Any more Democrats??

[Merlin1047]

You may think you have us beat but thats when libs are the most dangerous you can kill us and it will just piss us off. Then we'll get you, when you least expect it bwahahahahahaha

Hmmmm - you may have a point. They say that cockroaches can live for up to eight days without their heads. Apparently Democrats must share a similar trait. How else can you explain all those votes for kerry???

:teeth: :teeth: :teeth: :teeth:



har har har har har

Damn, I'm good. Humble, too.

 

[Merlin1047]

Well, since this thread has deteriorated anyway.

Check this out.

http://www.flowgo.com/funpages/view.cfm/5309

Stay near the top of the page and wait for the video to load. It comes up automatically. Make sure your sound is up.

This is funny as hell.

Trust me. I'd yank your chain on just about anything, but I take my humor seriously.

 

[Bonnie]

Well, since this thread has deteriorated anyway.

Check this out.

http://www.flowgo.com/funpages/view.cfm/5309

Stay near the top of the page and wait for the video to load. It comes up automatically. Make sure your sound is up.

This is funny as hell.

Trust me. I'd yank your chain on just about anything, but I take my humor seriously.

That was hysterical!!!!!!!!

 

[hylandrdet]

Yes, I'm a democrat and I'll be more than happy to explain two reasons why there aren't many of "us", as you see it, in this forum.

1. The bulk of the democratic vote comes from people who are struggling within the middle and lower classes. In laymen's terms, most democratic voters can't afford a computer, much less the internet and I hate them for that!

How dare they decide to choose to use their money for house payments, rent, food, daycare, healthcare, transportation, etc? Why spend money on all of those things instead of the internet?


2. Go back to the home page and read the disclaimer. The purpose of this forum is to promote discussions between liberals and conservatives, not Democrats and Republicans.

Liberalism and conservatism are apolitical philosophies; neither is really tied to any specific political group.

Webster's Dictionary defines a Liberal as:

"Characterized by generosity or lavishness in giving; abundant; ample; inclining towards opinions or policies that favor progress or reform, such as religion or politics.

Unless I'm due for a reading comprehension lesson, I don't see anything in the definintion of the word liberal that suggest that being a "liberal" is a bad thing.

Ex: Arnold Swarzenegger supports abortion and affirmative action. Remember, he may be a Republican, but he's married to a "Kennedy".

Webster's Dictionary defines a Conservative as:

"Opposed to change; desiring the preservation of the existing order of things; cautious; wanting to conserve"

Unless I'm due for a reading comprehension lesson here as well, I don't see anything in the definintion of the word conservative that suggest that being a "conservative" is a bad thing.

Ex: Can anybody give me the name of that democrat that'd spoken at the Republican National Convention

"And anyone who can't come to an appropriate blend of the two missed the point."

That blend is called a moderate- not excessive; tend toward the mean or average extent or quality; opposed to extreme political views

In layman's terms.. Moderates seek the middle ground. Moderates pursue compromise.

Although I am a democrat, I am a moderate democrat. Two examples:

Gun control- If can hit what you're aiming at, you're showing gun control. If you can put your gun away without your child getting a hold of it and killing himself or others, you're showing gun control. If you're a crimminal, you don't deserve a gun; how can you say that you are responsible enough to own a gun, when you'd proven to not be repsonsible enough to keep youself out of jail.

Abortion- Sure it's easy for me stop "my daughter" from having an abortion for birth control purposes; however, I'll personally drive her, should she have HIV and had been raped by bums, to an abortion clinic; for her child is doomed for a long and agonizing death if I don't. That would be my action as a man of responsibility and mercy.

Yes, you can find the middle ground if you become a moderate.

Yes, Virginia there are democrats in this forum; but we mainly consists of moderates and conservatives. I truly wish that the liberal democrats would show up to give the room some balance.

 

[nakedemperor]

I'm a liberal democrat, and today's my 20th birthd--- AAAHHHH ITS HAAAAPPENING!!!

I'm an old, rich white male who is afraid of change.

Nice to meet you!

 

[hylandrdet]

I'm a liberal democrat, and today's my 20th birthd--- AAAHHHH ITS HAAAAPPENING!!!

I'm an old, rich white male who is afraid of change.

Nice to meet you!

Your name doesn't refer to Caligula does it? Nice to meet you too!!!

 

[nakedemperor]

I wish I'd been that knowledgable of Roman history at the time, but I was like 13 when I made nakedemperor as an AOL name.

 

[White knight]

I think this site was put up by Nazis.
If you don't go with the party line the brown shirts try to beat you down.

Are there any free thinkers, that just don't see things in black and white?

 

[insein]

I think this site was put up by Nazis.
If you don't go with the party line the brown shirts try to beat you down.

