| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Deuteros" |
| Date: |
14 Aug 2005 12:52:30 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive" guy,
no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at the
idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq War and the
Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly voted for him
because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than the other guy and
because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government and
personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year. He's
enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's held
American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons for years
without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is no
greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving them a run
for their money. I've come to realize that both political parties are bad for
liberty and have no problem enacting more and more unconstitutional
legislation and spending bills every year. It's a shame it took me so long to
figure that out. It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the
party line that I used to believe.
Lately I've found myself identifying more and more with the libertarians (not
the Libertarian Party). I believe the founding fathers were essantially
libertarian.
.
|
|
| User: "andyfothershops" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
14 Aug 2005 06:13:55 AM |
|
|
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:42fedc1e$0$64002$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive" guy,
no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at the
idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq War and
the
Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly voted for him
because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than the other guy and
because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government and
personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year. He's
enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's held
American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons for years
without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into
law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is no
greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving them a
run
for their money. I've come to realize that both political parties are bad
for
liberty and have no problem enacting more and more unconstitutional
legislation and spending bills every year. It's a shame it took me so long
to
figure that out. It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the
party line that I used to believe.
Lately I've found myself identifying more and more with the libertarians
(not
the Libertarian Party). I believe the founding fathers were essantially
libertarian.
Weren't the libertarians "the whigs"? I do know that the Whigs were the UK
liberals.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
25 Aug 2005 06:45:49 PM |
|
|
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive" guy,
no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at the
idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq War and the
Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly voted for him
because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than the other guy and
because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government and
personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year. He's
enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's held
American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons for years
without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is no
greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving them a run
for their money. I've come to realize that both political parties are bad for
liberty and have no problem enacting more and more unconstitutional
legislation and spending bills every year. It's a shame it took me so long to
figure that out. It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the
party line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
25 Aug 2005 08:52:32 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:dell7c$3e5$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year.
He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's
held American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons
for years without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare
act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
Republicans are bad but Democrats are worse.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
25 Aug 2005 09:12:08 PM |
|
|
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:430e75df$0$12174$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:dell7c$3e5$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year.
He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's
held American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons
for years without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare
act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
Republicans are bad but Democrats are worse.
Except for the religious/non-religious colours with which they like to paint
their respective moralities, the two are absolutely indistinguishable in
government.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
25 Aug 2005 11:32:45 PM |
|
|
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year.
He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's
held American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons
for years without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare
act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
Republicans are bad but Democrats are worse.
And you're still a stupid bigot. You care more about your prejudices
than you care about America.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
26 Aug 2005 05:20:26 PM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year.
He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's
held American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons
for years without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare
act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
Republicans are bad but Democrats are worse.
And you're still a stupid bigot. You care more about your prejudices
than you care about America.
He should have provided evidence to back up his statement.
But your fanatical "Democrats are always right, Republicans are always
wrong" partisanship is silly. Dems and Repubs are all human beings, not
omniscient. They get some things right and they get some things wrong.
Vietnam was the second biggest thing that the Dems got wrong in the
entire history of the Dem Party. (The biggest thing, of course, was
being sympathizers to the Confederacy.)
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 01:11:03 AM |
|
|
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year.
He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's
held American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons
for years without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare
act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
Republicans are bad but Democrats are worse.
And you're still a stupid bigot. You care more about your prejudices
than you care about America.
He should have provided evidence to back up his statement.
But your fanatical "Democrats are always right, Republicans are always
wrong" partisanship is silly.
Since I never wrote anything of the sort it is obvious that it is YOU
who is playing that game of blaming the other side.
Try telling the truth and stop making excuse for your party.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
28 Aug 2005 06:22:44 PM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. < > wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year.
He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's
held American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons
for years without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare
act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
Republicans are bad but Democrats are worse.
And you're still a stupid bigot. You care more about your prejudices
than you care about America.
