If it wasn’t for those trusted Republicans we might have pedophiles running around the internet!
Late,
grmpysmrf
open mic night for misguided liberals
that’s it?? a half witty retort? no reason/excuse/misunderstanding that wasn’t reported?? or you don’t have one yet cause rush/O’reilly hasn’t told you what to think yet???
open your eyes new born calf! If it wasn’t for liberals we wouldn’t have the freedoms we have.
Late,
grmpysmrf
Hitler was a liberal!!
Er… yeah.
–SKot
I don’t consider myself republican nor do i consider myself a liberal. i vote for what benefits me. So should everyone. Otherwise you will find youself in a shit hole that a political party has dug for you.
either or… re: Brian J. Doyle… what’s so goddamn entertaining is the irony behind it all. just like that preacher’s wife that killed her husband, and even better, that psycho Cynthia McKinney. that’s entertainment. McKinney’s father (a few years ago) made a public statemtent when his daughter lost her first election and said the reason was “the jews”, additionally he pulled a knife - yes he pulled a knife in a Atlanta court hearing on someone. i hope all of the above burn.
I’m right there with you. I HAVE to find it amusing that our “political” discourse has come to this, or I’ll just weep. I am, however, comforted that our current administration seems to be imploding in upon itself. And it only took six years…maybe I’ll go weep, after all.
I don’t consider myself republican nor do i consider myself a liberal. i vote for what benefits me. So should everyone. Otherwise you will find youself in a shit hole that a political party has dug for you.
either or… re: Brian J. Doyle… what’s so goddamn entertaining is the irony behind it all. just like that preacher’s wife that killed her husband, and even better, that psycho Cynthia McKinney. that’s entertainment…
yeah Mckinney is a joke!!! at least as far as what’s been reported and the way she had conducted herself on Solidad Obrien… She is completely in the wrong! Although, I have to say in the scheme of things, it’s a pretty good sacrifice. Gladly trade a nobody senator for Delay’s resignation.
What’s really funny about McKinney’s statement is she’s yelling RACISM, Yet she’s upset that racism did not work for her. “He should know me because I’m BLACK!” like racism is ok if it works in her favor! What a jerk!
Anyway, The Doyle situation sounds like a really bad SNL skit, only it’s real, which brings an element of humor that could never be captured in a comedy skit! The fact that he’s Homeland Security isn’t even the punchline!!! The fact that he got busted the same day Justin Berry spoke before congress about sexual predators is just classic comedy! Damn who writes this shit??..oh yeah, right!
I’ve noticed Void brain I mean head hasn’t replied yet. I suppose he won’t until his favorite pundit tells him what to “think”. I imagine his defense will be some where along the lines of: “I was trying to help that poor girl…” “I, too, was molested and I was acting out…” or possibly, “…I’m sick, I’ve got mental problems and I didn’t know what I was doing! I need help! Somebody help me! I’ll take you all to the Betty Ford clinic with me!”
Skottty! tell me that was a joke about Hitler! that was what the “er Yeah” part was, right?
Hitler has more in common with modern day conservatives than liberals. In fact he has nothing in common with liberals.
He hated gay people… CHECK
Hated Folks of Color… CHECK
Had No tolerance for people with differing opinions than his… CHECK
Exploited the poor… CHECK
“Proved” his cause though Patriotism… CHECK
Secured the homeland…CHECK!!
Squashed civil liberties… CHECK
Declared war on sovereign nations… CHECK
Do I need to go on?
Late,
grmpysmrf
More On Doyle! I just found out He’s Christian. So I suppose it’s ok now, 'cause Christians never do anything wrong, they’re all for FAMILY VALUES! My Bad for posting before I had all of the facts! Does Family values include Fucking 14 year old Boys and Girls?? Damn who knew!? I guess I see why Liberals don’t have “Family Values”
Late,
grmpysmrf
Does Family values include Fucking 14 year old Boys and Girls??
Only if you were raised Catholic like me. Otherwise it’s kind of frowned upon.
I don’t consider myself republican nor do i consider myself a liberal. i vote for what benefits me. So should everyone.
Actually, if you vote for what benefits you instead of what benefits all, that very much makes you a Republican.
and even better, that psycho Cynthia McKinney.
Sure, McKinney is batshit crazy…but it’s not like she shot someone in the face and got away with it.
[reply]I don’t consider myself republican nor do i consider myself a liberal. i vote for what benefits me. So should everyone.
Actually, if you vote for what benefits you instead of what benefits all, that very much makes you a Republican.
and even better, that psycho Cynthia McKinney.
Sure, McKinney is batshit crazy…but it’s not like she shot someone in the face and got away with it.[/reply]
re: republican
brilliant response - my kudos to you. (no sarcasum)
[reply][reply]I don’t consider myself republican nor do i consider myself a liberal. i vote for what benefits me. So should everyone.
