If that were true, no one would watch Fox News. Yet, there are supposedly reasonable folk who do get their spoon-fed pablum from those racist dolts every single day.
When you strip away all the pretenses, facades, posturing, weasel language and really get down to the brass tacks of the matter... he's a Black Democrat. And that scares some people still.
.
Some people want to blame him for many things that aren't his fault:
• The above mentioned "surrender."
• The poor economy that was actually handed to him by the previous administration... that really was the fault of Clinton and the deregulation that he signed off on.
• A crippled space program that in all honesty, can trace it's lack of support all the way back to Reagan.
.
Could he have done better? Abso-fucking-lutely. He could also have had better support from Congress, who instead seemed to be obsessed with nothing more than trying to set him up to fail.
^truth what I didnt like about him is that he basically wanted to give free government support to people who wouldn't get off their asses and get a job which I don't agree with. I'm a conservative republican and a lot of my Texas friends blindly hate the man because he's a liberal I don't hate him I think we could do better.
I'm sure you've heard this story but I think it's important to point out not everyone supported by the government are "people who wouldn't get off their asses and get a job." My mom was on a form of welfare-after her husband became a drunk and left her a single mother with four children and an adopted and foster child (they were very pro "help people."Now we're off and we have a house, etc. But nevertheless that wouldn't have been possible without the help...it serves its purpose
Thank you for sharing and I'm sorry for that situation. I am aware of situations and perfectly OK with it. I'm just not OK with our government spoon feeding people who don't need it.
texasranger: "he basically wanted to give free government support to people who wouldn't get off their asses and get a job".
Not only is this untrue, you're ALWAYS going to have people who abuse the system. Also, if you have a problem with the govt spoon-feeding people who don't need it, remember, corporations are people now. ;)
If you do not want to be lumped with that extremist crowd, stand up and do something about it. It's better to be on the side of the Democrats than to let some teabagging sociopaths decide what you stand for. I don't blame you for the opinions of your extremist fellows; however, I *do* blame you if you don't address them and put those opinions in their proper perspective.
I can't disagree, but I would counter with: it's better to be an independent, rather than subscribing to a political ideology and allowing their group think to make your decisions for you, suggesting or even outright stating what to think about a particular topic.
.
I'm an independent and staunchly so. So much in fact, that it is generally difficult to "get along" politically with strict adherents to either party. Mainly because in recent races, I don't see it as who or which party can best represent my and my communities interests, it's who is going to shit on/allow to shit on the Constitution less.
You are certainly entitled to be an independent, Smitty, but in practical (and historical) terms, all you do is splinter the vote. The way I see it, you choose the party that is more likely to support those beliefs you hold dearest, and work within the system to add those personal beliefs to the platform. It does an Independent no good whatsoever if the party that wins seeks to utterly dismantle everything you believe in.
And a last word on this: you don't *have* to be a strict adherent to party beliefs; such people are called 'moderates' or 'centrists'. Work within the system. That's called evolution.
And Texasranger, how do you expect anyone to be able to discuss anything with you with an opening remark like that? It brooks no room for either compromise or finding of common ground. If you are unwilling to try and find that, you are being unAmerican. Dissent, discussion and debate are the three ingredients that are forged into American beliefs.
You have nothing to be offended about, TR; there aren't a lot of extremist Democrats with anything approaching the foothold that the Republican's extremists have. And those guys are - simply put - anarchist seditionists. They want to dismantle the government and let the chips fall where they may. They - like a lot of terrorist organizations, fail to understand that the world exists outside their little bublle of belief. The moment you dismantle the tax code or restructure how the government does things, you give America's neighbors the opportunity to take advantage. You want to REALLY lose your American way of life, you should opt to side with them. America would cease to exist inside of 5 years.
Yeah, I doubt that the Democrats would be willing to entertain my ideas on the rights of gun ownership or the Republicans to even stop and listen when I talk about women's, minority or gay rights.
I am certainly a Democrat, and I am open to ideas of gun control, more efficient government and a controlled response to foreign investment. Anything that restrict sthe rights of others is not up for discussion.
And TR, I don't typically read my posts out loud, so I can't hear what I've read. But I do in fact understand and believe in them. After all, I wrote them.
Not saying which side I'm on, but I just want to put in that being President is one of the most stressful jobs out there because the country is in your hands. And there has not been a President that hasn't fucked up yet, no one is perfect.
Why would I do that, oh user with a single post "Scarletdoll"? She said something stupid, and she was properly chastised for it. It isn't as if I insulted her heritage or kicked her puppy.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. If you say something stupid, someone is free to call you on it. You cannot support free speech only when it supports your opinions and not dissent to those opinions.
He's caused more debt then any presedent we have had combined, he basically surrendered the war we were just in and he won't go take out a worse group that is a national threat to everyone. Yeah, he's the best!
Doesn't mean that there aren't people that do truly believe this.
.
Some people want to blame him for many things that aren't his fault:
• The above mentioned "surrender."
• The poor economy that was actually handed to him by the previous administration... that really was the fault of Clinton and the deregulation that he signed off on.
• A crippled space program that in all honesty, can trace it's lack of support all the way back to Reagan.
.
Could he have done better? Abso-fucking-lutely. He could also have had better support from Congress, who instead seemed to be obsessed with nothing more than trying to set him up to fail.
Not only is this untrue, you're ALWAYS going to have people who abuse the system. Also, if you have a problem with the govt spoon-feeding people who don't need it, remember, corporations are people now. ;)
.
I'm an independent and staunchly so. So much in fact, that it is generally difficult to "get along" politically with strict adherents to either party. Mainly because in recent races, I don't see it as who or which party can best represent my and my communities interests, it's who is going to shit on/allow to shit on the Constitution less.
And a last word on this: you don't *have* to be a strict adherent to party beliefs; such people are called 'moderates' or 'centrists'. Work within the system. That's called evolution.
And TR, I don't typically read my posts out loud, so I can't hear what I've read. But I do in fact understand and believe in them. After all, I wrote them.
Almost as bad as the failure to autocorrect.
*not participating because not American*
*sips Coke*