How anyone talking about fiscal responsibility could vote for the Democrats is a mystery to me.

Simple. Because with a small majority, they’ll be able to gridlock congress until the Big Government Neo-Cons are ousted (please Dear God!) in ‘08. They won’t fix anything, but they will probably put some brakes on the insane spending spree the Republicans have been riding for the past 6 years or so.

And civil rights? Name on instance in which someone’s civil rights were actually infringed upon by the Bush administration.

Any American citizen who was listened to or imprisoned without charges. Civil rights don’t just apply to the good Americans, they apply to all Americans or this whole country is simply a hypocritical joke.

I do not mean some bs propaganda…but an honest to God example that does not include some homicidal terrorist behind bars where he damn well belongs. Sheesh, for some people it will always be 1969.

That’s a scary comment.

As for the metaphysical debate, I do not even know what that means. I think it means that if Democrats want to feed us a line of crap about what good mommies and Christians they are we are supposed to be impressed, but if some nasty old Republican happens to admit he prays for strength in times of trial that is just over the top.

I don’t think I’ve ever given that impression and I’m rather surprised that you would stoop to such strawman BS. Metaphyiscs, when is a life a life, should we teach ID in school, when is brain dead not really dead… That’s metaphysics. If its not something that we can prove in some real sense, then government shoudn’t be involved. Not in stem cells, not in abortion, not in life support nor in the ID versus evolution debate. I don’t care who believes what about the afterlife, the spirit realm or their own consciousness. I do care when they try to implement these half-baked myths as law in this nation.

Fox has a poll out which states that 51% of the Democrats questioned wanted us to win in Iraq. 34% did not and the remaining 15% were not sure.

That is why I left the Democratic Party, they are hypocrites. And I do question the patriotism of that 49%.

I have no idea what that poll is supposed to tell us. I have no idea what question was asked, nor how the poll was conducted. Beyond that, I don’t think its an issue of being patriotic if one disagrees with a war undertaken by their country. That’s the point of a free nation. We’re free to disagree, even on matters of patriotism.

What does it mean to win in Iraq? How will we win? When will we know we won? Now, 5 years from now? Or when all of the fallout is realized 20 years from now? If you base your political affiliation on polls ans statistics, then I would remind you that Mark Twain once said something very wise:

There are three kinds of lies. Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.

Believe me, it hurts me to have to consider that the Democrats are currently less of a threat to this nations future than the other options. But after the Republicans performance over the past 12 years (and more importantly with Bush), I couldn’t, in good conscience vote for more of that warped ideologically driven agenda.

Between the three groups, the stay-at-homes could have made the difference.

A big percentage of the Dems who won did so as hawks. I don’t think that should be forgotten.

I’m sorry, but you’ve just revealed yourself a damned fool.

Was it about the way the war is going or about the way it is being reported?

I’m not going to pretend that it’s going well, or that serious errors in judgment have not been made, but the support for the war was pretty qualified from the outset, with plenty of dire predictions of a Viet Nam quagmire. I’m not a Ralph Peters fan, but he may be showing a great deal of insight by suggesting that Iraq is, in fact, Al Qaeda’s quagmire as the Sunni Islamists cannot hope to control Iraq’s Shia majority nor can they afford to retreat from Iraq either. And back in Afghanistan and Somalia, A-Q’s soul Taliban and Islamic Courts Union soul mates aren’t exactly on top of things either.

I have noticed something working in health care, no one thinks it is bloat when they are the recepient. I think most people talk about small goverment but that means cutting something someone else needs or wants, not them.

The truth is more people are interested in effective government than small government. However, they do resent waste. The problem is that they can not decide what waste is.

How anyone talking about fiscal responsibility could vote for the Democrats is a mystery to me. First Social Security is a crisis, then it isn’t, then it is. First they complain about spending too much money and then they want to nationalize health care…the cost, don’t worry, the sky is the limit.

And civil rights? Name on instance in which someone’s civil rights were actually infringed upon by the Bush administration. I do not mean some bs propaganda…but an honest to God example that does not include some homicidal terrorist behind bars where he damn well belongs. Sheesh, for some people it will always be 1969.

As for the metaphysical debate, I do not even know what that means. I think it means that if Democrats want to feed us a line of crap about what good mommies and Christians they are we are supposed to be impressed, but if some nasty old Republican happens to admit he prays for strength in times of trial that is just over the top.

Fox has a poll out which states that 51% of the Democrats questioned wanted us to win in Iraq. 34% did not and the remaining 15% were not sure.

That is why I left the Democratic Party, they are hypocrites. And I do question the patriotism of that 49%.

A good friend of mine is one of that rare breed, a dyed-in-the-wool Republican who works in show business (though he’s not an actor, or an established writer, like Roger). He surprised me over the summer by declaring outright that he hoped for a Democrat congress because gridlock was preferable to the current state of affairs. He’s a small-government, somewhat libertarian conservative, and he was ticked off about government bloat. I was surprised that he considered that a more important issue than the war (and I tend to agree that the war *should* be the more important issue), but there it is.