Actually, if you vote for what benefits you instead of what benefits all, that very much makes you a Republican.
and even better, that psycho Cynthia McKinney.
Sure, McKinney is batshit crazy…but it’s not like she shot someone in the face and got away with it.[/reply]
re: republican
brilliant response - my kudos to you. (no sarcasum)[/reply]
I was thinking the same thing!
late,
grmpysmrf
grmpysmrf - regarding Hitler:
Hitler was a vegetarian, too! [;)]
–SKot
re: republican, brilliant response - my kudos to you. (no sarcasm)
Thanks. But it’s true. It’s one of the things that very clearly defines somebody on the Left from somebody on the Right. I know that the lines have blurred since the creation of either the Democratic or Republican Parties but some ideals remain. For instance…a Democrat, by definition, believes that an elected official should vote according to the will of their constituents even if they, the official, disagrees. A Republican, on the other hand, believes that once their official has been elected, that official should vote with little or no regard to their constituents. In other words, Democrats feel that their elected officials should be held accountable, and Republicans…don’t.
Yeah, it’s rare to run into an existential Republican. But it’s not rare to run into a greedy one.
A Republican, on the other hand, believes that once their official has been elected, that official should vote with little or no regard to their constituents…
which would explain their mantra “we don’t listen to polls” what clearer way can the republicans say “We don’t give a crap about what the voting populace thinks!” How else can one gauge the mood of the country??? what crakcs me up are these republicans that run around saying Hooray to the president “he doesn’t listen to polls= He doesn’t care if I agree with him or not!” yeah that’s the leader I want in a DEMOCRACY!
Late,
grmpysmrf
If politicians did nothing but act on polls, why would you bother to vote for anybody? If you’re voting for people not to think, what’s the difference between one or the other? When polls determine legislation, everything comes down to the media and how they sway the general public. The media simply should not have that much power - this has been the biggest problem with politics since the Kennedy/Nixon debates.
We elect officials to make informed decisions that they believe would benefit the country. The polls are supposed to be used as a guide for what certain factions believe ought to be happening. If a politician wants to be re-elected, he will have an eye on the polls - but he should be using that to determine how state of the union addresses ought to be conducted, not how to make every decision.
The reason politicians usually suck so bad is they only care about re-election - which is why so many problems go “unfixed” for so long: illegal immigration, drugs, etc. No one wants to piss off the wrong people and lose an election, even though 99% of the time the general population doesn’t know shit about the issues.
If politicians did nothing but act on polls, why would you bother to vote for anybody?
So that we can be represented. Polling should not be confused with voting.
If you’re voting for people not to think, what’s the difference between one or the other?
The difference is, one official might do a good job of attending to the needs and promoting the desires of their constituents, and one might not. It’s not a matter of thinking, or not thinking.
We elect officials to make informed decisions that they believe would benefit the country.
The average elected official is no better informed than their constituents. Besides, the official is there to serve their constituents, not rule them. What you describe sounds more like totalitarianism than democracy. I hope I haven’t offended you.
If politicians did nothing but act on polls, why would you bother to vote for anybody?
Nobody is suggesting voting off of polls. they should use them as a guide as you suggest later in your post. I wholey agree with that.
If you’re voting for people not to think, what’s the difference between one or the other? .
I’m voting for people to represent my best interests as well as the majority of the people around me. That has nothing to do with them not thinking.
When polls determine legislation, everything comes down to the media and how they sway the general public…
Nobody is saying polls should cdetermine legistlation but they shouldn’t be ignored completely either as the W administration has done.
The media simply should not have that much power - this has been the biggest problem with politics since the Kennedy/Nixon debates…
what do you suggest? The media has always been the way people gather their information. That was the whole reason behind “freedom of the press” the problem now is the press is in a limited number of hands, where, as before the press was very spread out. This is why television media does not like bloggers. The bloggers have returned the press back to the hands of the many. It’s harder for the few to kill/supress stories that don’t benefit their advertisers or their causes. Corporations want to BE big brother Not have a big brother.
We elect officials to make informed decisions that they believe would benefit the country. The polls are supposed to be used as a guide for what certain factions believe ought to be happening.
I whole heartedly agree but to ignore the polls completely is being uninformed as to the needs/wants of the country. which leads us to what wempathy said, totalitarianism.
If a politician wants to be re-elected, he will have an eye on the polls - but he should be using that to determine how state of the union addresses ought to be conducted, not how to make every decision.
again, nobody is saying every decision but the politicians should be informed. and not just for relecetion stuff. that’s why they are there TO represent me! not make my decisions for me but to act on my behalf. thus the whole REPRESENTITIVE style government. they represent me they don’t tell me what to do.
