Re: The curse of the Terrierborg: corruption


Schizoid Man wrote:
> ScottW wrote:
>
> > Just look at the hypocrisy of the democratic party... while the hard
> > left of the party screams for immediate withdrawal, the obvious leading
> > presidential candidate, Hilary, supports more troops, not less. What
> > a mess of a party. And theres that idiot Reid trying to explain why
> > he voted to give the president authority for war... he only did it IF
> > there was proof of WMDs and IF there was a proven threat.. What an
> > idiot... IF thats what he thought he was voting on... he never should
> > have voted yes the moron. His argument amounts to a Kerry repeat of
> > he voted for it before he was against it. Idiot.
>
> I'll be succint. Regardless of all my anti-Republican tirades, I do not
> honestly believe that the Dems will be any better than the Republicans
> on 99% of the issues.

I agree. Then one must ask.. Why? and I can only conclude that
there is no difference
between the candidates as they are all funded and in a sense created by
the same special interest monies with the same agenda. Occasionally a
guy like Tancredo actually steps forward and tries to represent
something. My own rep, Issa, complained about Tancredo's support for
Gilchrist in Orange County. I sent him a e-mail telling him I thought
Tancredo deserved his support. He actually replied that Tancredo was
muddying the waters and going outside the approved ways of doing things
in Congress and making it difficult for representatives to get along,
basically explaining that he was mucking up the you pass my pork and
I'll pass yours way that Congress works. It was most disheartening and
my reply to his mail... bounced. Have to go back through the web
filter.
>
> If you really think about it, the last presidential election was not
> decided on 'hard' issues like military or economic policies. It was
> decided on 'soft' issues like abortion and evolution.

There was the "war on terror" filling the military aspect but the rest
of the important agenda that Americans should be interested in got
little attention, immigration, energy.
>
> I am appalled that so many members of the Republican party still
> consider Darwin to be a heretic, or The Origin of Species to be
> blasphemous. For me personally, there does lie the distinction between
> the Left and the Right.

it's a big "who gives a ***" distinction to me..... still interesting
that listening to my local left radio this morning they espoused an
extreme secular point of view denigrating all religions as forcing
their point of view on others while failing to note that supporting
secularism is also a point of view not universally held.

Frankly, I'd like a real national debate on immigration, population
growth, deficit spending (and its need for economic/population growth
to sustain). It's mind boggling to me that many non-minority
liberals who support open borders also support kyoto without realizing
that open borders fuels this nations growth and CO2 output. Of course
halting that suicidal trend would create decades of flat to
recessionary economies.... but I've decided its our only hope. Else
by 2100 the US will be billion people and facing the need for Chinese
style population growth measures. As it is we control our destiny
much as an ant colony, at the will of nature.

ScottW

.

Quantcast