He should have provided evidence to back up his statement.
But your fanatical "Democrats are always right, Republicans are always
wrong" partisanship is silly.
Since I never wrote anything of the sort it is obvious that it is YOU
who is playing that game of blaming the other side.
Try telling the truth and stop making excuse for your party.
OK, I'll listen: What are your specific criticisms of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY?
And I'm a registered Independent. I don't make excuses for any
political party--even when it's one that I voted for.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
25 Aug 2005 07:26:54 PM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive" guy,
no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at the
idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq War and the
Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly voted for him
because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than the other guy and
because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government and
personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year. He's
enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's held
American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons for years
without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is no
greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving them a run
for their money. I've come to realize that both political parties are bad for
liberty and have no problem enacting more and more unconstitutional
legislation and spending bills every year. It's a shame it took me so long to
figure that out. It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the
party line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties. Because that's
who is increasingly bankrolling Dem political campaigns these days.
Follow the money. And I'm sure that money comes with political strings
attached.
The loony left--the aforementioned far left-wingers--now has as much
influence with the Dem Party as the Christian evangelicals have with the
GOP. The difference is that the loony left aren't patriotic, won't side
with their country and support their government even when America is
attacked by a foreign enemy, and are absolutely opposed to the use of
military force, anywhere, anyplace, anytime, even if the alternative
were the obliteration of this country.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
25 Aug 2005 11:32:03 PM |
|
|
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive" guy,
no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at the
idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq War and the
Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly voted for him
because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than the other guy and
because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government and
personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year. He's
enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's held
American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons for years
without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is no
greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving them a run
for their money. I've come to realize that both political parties are bad for
liberty and have no problem enacting more and more unconstitutional
legislation and spending bills every year. It's a shame it took me so long to
figure that out. It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the
party line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens of
thousands.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
26 Aug 2005 01:33:24 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:dem602$o4b$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of
a lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every
year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID
card. He's held American citizens arrested on American soil in
military prisons for years without being charged with a crime. He
signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens of
thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam. They are no better than
Republicans.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 01:09:56 AM |
|
|
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:dem602$o4b$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of
a lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at
the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq
War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly
voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than
the other guy and because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government
and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every
year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID
card. He's held American citizens arrested on American soil in
military prisons for years without being charged with a crime. He
signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is
no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving
them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both political
parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting more and more
unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every year. It's a
shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's especially
frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that I used to
believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens of
thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 03:21:44 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:dep03k$5fn$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:dem602$o4b$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell
of a lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive"
guy, no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited
at the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the
Iraq War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I
mainly voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up
worse than the other guy and because of the judges Bush would
probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small
government and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased
spending every year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically
a federal ID card. He's held American citizens arrested on American
soil in military prisons for years without being charged with a
crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there
is no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is
giving them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both
political parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting
more and more unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every
year. It's a shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's
especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that
I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats
must be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens of
thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
My party? What makes you think I give a rat's ***** about the Republican
Party?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 03:49:58 PM |
|
|
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited
at the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the
Iraq War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I
mainly voted for him because he probably wouldn't screw thing up
worse than the other guy and because of the judges Bush would
probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small
government and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased
spending every year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically
a federal ID card. He's held American citizens arrested on American
soil in military prisons for years without being charged with a
crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there
is no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is
giving them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both
political parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting
more and more unconstitutional legislation and spending bills every
year. It's a shame it took me so long to figure that out. It's
especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the party line that
I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats
must be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens of
thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
My party? What makes you think I give a rat's ***** about the Republican
Party?
What you wrote up at the top of this article.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 05:17:39 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:deqjll$327$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly
excited at the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I
supported the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004
rolled around I mainly voted for him because he probably wouldn't
screw thing up worse than the other guy and because of the judges
Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small
government and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased
spending every year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is
basically a federal ID card. He's held American citizens arrested
on American soil in military prisons for years without being
charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there
is no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is
giving them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both
political parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting
more and more unconstitutional legislation and spending bills
every year. It's a shame it took me so long to figure that out.