Are there any free thinkers, that just don't see things in black and white?

I see things in brown. NOW GET BACK UN LINE!!!

 

[Bonnie]

And I keep wondering what's so great about always taking the center of the road on everything? Exactly how does that qualify for intelligent thinking? Sounds much more like not being able to take a firm stand on anything..........Maybe even wishy washy

 

[Zhukov]

Are there only Republican's in here??

I'm not a Republican.

In fact I may even be a registered Democrat, not sure, can't remember, don't care.

Perhaps a better question would be, "Is everyone here voting to re-elect the President?"

The majority yes, but there are exceptions.

Are there any free thinkers, that just don't see things in black and white?

...as if the two were mutually exclusive. That's a real open mind you have isn't it? Congratulations on your blatant hypocrisy.

 

[dmp]

And I keep wondering what's so great about always taking the center of the road on everything? Exactly how does that qualify for intelligent thinking? Sounds much more like not being able to take a firm stand on anything..........Maybe even wishy washy

...it's a lack of moral courage.

 

[White knight]

People try to bagger you to choose sides. Not by the strength of their reasoning, but by peer pressure, by labeling. If you not liberal enough you’re a rightwing nut job, if you’re not conservative enough you’re a liberal whiney.
So it’s either chose the black or the white side.
Bonnie if that’s the way you think, then obviously you’re not a problem solver.
There is no one road to follow. Not the high, middle or low. There is no one color to choose, neither black nor white. No one party has the complete answer. I guess it’s easier when people don’t have to think too hard about a issue. Yeah it's easier to just label something and try to dump it into one category or the other.

 

[CSM]

People try to bagger you to choose sides. Not by the strength of their reasoning, but by peer pressure, by labeling. If you not liberal enough you’re a rightwing nut job, if you’re not conservative enough you’re a liberal whiney.
So it’s either chose the black or the white side.
Bonnie if that’s the way you think, then obviously you’re not a problem solver.
There is no one road to follow. Not the high, middle or low. There is no one color to choose, neither black nor white. No one party has the complete answer. I guess it’s easier when people don’t have to think too hard about a issue. Yeah it's easier to just label something and try to dump it into one category or the other.

Sooner or later, the thinking has to stop and the action has to begin. The person that has committment to a course of action gets a lot more of my respect (whether they I agree with them or not) than one who commits to nothing.

 

[Bonnie]

People try to bagger you to choose sides. Not by the strength of their reasoning, but by peer pressure, by labeling. If you not liberal enough you’re a rightwing nut job, if you’re not conservative enough you’re a liberal whiney.
So it’s either chose the black or the white side.
Bonnie if that’s the way you think, then obviously you’re not a problem solver.
There is no one road to follow. Not the high, middle or low. There is no one color to choose, neither black nor white. No one party has the complete answer. I guess it’s easier when people don’t have to think too hard about a issue. Yeah it's easier to just label something and try to dump it into one category or the other.

I wasn't speaking about party affiliation or even Liberal /Conservative........I am saying that at some point in a person's life they need to determine wether they are pro-life or pro-abortion, religious or non religious, moral or immoral, for high taxes, against high taxes, for capitolism, agains capitolism, pro socialistic etc......Being a problem solver does not eqaute to endless debate but rather actually having a conviction and sticking to it, then taking action. How you happen to arrive at that conviction is what's up for debate. I am neither a Republican or Democrat..........But I am Pro-life, pro capitolist, religious, etc.....None of that is up for debate to me. yes it's nice to hear everyone's argument.but then what.....change your mind as the wind blows??????? Good luck getting anything accomplished like that!!!

 

[GWBfan]

I wasn't speaking about party affiliation or even Liberal /Conservative........I am saying that at some point in a person's life they need to determine wether they are pro-life or pro-abortion, religious or non religious, moral or immoral, for high taxes, against high taxes, for capitolism, agains capitolism, pro socialistic etc......Being a problem solver does not eqaute to endless debate but rather actually having a conviction and sticking to it, then taking action. How you happen to arrive at that conviction is what's up for debate. I am neither a Republican or Democrat..........But I am Pro-life, pro capitolist, religious, etc.....None of that is up for debate to me. yes it's nice to hear everyone's argument.but then what.....change your mind as the wind blows??????? Good luck getting anything accomplished like that!!!

