government, being conservative myself, but if I can't have it I will settle for a strong country militarily and a strong economy domestically. I will enjoy the freedom both give me. What else really matters to the average American? Like Clinton so wisely stated. "It's the economy, stupid!" So, wake up and smell the roses. S.Simon On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:53:39 -0500, "Simple Simon" wrote: What don't you get about the famous Clinton statement, "It's the economy, stupid!". Clinton was often wrong but he hit the nail right on the head with that assessment. He was elected because he knew the validity of that statement. I'm no admirer of the former President but I give credit where credit is due. As far as Americans are concerned, it IS the economy, stupid. Bush has the economy in 2004. Bush wins by a landslide. Game, set, match! Believe it. S.Simon "felton" wrote in message ... What you are seeing is what happens when one party controls the "system". When we are blessed with "gridlock", the politicians are forced to compromise somewhere in the middle, where most Americans are comfortable. Unfortunately, the political parties are controlled by the activists, who are generally the extremists. Moderates can't get the nomination from their parties, so this is what we have. Normally I would say that Bush would have little chance of being reelected for any number of reasons, but don't sell the Democrats short. They will end up nominating someone who is even worse, if that is possible. I wonder what happened to the term limits that the Republicans promised us in their "Contract with America"? I'll be voting to limit the terms of as many as I am able in the next election. Pray for gridlock. On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 08:30:56 +1100, Donny's Dilemma wrote: On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:18:36 -0500, "Simple Simon" wrote: What would you prefer to call people who demean everything their own country does to make sure freedom doesn't become an antiquated term? Oh, you mean the thinking people who can see what's happening to your once proud tradition and values? The "Hate America First" crowd truly wakes up in the morning hating their country and goes to bed at night hating their country and dreams dreams of hatred toward their country. This is how they are. They should be spat upon at every opportunity because they deserve no better treatment. Let them speak out, let them make fools of themselves and let them become objects of scorn. They reap as they sow. S.Simon What is it with this "hate" word? Disagree, dislike but hate? Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
hate speech | General | |||
OT - Politics of hate won't beat Bush | ASA | |||
For Ganz and anybody else with MTV-shortened memories. | ASA | |||
What to love about the United States. | ASA |