It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the party
line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats
must be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org,
Michael Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless
wars. At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens
of thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
My party? What makes you think I give a rat's ***** about the Republican
Party?
What you wrote up at the top of this article.
I used to care. I don't anymore. The Republicans have gone away from their
principles. They are no different than the Democrats.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 11:11:10 PM |
|
|
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:deqjll$327$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly
excited at the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I
supported the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004
rolled around I mainly voted for him because he probably wouldn't
screw thing up worse than the other guy and because of the judges
Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small
government and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased
spending every year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is
basically a federal ID card. He's held American citizens arrested
on American soil in military prisons for years without being
charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there
is no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is
giving them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both
political parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting
more and more unconstitutional legislation and spending bills
every year. It's a shame it took me so long to figure that out.
It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the party
line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats
must be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org,
Michael Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless
wars. At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens
of thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
My party? What makes you think I give a rat's ***** about the Republican
Party?
What you wrote up at the top of this article.
I used to care. I don't anymore. The Republicans have gone away from their
principles. They are no different than the Democrats.
More of the same political bigotry. You still favor your political
party. You cannot accept that Democrats might now be better than
Republicans.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 07:18:15 PM |
|
|
Deuteros wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:deqjll$327$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Steven L. < > wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly
excited at the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I
supported the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004
rolled around I mainly voted for him because he probably wouldn't
screw thing up worse than the other guy and because of the judges
Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small
government and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased
spending every year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is
basically a federal ID card. He's held American citizens arrested
on American soil in military prisons for years without being
charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there
is no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is
giving them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both
political parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting
more and more unconstitutional legislation and spending bills
every year. It's a shame it took me so long to figure that out.
It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the party
line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats
must be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org,
Michael Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless
wars. At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens
of thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
My party? What makes you think I give a rat's ***** about the Republican
Party?
What you wrote up at the top of this article.
I used to care. I don't anymore. The Republicans have gone away from their
principles. They are no different than the Democrats.
I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I'm registered in
Massachusetts as an Independent.
I can't find a major political party that matches my views: I'm fairly
libertarian on issues like abortion and gay marriage and illicit drugs
and whatever consenting adults do in the bedroom. But I'm a hawk on
foreign policy (I'm more hawkish than Bush in some ways), and I believe
that government should keep its hands off the economy as much as possible.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 11:12:39 PM |
|
|
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Deuteros wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:deqjll$327$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly
excited at the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I
supported the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004
rolled around I mainly voted for him because he probably wouldn't
screw thing up worse than the other guy and because of the judges
Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small
government and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased
spending every year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is
basically a federal ID card. He's held American citizens arrested
on American soil in military prisons for years without being
charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there
is no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is
giving them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both
political parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting
more and more unconstitutional legislation and spending bills
every year. It's a shame it took me so long to figure that out.
It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the party
line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats
must be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org,
Michael Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless
wars. At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens
of thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
My party? What makes you think I give a rat's ***** about the Republican
Party?
What you wrote up at the top of this article.
I used to care. I don't anymore. The Republicans have gone away from their
principles. They are no different than the Democrats.
I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I'm registered in
Massachusetts as an Independent.
I can't find a major political party that matches my views: I'm fairly
libertarian on issues like abortion and gay marriage and illicit drugs
and whatever consenting adults do in the bedroom. But I'm a hawk on
foreign policy (I'm more hawkish than Bush in some ways), and I believe
that government should keep its hands off the economy as much as possible.
So you want more military power for the government and you want more
economic power for corporations. You want war and you want poverty.
