|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#201
|
|||
|
|||
We Have a President That Rides A Bike Now!
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" wrote in message .. . "still me" wrote: On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 08:52:55 -0400, RonSonic wrote: The Democrats can continue to run against Bush, and probably will, but inasmuch as he won't be the other name on the ballot it'll be largely wasted. Most of that candidates on the Rep side endorse most of his positions. So, running against him will work as a strategy. I actually consider Hillary to be a significant and substantial candidate - a bit short in the personal charm department maybe but a far more serious person than the last two stuffed senatorial shirts they trotted out. Unfortunately for her she will likely come out of this insanely long primary having adopted enough leftish coloration to leave her unelectable by the general public. She brings all of Bill's baggage with her. His positives only help with the core audience. She might gain some women's votes but she loses those who would never vote for a women. I think she's a loser. Southerner would help, anybody from the Midwest wouldn't hurt, and I mean the real midwest where they still have some factories and railyards and cows, not Chicago. They need a real Southerner. I don't think Hillary qualifies. They don't seem to understand that the South has finally gotten over it's Lincoln era "we're not Republicans" bias and now votes Republican. They keep getting alliances with union officials and think that's the same as having the union vote and it isn't the same thing at all. Even now there aren't enough government workers for that to succeed. Over the decades the Republican party has evolved into a creature that feeds on New England liberals. Or looking at it the other way - the Dem's haven't yet figured out that a Northern Liberal is not going to win. Advantage Republicans.... On the other hand, maybe many of the blue collar evangelicals have started to figure out that not only are they screwing themselves economically by voting Republican, but the Republicans have only paid lip services to their social agenda. They may just decide to stay home at election time. The Republicans have to deal with the fact that they have dominated national politics for a quarter century, had most of the economic agenda implemented, yet only those who were rich before hand are doing better. Even though the corporate media is dominated by pundits that bleat the regressive economic case, people will still look at their own lives and see that things are not going right for them. Well, I have not had to step over any dead bodies lying in the streets lately, so that is a good sign. I wonder why it is that all the rest of the world wants to come to America if the working poor are so god damn poor! The US (and to lesser but still significant extent, Europe) has used its military and economic power to increase poverty in countries primarily inhabited by darker skinned people. Do you notice many Western Europeans wanting to come to the US, besides the odd laissez-faire capitalist? Despite a lower per capita GNP, the lower and middle classes are much better off. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition" -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Ads |
#202
|
|||
|
|||
We Have a President That Rides A Bike Now!
still me? wrote:
... I'd tell you about your third problem but the second one is already preventing you from recognizing the first, so there's little point to continuing. butbutbut, the rest of us are curious! -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition" -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#203
|
|||
|
|||
We Have a President That Rides A Bike Now!
still me wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:33:23 -0700, "Bill Sornson" wrote: You really come across as a social class bigot. Just ask yourself how well "your way" is working in places like New Orleans. Dependency ain't cutting it; time to try empowerment based on personal responsibility coupled with opportunity. Only one problem with that: Dems will not keep getting elected if this occurs. Get a clue. I have a clue. Your first problem is that you assume anyone who opposes that a-hole of a President and his crony neo-con fascists who are selling us down a river is a Democrat. Your second problem is that you are the definition of the brainwashed masses that the neo's are pulling along like lemmings. I'd tell you about your third problem but the second one is already preventing you from recognizing the first, so there's little point to continuing. Nonsequitur much? LOL Bill "oh, and Flogger wants to know who you really are" S. |
#204
|
|||
|
|||
We Have a President That Rides A Bike Now!
"still me" wrote in message ... On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:52:40 -0500, "Keats" wrote: "Avoiding long-term poverty is not rocket science. First, graduate from high school. Second, get married before you have children, and stay married. Third, work at any kind of job, even one that starts out paying the minimum wage. And, finally, avoid engaging in criminal behavior. If you graduate from high school today with a B or C average, in most places in our country there's a low-cost or financially assisted post-high-school education program available to increase your skills. Statistically this is true. Obviously avoiding poverty are choices best made early in life. Obviously, you can't let yourself be sucked into victimhood by those whose self interest it is to have you in poverty so they can be your poverty pimp, or have you in their voter constituency, or just feel good about themselves such as some social workers and other non- helpful do-gooders. The choices to not be poor come easy and natural for most people brought up in a non-poverty family, but if you are born into poverty you will most likely need outside influence to get you off the poverty track in as much as there are powerful forces working from within to keep you in place. Nice theory, but it doesn't wash. I'm no fan of endless, wasteful social programs, but the very people promoting the financial assistance programs you cite are the Democrats - who you accuse of having some farfetched conspiracy to keep people in poverty. Logic just defeated you. Can you point me to any congressional democrat promoting the Bush administration's Department of Education? Most of them seem to be like you - never uttering a positive word. As Walter Williams said avoiding long-term poverty is not rocket science. Graduate from high school. Get married before you have children and stay married. Get a job and increase your skills. Don't be a criminal. Nothing too complicated there, eh? Find me a democrat saying these things and I'll show you a extraordinarily good democrat. But unfortunately this language isn't part of their talking points or of your own thoughts and speech. Keats |
#205
|
|||
|
|||
We Have a President That Rides A Bike Now!
"still me" wrote in message ... On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:51:41 -0500, "Keats" wrote: Can you point me to any congressional democrat promoting the Bush administration's Department of Education? Most of them seem to be like you - never uttering a positive word. Don't assume people are Democrats just because they can objectively recognize that Bush is a neo fascist, neo con moron puppet without a clue who has caused great harm to the USA that will take decades to repair. I haven't seen any talk from either party about education. Bush has his "no child left behind" but I haven't seem anyone except him hyping that. In addition, the only hype I've seen out of that is the ill-designed concept of standardized testing. That just leads to standardized education and teaching to the test. The fact that some urban school systems are failing should not be used to penalize and handicap suburban school systems that work - but that's the effect of standardized testing. Why do I have the strong feeling that you belong to a teachers union? As Walter Williams said avoiding long-term poverty is not rocket science. Graduate from high school. Get married before you have children and stay married. Get a job and increase your skills. Don't be a criminal. Nothing too complicated there, eh? Find me a democrat saying these things and I'll show you a extraordinarily good democrat. But unfortunately this language isn't part of their talking points or of your own thoughts and speech. You left out the part about "take a job, any job, at minimum wage" (paraphrased) from your earlier post. That is a prescription for life long poverty. I didn't know that a kid taking a minimum wage job also got a prescription for life long poverty, but that could certainly explain why democrats and other liberals are so determined to perpetuate the minimum wage system. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Great Don Quijote of RBM! | donquijote1954 | General | 256 | August 18th 07 08:20 AM |
Don Quijote expounds ... | LotteBum[_60_] | Australia | 0 | August 1st 07 12:39 AM |
Great stuff looking for a great home... | Jessica Cann | Marketplace | 0 | March 11th 04 07:46 PM |
Chilly Hilly - Great ride and great weather | cheg | General | 5 | March 1st 04 07:02 PM |