Republican or Democrat

[bonus12]

I hope 10 of the independants vote democrap, too. Still leaves them 2 short of a tie. :biglaugh:

the poll changed. no matter, i think the democrats will win this time around. last poll i heard had the democrats with a 44 to 33 point lead nationally. Yes, that is double digits! looks good for the dems, which means it looks good for people's rights!

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

Indeed... The people's right to higher taxes, uber-political correctness, self contradiction, and needless legislation. :stickpoke

Sorry. I couldn't help myself. Really, it's all in fun :icon_bigg

 

[bonus12]

Indeed... The people's right to higher taxes, uber-political correctness, self contradiction, and needless legislation. :stickpoke

Sorry. I couldn't help myself. Really, it's all in fun :icon_bigg

repubs have been singing the same song about dems raising taxes for countless years. blah blah blah. well, have you ever thought that bush needlessly raises poverty, fear of terrorism, etc? :icon_conf

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

I will be the first to admit that my biggest disappointment in Bush has been spending, but 'raises poverty'? I need to see some real (not left-wing propaganda) data to support this, and feelings don't count. Fact is, dems have proven themselves as taxers/spenders for a couple of generations or more.

As for 'fear of terrorism', we have seen plenty of reason to fear domestically and abroad since the 80's. It just amazes me that America as a whole had the balls to react properly to Pearl Harbor just a half century ago by declaring war, but if it happened today we would all be split on whether there was any reason to really fear Japan and what we did to anger them and how we deserved it.

EDIT: Here is a graph of Poverty Rates from the US Census Bureau, and yes the past 6 years are most certainly within the natural variation of the population, but I'm looking for a table of the actual numbers to prove that: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty05/pov05fig05.pdf
Data, not emotion. It's the Republican way.

 

[bonus12]

I will be the first to admit that my biggest disappointment in Bush has been spending, but 'raises poverty'? I need to see some real (not left-wing propaganda) data to support this, and feelings don't count. Fact is, dems have proven themselves as taxers/spenders for a couple of generations or more.

As for 'fear of terrorism', we have seen plenty of reason to fear domestically and abroad since the 80's. It just amazes me that America as a whole had the balls to react properly to Pearl Harbor just a half century ago by declaring war, but if it happened today we would all be split on whether there was any reason to really fear Japan and what we did to anger them and how we deserved it.

pearl harbor was an attack led by the country whereas 9/11 was an attack led by few, who were only representing their own feelings. that's why the war in iraq is so controversial.

bush has widened the financial gap. according to non-partisan Economic Policy Institute, EPI: Between 2001 and 2004, the average wealth of the top 1% grew by about $1.25 million, and that group of people hold an average of $3.3 million in stocks. By 2004, the top 1% of households owned 190 times what the typical, middle-income household owns.

By contrast, the bottom 90% controlled a mere 19% of all financial assets. Nearly 1/3 of US households own $10,000 or less in wealth, with slightly more than half of that group in the red. In fact the average wealth of the bottom 20% shrank between 2001 and 2004 by almost $3,000 to -$11.400.

source: http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/4007/1/43

it's nice to have a solid discussion like this without any tantrums...

 

[Wills7MGTE]

I put independent, I don't vote party because I think for myself and could really care less about either, being niave is believing anyone in any office cares about you. I vote so that I can't be accused of not trying and because I do respect the armed forces as I lived on bases a lot of my life and my family has been involved for generations, I'm not wasting a right that so many have died for.

 

[chriso]

Republican and here's why !!!

 

[killarb634]

Poverty has raised since Bush has been in office. The biggest difference since he has been in office is the almost disappearance of the "middle class." Is this occurence the fault of George Bush? I wont answer because I am opposed to all the right wing bullshit that happens in this country. Since Bush has been in "POWER" the average wage has increased all across the United States. However the purchasing power of that dollar in the united states has declined due to inflation and a lack of wage increases to move directly with inflation. Bush and his right wing party could have done alot of different in this country and should have. The war aside (obvious and countless fuck ups) Bush should have tried to pass some type of Lobby Reform bill, which would have been shot down because most of congress has their hands in the pocket of the lobbyists. Blah Blah Blah i'm done don't want to ramble on and on about my views. Just posted this poll to see the outline of the site.

 

[bonus12]

Republican and here's why !!!

u have luara bush on there? GROSS!!!

haha, good poster.


Good vs. Bad =
Dems: http://blog.travelpost.com/wp-content/beer_mug_3.gif

Repubs: http://www.clementpappas.com/products/images/prune.jpg

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

pearl harbor was an attack led by the country whereas 9/11 was an attack led by few, who were only representing their own feelings.

:aigo: :aigo: :aigo: OMG, that supports your postition??!!?!??!!! THAT is the very problem with the cancer of political correctness. Timothy McVey was only representing his feelings, and there were entire countries sponsoring the behaviors of the 'few' you refer to. Nope, no way. Americans 60 years ago would've gone balls out for those bastards.

Here's a link to a control chart I did of the poverty rate in the US:

Like I said, Bush has done an A-one job of keeping it low, and these are true statistics. Year to year percentages are meaningless if you don't look at the process as a whole. If you've never been exposed to Shewart Control Charts, then read up here to see the beauty of analyzing data this way:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_chart
http://www.qualitydigest.com/feb98/html/spctool.html

BTW, I appreciate a good discussion w/o name calling, too.

 

[killarb634]

:aigo: :aigo: :aigo:
Here's a link to a control chart I did of the poverty rate in the US:

Like I said, Bush has done an A-one job of keeping it low, and these are true statistics. Year to year percentages are meaningless if you don't look at the process as a whole.
BTW, I appreciate a good discussion w/o name calling, too.