Not very smart, IMO.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
28 Aug 2005 09:24:10 AM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. < > wrote:
Deuteros wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:deqjll$327$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in
Steven L. < > wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly
excited at the idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I
supported the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004
rolled around I mainly voted for him because he probably wouldn't
screw thing up worse than the other guy and because of the judges
Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small
government and personal responsibility yet Bush has increased
spending every year. He's enacted the REAL ID Act which is
basically a federal ID card. He's held American citizens arrested
on American soil in military prisons for years without being
charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there
is no greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is
giving them a run for their money. I've come to realize that both
political parties are bad for liberty and have no problem enacting
more and more unconstitutional legislation and spending bills
every year. It's a shame it took me so long to figure that out.
It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the party
line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats
must be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org,
Michael Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless
wars. At least the Democrats haven't been killing people by the tens
of thousands.
Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam.
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
My party? What makes you think I give a rat's ***** about the Republican
Party?
What you wrote up at the top of this article.
I used to care. I don't anymore. The Republicans have gone away from their
principles. They are no different than the Democrats.
I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I'm registered in
Massachusetts as an Independent.
I can't find a major political party that matches my views: I'm fairly
libertarian on issues like abortion and gay marriage and illicit drugs
and whatever consenting adults do in the bedroom. But I'm a hawk on
foreign policy (I'm more hawkish than Bush in some ways), and I believe
that government should keep its hands off the economy as much as possible.
So you want more military power for the government and you want more
economic power for corporations. You want war and you want poverty.
Not very smart, IMO.
You're not only a loyal Democrat, you're a loyal *left-wing* Democrat.
It was BILL CLINTON who proclaimed "The era of big government is over."
And there are plenty of Democrats who favor a strong military.
But you left-wing Democrats are ideologically indistinguishable from the
Green Party. And that's where you would be if you thought Greens had a
chance of winning elections.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
28 Aug 2005 12:18:22 PM |
|
|
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
I can't find a major political party that matches my views: I'm fairly
libertarian on issues like abortion and gay marriage and illicit drugs
and whatever consenting adults do in the bedroom. But I'm a hawk on
foreign policy (I'm more hawkish than Bush in some ways), and I believe
that government should keep its hands off the economy as much as possible.
So you want more military power for the government and you want more
economic power for corporations. You want war and you want poverty.
Not very smart, IMO.
You're not only a loyal Democrat,
The problem with you dumbshit bigots is that you almost never get
anything right. In fact I am NOT a Democrat at all.
It was BILL CLINTON who proclaimed "The era of big government is over."
And it has been Bush who proceeded to greatly expand the size of the
government.
And there are plenty of Democrats who favor a strong military.
The US spends more on its military than the rest of the world combined.
How "strong" is enough?
You want a party that matches your views? Check out the fascists.
They stand for more military and more power to corporations.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
28 Aug 2005 06:20:54 PM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. < > wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. < > wrote:
I can't find a major political party that matches my views: I'm fairly
libertarian on issues like abortion and gay marriage and illicit drugs
and whatever consenting adults do in the bedroom. But I'm a hawk on
foreign policy (I'm more hawkish than Bush in some ways), and I believe
that government should keep its hands off the economy as much as possible.
So you want more military power for the government and you want more
economic power for corporations. You want war and you want poverty.
Not very smart, IMO.
You're not only a loyal Democrat,
The problem with you dumbshit bigots is that you almost never get
anything right. In fact I am NOT a Democrat at all.
It was BILL CLINTON who proclaimed "The era of big government is over."
And it has been Bush who proceeded to greatly expand the size of the
government.
I'm a registered Independent, remember?
I really do want to shrink the size and scope of government. Remember?
And there are plenty of Democrats who favor a strong military.
The US spends more on its military than the rest of the world combined.
That's irrelevant.
The U.S. spends less than 3% of its GDP on its military.
That's the lowest percentage since the end of World War II.
Right now, we don't have enough troops to fight the war in Iraq. We
sent 150,000 because we just don't have 500,000. Not any more.