The reason politicians usually suck so bad is they only care about re-election - which is why so many problems go “unfixed” for so long: illegal immigration, drugs, etc.
How would they know what needs to be fixed unless they are paying attetnion to some polls?
No one wants to piss off the wrong people and lose an election, even though 99% of the time the general population doesn’t know shit about the issues.
So what makes the politician so much more informed? just a rhetorical question.
Late,
grmpysmrf
“I’m voting for people to represent my best interests as well as the majority of the people around me. That has nothing to do with them not thinking.”
See, I think it does, depending on how well they listen to the polls. I think anyone can read a poll and then vote on a bill accordingly. These are called puppet governments. The serve a special group - that’s what it ends up as because polls are all over the place. They are simply too unreliable to go on. But we both agree they should be used as a guide.
“what do you suggest? The media has always been the way people gather their information. That was the whole reason behind “freedom of the press” the problem now is the press is in a limited number of hands, where, as before the press was very spread out. This is why television media does not like bloggers. The bloggers have returned the press back to the hands of the many. It’s harder for the few to kill/supress stories that don’t benefit their advertisers or their causes. Corporations want to BE big brother Not have a big brother.”
Woodward and Burnstein turned everybody with access to a typewriter into a conspiracy theorist and an overachieving journalist. Believe me, bloggers did not invent free press - it’s been going on for a long time. But it doesn’t matter because the bloggers and everything before that has become just as partisan and the crookedest politician. I’ve nearly seen a piece of underground news that wasn’t radically right wing or radically left wing. That’s fine, but it doesn’t serve the interest of the majority of the people any better than a politicians doing what he thinks is right.
And to be honest, I don’t guess I have a suggestion about the press. I think we need the freedom of the press, but I think when the press gets so much power the government has to cater to it, now the potential for corruption in the press is just too great. You’re headed for trouble. My stance is I believe very little of what I read - yes, that makes it difficult to always form opinions, but I think opinions are a little too rampant these days anyway.
“…to be completely is being uninformed as to the needs/wants of the country. which leads us to what wempathy said, totalitarianism.”
I can agree with that. And I don’t think I said that politicians should be uninformed, I just don’t think they should change strategies every time somebody in the press writes a convincing article. You just can’t run a government that way.
“that’s why they are there TO represent me! not make my decisions for me but to act on my behalf. thus the whole REPRESENTITIVE style government. they represent me they don’t tell me what to do.”
There’s a fine line there. I hear what you’re saying, but it’s kind of like getting input from co-workers, but ultimately the boss needs to make the decision.
“How would they know what needs to be fixed unless they are paying attetnion to some polls?”
Yeah, I agree. My point is kind of along your lines I think - you want them to listen to polls as do I. I just think bashing an administration because of a perception that they aren’t listening to the polls is naive. We don’t know what they’re ignoring and what they just determined that certain opinions are from an unreliable source, or even just plain wrong. It’s a tricky issue. Maybe I’m just cynical about polls because I don’t believe they’re always honest in how they’re portrayed.
“So what makes the politician so much more informed? just a rhetorical question.”
I’m going to answer your rhetorical question anyway. I think there are matters of course that the American people don’t know about - that maybe for security reasons we can’t know about. We are at war - and when a country is at war, you can’t be open with your population about every move you make or every plan. It wouldn’t be a rational thing to do. I’m not saying these people are perfect, far from it. And I’m certainly no Bush supporter, but to say we know the same stuff they do is ridiculous. We don’t. It’s not our job to know as much as they do about every angle and every person’s opinion that deals with an issue. Have you ever run a company? Have you ever run a company with as many employees as we have people in this country? Again, I’m not defending Bush, but it’s really easy to sit behind a computer and say how a country like America ought to be run. We have a pretty nice luxury to do that. But let’s face it, I doubt anybody on a Ministry web board, myself happily included, wants to try.
Fun stuff though.
I currently represent the 26th division of the metro-county government in my city, and I turned twenty six yesterday. I’m about nine years off from being eligible for running for president, and I never will. But I certainly know what would be successful and what wouldn’t, and it all comes down to two things - honesty and diplomacy. This administration has neither. You can sweet talk the rest of the world while spouting lies (i.e. Reagan), or you can piss off the rest of the world by acting like a child (i.e. Bush Jr.). But why do either? It’s perfectly possible to be honest about everything you do (with the exception of military tactics and such), while at the same time trying to get along with everyone else. That’s how I’d run things if I could - reach out a hand to ALL the worlds’ citizens without turning my back on my own people. And I’m really curious about what an honest administration would be like - whether it’s about what I do with my pants off to why I had to give my buddies all of the middle class’ money, I would tell the truth. Horrifying concept, I know, but it’s worked for me here, and it earned me respect from constituents twice my age that didn’t think I knew shit about shit.