twa Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Slightly off topic, but it's another talking point that I think is knowingly dishonest:What have the Dems done? In the Senate, the Dems enjoy a 51-49 seat lead, but that isn't the whole story. There are some rather conservative Democratic Senators who are Republicans in Dem's clothing. The official #51 Senator is Joe Liebermann who is staunchly, avidly, and proudly behind McCain and many "republican" positions. So, even if he caucases with the Dems, his vote is uncertain. (That's actually as it should be. I wish more politicians would vote their conscience like Joe and not be slaves to their party) So, you have a razor, microscopic thin majority with several frequent defectors and you expect them to make major wholesale changes against a fillibustering Repub group and a President who after 6 years figured out how to spell the word VETO? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wouldn't that same theory apply to the R controlled Congress of the past? Where do you think RINO came from? :laugh: Dems ARE electing more conservative leaning congressmen(which is a good thing) and reaping the same result as the Reps did with RINO's. Perhaps one day the middle and conservatives can get together and accomplish something...again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Health Care. I don't know if a national plan will ever pass but for the first time in a long time a candidate serious about looking at the current system and seeing the failure will sit in the white house. Someone interested in allowing foriegn drug competition and interested in access over profit. Again a BIG CHANGE. This is from McCain's website: John McCain believes we can and must provide access to health care for every American. He has proposed a comprehensive vision for achieving that. For too long, our nation's leaders have talked about reforming health care. Now is the time to act. John McCain will look to bring greater competition to our drug markets through safe re-importation of drugs and faster introduction of generic drugs. http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 The reason that Obama's campaign theme is change has nothing to do with specific issues like health care or Iraq. It's not about changing policies; it's about changing Washington. Look at Obama's past. Do you think it is in line with what he said there? You don't even need to do that. Just look at what he's done in the past 2 days and tell me if you think he's all about transparency and ethics in government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Wouldn't that same theory apply to the R controlled Congress of the past?Where do you think RINO came from? :laugh: Dems ARE electing more conservative leaning congressmen(which is a good thing) and reaping the same result as the Reps did with RINO's. Can't be a good thing if the country is not in the shape we want it to be and everyone agrees there needs to be change. Republicans seem to be more homogenous (Congressional ones anyway. Democrats are a more fractious and diverse lot at least recently) That's why Republicans have ruled the roost for most of the last 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 He will CHANGE our diplomacy and the way we deal with the international community. Say good bye to cowboy diplomacy. No more Bolton failures at the UN and the end of the Bush doctrine. This is a BIG CHANGE.Health Care. I don't know if a national plan will ever pass but for the first time in a long time a candidate serious about looking at the current system and seeing the failure will sit in the white house. Someone interested in allowing foriegn drug competition and interested in access over profit. Again a BIG CHANGE. No more endless time table in Iraq. It's time to look for a political solution and an exit strategy. Bush failed completely in the planning and was too heavily invested to pull a Reagan and get the hell out of there. McCain has already said he stands for more of the same - Obama doesn't. This is a CHANGE in our Iraq policy. Those are three huge things, my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Can't be a good thing if the country is not in the shape we want it to be and everyone agrees there needs to be change.Republicans seem to be more homogenous (Congressional ones anyway. Democrats are a more fractious and diverse lot at least recently) That's why Republicans have ruled the roost for most of the last 20 years. Dems diverse? They seem to have no problem voting in lockstep on some issues. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/06/020696.php Congressman Roy Blunt put together these data to highlight the differences between House Republicans and House Democrats on energy policy: ANWR Exploration House Republicans: 91% Supported House Democrats: 86% Opposed Coal-to-Liquid House Republicans: 97% Supported House Democrats: 78% Opposed Oil Shale Exploration House Republicans: 90% Supported House Democrats: 86% Opposed Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration House Republicans: 81% Supported House Democrats: 83% Opposed Refinery Increased Capacity House Republicans: 97% Supported House Democrats: 96% Opposed SUMMARY 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Thanks for agreeing. In every example you put forth, Dems are less in lockstep than Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Thanks for agreeing. In every example you put forth, Dems are less in lockstep than Republicans. You're welcome,it also proves some have more sense than others by voting across party lines for a good idea. (and of course the effectiveness of a good Hammer ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Is it a hammer or just a really potent Whip? Actually, your example showed very few Republicans ever crossing party lines. Mind you, given the percentages, both parties are pretty guilty of group-think (as we knew) The problem is that both parties mis-learned their sensai's message. While others were saying, think outside the box... Congressmen had this weird zen look and kept repeating... "Be the Box. Be the box." I'm so over gas and oil. We should all be living in solar powered houses and driving cars run by Mr. Fusion powered garbage. McCain, especially because he's from Arizona, should be all about the sun. California, Nevada, and Arizona would be great "Sun/solar states" And don't give me... it's impossible, because if we figured out how to have better communicators than Captain Kirk's three hundred years before Kirk ever called to Enterprise, then we just ain't trying when it comes to solar and other alternatives. :grumpy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 SUMMARY 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas. Moreover, to the Hog's point. If 91% of the Republicans are marching conisitantly to the same beat of the hammer, than McCain's Presidency will be 91% similar to Bush... which is frighteningly like a third Bush term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Moreover, to the Hog's point. If 91% of the Republicans are marching conisitantly to the same beat of the hammer, than McCain's Presidency will be 91% similar to Bush... which is frighteningly like a third Bush term. Does that mean you are voting McCain since he voted out of lockstep with the party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Does that mean you are voting McCain since he voted out of lockstep with the party? Gosh, as the local Bush Booster that must mean you are voting anti-McCain then. No matter what we do TWA, we neutralize eachother :mad: If we are being honest, I haven't made my mind up yet. Neither candidate has convinced me yet. Though I hate neither... which is a welcome relief from recent elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Gosh, as the local Bush Booster that must mean you are voting anti-McCain then. No matter what we do TWA, we neutralize eachother :mad:If we are being honest, I haven't made my mind up yet. Neither candidate has convinced me yet. Though I hate neither... which is a welcome relief from recent elections. I do not support McCain,never have. I haven't decided either,but any choice I make will be settling or voting against instead of for...but they are both are better than Kerry or Gore....maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 and whenever there's talk of taxing the rich bush says all the upstart companies would get caught in that and go under.rich get richer poor get poorer that's one of the most prominent things I've noticed under bush. It is not teh governments job to make you rich its your job to do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Not only can it be addictive, but there appears to be a genetic component to the addiction:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18519829?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum Genes such as ELTD1 on chromosome 1, in addition to genes on chromosomes 4 (eg, GABRA2) and 6 (eg, CNR1), may be associated with the genetic risk for cannabis use disorders. We introduce a novel quantitative phenotype, a cannabis problems factor score composed of DSM-IV abuse and dependence criteria, that may be useful for future linkage and association studies. this is why i like peer reviewed articles. granted that was only the abstract but they determined chromosomes that have the potential for being linked to cannibis in addition to other disorders as well. interesting, but not what you're arguing, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 i love reading your posts. Thanks. I'm a fan of your sig! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.