How "strong" is enough?
for you, the answer is to weaken the U.S. military to the point that the
U.S. Government will be forced to take the military option off the
table. Right?
You want a party that matches your views? Check out the fascists.
They stand for more military and more power to corporations.
I have read the platforms of all the major parties in the U.S.
Your views are closest to the Green Party. That's where you belong.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
28 Aug 2005 08:19:16 PM |
|
|
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
I can't find a major political party that matches my views: I'm fairly
libertarian on issues like abortion and gay marriage and illicit drugs
and whatever consenting adults do in the bedroom. But I'm a hawk on
foreign policy (I'm more hawkish than Bush in some ways), and I believe
that government should keep its hands off the economy as much as possible.
So you want more military power for the government and you want more
economic power for corporations. You want war and you want poverty.
Not very smart, IMO.
You're not only a loyal Democrat,
The problem with you dumbshit bigots is that you almost never get
anything right. In fact I am NOT a Democrat at all.
It was BILL CLINTON who proclaimed "The era of big government is over."
And it has been Bush who proceeded to greatly expand the size of the
government.
I'm a registered Independent, remember?
I really do want to shrink the size and scope of government. Remember?
Except for the military, it seems.
And there are plenty of Democrats who favor a strong military.
The US spends more on its military than the rest of the world combined.
That's irrelevant.
The U.S. spends less than 3% of its GDP on its military.
That's irrelevant. The US has far more military strength than it
needs for defense.
Right now, we don't have enough troops to fight the war in Iraq.
And the nazis didn't have enough troops to take over the world.
How "strong" is enough?
for you, the answer is to weaken the U.S. military to the point that the
Stop lying, coward, and try to answer the question.
You want a party that matches your views? Check out the fascists.
They stand for more military and more power to corporations.
I have read the platforms of all the major parties in the U.S.
Then look past the "major" parties.
Your views are closest to the Green Party.
Your views are closest to the nazis.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "KenStahl" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 07:46:17 AM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
And so the neocon uses the pathetic excuse that because of a wateful
war 30 years ago it's okay to have another wasteful war now.
You don't give a ***** about America. All you care about is politics
and protecting your party.
The day will come when we will not have to reason with such
fools. Somehow, some way, Democrats just need to make
Republicans irrelevant and then go on to formulate their own
policies and leadership. The Republican's time has come and
gone and while they may be in control of the key offices at
the moment the people have already started to turn against
them and there is a good chance that the 2006 elections will
startle many of them.
Food for thought: What would it take to replace the five
Republican senators with the longest time in the Senate that
are running in 2006. If the Democrats can do what it takes
to accomplish that one goal then the rest will fall into
place with little effort at all.
--
Blogging at http://HexagonalPeg.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
26 Aug 2005 10:19:09 AM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. < > wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive" guy,
no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at the
idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq War and the
Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly voted for him
because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than the other guy and
because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government and
personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year. He's
enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's held
American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons for years
without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is no
greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving them a run
for their money. I've come to realize that both political parties are bad for
liberty and have no problem enacting more and more unconstitutional
legislation and spending bills every year. It's a shame it took me so long to
figure that out. It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the
party line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
Four words: President Lyndon Baines Johnson.
Ever heard of him?
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
26 Aug 2005 11:39:38 AM |
|
|
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Jay <jayp@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:a7hsf1hiddjichhq2gu1piv5k11afliebc@4ax.com:
Who used to agree with George W. Bush but does not anymore?
Why?
I am one. The best I can say at this point is that he was a hell of a
lot better than the alternative.
Why? I preferred the "new sheriff in town" "wanted: dead or alive" guy,
no is no longer there.
I used to be a die hard Bush supporter. In 2000 I was truly excited at the
idea of Bush becoming president. After 9/11 I supported the Iraq War and the
Patriot Act, etc. By the time 2004 rolled around I mainly voted for him
because he probably wouldn't screw thing up worse than the other guy and
because of the judges Bush would probably appoint.