Where did you get your data? Can i have a link? Thanks
Brian

 

[bonus12]

:aigo: :aigo: :aigo: OMG, that supports your postition??!!?!??!!! THAT is the very problem with the cancer of political correctness. Timothy McVey was only representing his feelings, and there were entire countries sponsoring the behaviors of the 'few' you refer to. Nope, no way. Americans 60 years ago would've gone balls out for those bastards.

Here's a link to a control chart I did of the poverty rate in the US:

Like I said, Bush has done an A-one job of keeping it low, and these are true statistics. Year to year percentages are meaningless if you don't look at the process as a whole. If you've never been exposed to Shewart Control Charts, then read up here to see the beauty of analyzing data this way:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_chart
http://www.qualitydigest.com/feb98/html/spctool.html

BTW, I appreciate a good discussion w/o name calling, too.

60 years ago was a looong time ago, and things were waaay different then. regardless, we have killed over 700,000 innocent citizens in the iraq war for what a few people have done. it's not like the people of iraq voted for the terrorists to attack america.

don't get me wrong, those terrorists should be punished, but america is going about it in the wrong way. like a lot of people, i think Bush is in Iraq for the oil and profit.

one way america could stop terrorism is to develop better foreign relations, but this doesnt appeal to bush b/c it is not nearly as profitible.

 

[91T breezen']

Poverty has raised since Bush has been in office. The biggest difference since he has been in office is the almost disappearance of the "middle class." Is this occurence the fault of George Bush? I wont answer because I am opposed to all the right wing bullshit that happens in this country. Since Bush has been in "POWER" the average wage has increased all across the United States. However the purchasing power of that dollar in the united states has declined due to inflation and a lack of wage increases to move directly with inflation. Bush and his right wing party could have done alot of different in this country and should have. The war aside (obvious and countless fuck ups) Bush should have tried to pass some type of Lobby Reform bill, which would have been shot down because most of congress has their hands in the pocket of the lobbyists. Blah Blah Blah i'm done don't want to ramble on and on about my views. Just posted this poll to see the outline of the site.

You are mistaken in the inflation numbers. They are down also. Unemployment is way down, stock market is booming, and my 'middle class' tax burden is lower than it ever was during the BJ Clinton years. I will admit that this administration has spent way too wildly, but the alternative to Republican control, is way worse!!!:aigo: :1zhelp:

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

Where did you get your data? Can i have a link? Thanks
Brian

From the US Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/hstpov2.html

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

60 years ago was a looong time ago, and things were waaay different then.

...and much less politically correct, more united, and stood on higher moral ground than today. It's something to strive to get back to, not ignore.

 

[killarb634]

I hate to say it. (dealing strictly with Iraq)

IRAQ WAS BETTER OFF WITH SADDAM IN POWER

The people of that country can not control one another and are in the middle of a civil war which the U.S. wants nothing to do with.

Quote me

Who killed more Iraqi's Saddam or the U.S.?

Inflation number are off. So your telling me Inflation is Down AND Unemployment is DOWN at the same time? Please elaborate. they are obviously inversely related. If unemployment is down then more jobs means more spending. With more spending equals more demand less supply. Higher demand and lower supply increase prices. This leads to Inflation.

 

[ma71supraturbo]

It just amazes me that America as a whole had the balls to react properly to Pearl Harbor just a half century ago by declaring war, but if it happened today we would all be split on whether there was any reason to really fear Japan and what we did to anger them and how we deserved it.

Not quite sure what is wrong with stopping to think "why is this (otherwise rational) country risking such large economic and human costs by waging war against us?" In the case of Pearl Harbor, we fucked the Japanese by cutting off their oil supply while they were at war with other countries (during a time in which we were supposedly neutral).

That doesn't mean we shouldn't wage a war of retaliation, but only a fool would eliminate all possible courses of action (diplomacy, even after an attack, being one of them).


In the case of the Osama -- if it was such a huge priority to get him, why did we divert a majority of our overseas combat efforts to Iraq? In the past few years, we've further angered Islamic extremists with our additional (and futile) meddling in the Middle East and -- what's worse -- we've encouraged future attacks (by displaying weakness in failing to get Osama and getting bogged down in Iraq)

 

[bonus12]

You are mistaken in the inflation numbers. They are down also. Unemployment is way down, stock market is booming, and my 'middle class' tax burden is lower than it ever was during the BJ Clinton years. I will admit that this administration has spent way too wildly, but the alternative to Republican control, is way worse!!!:aigo: :1zhelp:

as for the economy, how can you say it is booming when america is plunging farther into debt? did you know that if every living american dvided and payed the debt evenly, we would each owe around $30,000!!! :aigo:

so you vote for republican b/c you think the opposition is worse? that's no fun. i vote dems b/c i think they are better. just a different way of looking at it.

is anyone willing to provide some actual stats for inflation and employment numbers? i believe they are not in favor of Bush's administration.

 

[Adjuster]

I'm conservative in so many ways, but I'm also liberal in some others.

Therefore I'm not going to subscribe to any party, but more to the idea that I vote for lower taxes, less government and the right to drive more than 55mph anywhere I see fit.

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

Well, it's getting close to bed time, so I will tackle the last two posts from Killarb and ma71supraturbo. I don't have time to look up the actual number of people killed by Sadam, but I have to ask again to have you show me the data. It is well known that he killed a HUGE number of HIS OWN people, and would have continued to do so.

As for diplomacy, the terrorists have all made it clear that they have NO interest in it at all. They live under a solid belief that we must die as infidels, and make no bones about it. We have only played by their rules, and their own people have died because of it. That's the sad irony of the whole situation, and I hate it as much as you.