Republicans and conservatives are supposed to be for small government and
personal responsibility yet Bush has increased spending every year. He's
enacted the REAL ID Act which is basically a federal ID card. He's held
American citizens arrested on American soil in military prisons for years
without being charged with a crime. He signed a huge Medicare act into law.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I believe there is no
greater threat to liberty than liberals, but George Bush is giving them a run
for their money. I've come to realize that both political parties are bad for
liberty and have no problem enacting more and more unconstitutional
legislation and spending bills every year. It's a shame it took me so long to
figure that out. It's especially frustrating to see conservatives tow the
party line that I used to believe.
You still haven't figured it out. You still think that Democrats must
be worse than Republicans.
I can only go by what I've seen.
That "argument" has been used to justify all manner of bigotry.
A vote for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for Moveon.org, Michael
Moore, George Soros and the Hollywood loony lefties.
A vote for any Republican is a vote for war, fascism, terrorism, and
power for rich elites.
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
Four words: President Lyndon Baines Johnson.
Ever heard of him?
President Richard Millhouse Nixon.
Heard of him?
And so you continue to whine about idiotic irrelevancies in order to
justify your bigotry. You think that a president of 40 years ago
somehow causes Bush to waste $350,000,000,000 and thousands of lives
in Iraq.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
26 Aug 2005 05:18:03 PM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. < > wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
Four words: President Lyndon Baines Johnson.
Ever heard of him?
President Richard Millhouse Nixon.
Heard of him?
Yep, he's the President who got the U.S. out of Vietnam--after John F.
Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson put us into Vietnam. On the very day that
Nixon was inaugurated President, there were half a million American
troops already in Vietnam.
And so you continue to whine about idiotic irrelevancies in order to
justify your bigotry. You think that a president of 40 years ago
somehow causes Bush to waste $350,000,000,000 and thousands of lives
in Iraq.
No, I was responding to your earlier statement (see above) that "At
least the Democrats haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars
in needless wars." That's clearly false, since as the Pentagon Papers
(great read!) showed, the John F. Kennedy Administration instituted the
policy of gradual escalation in Vietnam, involving the Green Berets; and
then the Lyndon Johnson administration instituted greater escalation
including 500,000 ground troops and Operation Rolling Thunder, strategic
bombing with B-52's.
When you lefties say "Iraq is Bush's Vietnam," you should remember that
Vietnam was Lyndon Johnson's Vietnam.
And by the way, these were not hawkish moderate Democrats like Senator
Henry "Scoop" Jackson who gave us the Vietnam catastrophe. They were
LIBERALS like Robert S. McNamara. And the LBJ administration was the
same LIBERAL administration that passed Medicare.
Vietnam is the legacy of modern liberal Democrats. It's how modern
liberals fight wars. They fight them to LOSE.
Hope this helps.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 01:08:30 AM |
|
|
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda. At least the Democrats
haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in needless wars.
Four words: President Lyndon Baines Johnson.
Ever heard of him?
President Richard Millhouse Nixon.
Heard of him?
Yep, he's the President who got the U.S. out of Vietnam--
And into Cambodia.
And so you continue to whine about idiotic irrelevancies in order to
justify your bigotry. You think that a president of 40 years ago
somehow causes Bush to waste $350,000,000,000 and thousands of lives
in Iraq.
No, I was responding to your earlier statement (see above)
You were babbling idiotic irrelevancies.
that "At
least the Democrats haven't been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars
in needless wars."
And they haven't been, moron.
That's clearly false, since as the Pentagon Papers
(great read!) showed, the John F. Kennedy Administration instituted the
THE DEMOCRATS ARE NOT IN POWER, MORON!
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: Who used to agree with Bush but doesn't anymore? |
27 Aug 2005 03:19:34 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:dep00t$5ej$1@bolt.sonic.net:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Steven L. <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
***** propaganda is ***** propaganda | | | | | | | | |