Well put, and that is clearly why the libs just LOVE Kerry and HATE George W Bush. W is nothing if not decisive !!!!
:clap1:

 

[MJDuncan1982]

I wasn't speaking about party affiliation or even Liberal /Conservative........I am saying that at some point in a person's life they need to determine wether they are pro-life or pro-abortion, religious or non religious, moral or immoral, for high taxes, against high taxes, for capitolism, agains capitolism, pro socialistic etc......Being a problem solver does not eqaute to endless debate but rather actually having a conviction and sticking to it, then taking action. How you happen to arrive at that conviction is what's up for debate. I am neither a Republican or Democrat..........But I am Pro-life, pro capitolist, religious, etc.....None of that is up for debate to me. yes it's nice to hear everyone's argument.but then what.....change your mind as the wind blows??????? Good luck getting anything accomplished like that!!!

Taking the middle road does not show lack of moral courage (sounds like something Rush would say) nor is it wishy washy. It can be at times but it is insane to follow a position without question. Very few things are black and white...most issues are somewhere in the middle. Few examples from your list:

Pro-life - Yes usually, unless the life of the mother is in danger then I am pro-abortion. Plus you have to be realistic about the issue - women are going to have abortions. No matter how much you outlaw it. If it is going to happen, let's be grown up about it and be safe.

High taxes/low taxes - Depends on the situation. Corporations that gouge the public interest solely for monetary gain should have high taxes. Poor families making nothing should have low taxes. Rich people should have higher taxes, IMO. The more you receive from a society the more you give back to it.

Capitalism/Anti-Capitalism - Pro in most cirumstances but The Jungle has shown us the evils of it. Out-sourcing of jobs is another minus. We have regulations on businesses because we don't want one company to dominate. In some situations I'm for it as the paramount ideology, in other situations, different social concerns trump.

It amazes me that Bush has somehow made it acceptable to be stubborn and blindly follow a principle. The only principle I am firmly committed to is to rationally look at each situation and determine what is the best thing to do in relation to everything involved. Yes, this often times leads to debate but that is what our founders wanted. The Senate is the most deliberative governmental body in the world. Yes you have to take action but that doesn't mean you can't think about it first.

I'm against shoot first and ask question later...how about we figure out who to shoot and if we really need to shoot them and then shoot?

 

[dilloduck]

Taking the middle road does not show lack of moral courage (sounds like something Rush would say) nor is it wishy washy. It can be at times but it is insane to follow a position without question. Very few things are black and white...most issues are somewhere in the middle. Few examples from your list:

Pro-life - Yes usually, unless the life of the mother is in danger then I am pro-abortion. Plus you have to be realistic about the issue - women are going to have abortions. No matter how much you outlaw it. If it is going to happen, let's be grown up about it and be safe.

High taxes/low taxes - Depends on the situation. Corporations that gouge the public interest solely for monetary gain should have high taxes. Poor families making nothing should have low taxes. Rich people should have higher taxes, IMO. The more you receive from a society the more you give back to it.

Capitalism/Anti-Capitalism - Pro in most cirumstances but The Jungle has shown us the evils of it. Out-sourcing of jobs is another minus. We have regulations on businesses because we don't want one company to dominate. In some situations I'm for it as the paramount ideology, in other situations, different social concerns trump.

It amazes me that Bush has somehow made it acceptable to be stubborn and blindly follow a principle. The only principle I am firmly committed to is to rationally look at each situation and determine what is the best thing to do in relation to everything involved. Yes, this often times leads to debate but that is what our founders wanted. The Senate is the most deliberative governmental body in the world. Yes you have to take action but that doesn't mean you can't think about it first.

I'm against shoot first and ask question later...how about we figure out who to shoot and if we really need to shoot them and then shoot?

FOR THE LAST TIME-------------------HE DID ASK FIRST!!!!!!!

 

[MJDuncan1982]

FOR THE LAST TIME-------------------HE DID ASK FIRST!!!!!!!

For the last time...I was speaking in generalities, not specifically about Iraq. OCD.

 

[dilloduck]

Taking the middle road does not show lack of moral courage (sounds like something Rush would say) nor is it wishy washy. It can be at times but it is insane to follow a position without question. Very few things are black and white...most issues are somewhere in the middle. Few examples from your list:

Pro-life - Yes usually, unless the life of the mother is in danger then I am pro-abortion. Plus you have to be realistic about the issue - women are going to have abortions. No matter how much you outlaw it. If it is going to happen, let's be grown up about it and be safe.

High taxes/low taxes - Depends on the situation. Corporations that gouge the public interest solely for monetary gain should have high taxes. Poor families making nothing should have low taxes. Rich people should have higher taxes, IMO. The more you receive from a society the more you give back to it.

Capitalism/Anti-Capitalism - Pro in most cirumstances but The Jungle has shown us the evils of it. Out-sourcing of jobs is another minus. We have regulations on businesses because we don't want one company to dominate. In some situations I'm for it as the paramount ideology, in other situations, different social concerns trump.

It amazes me that Bush has somehow made it acceptable to be stubborn and blindly follow a principle. The only principle I am firmly committed to is to rationally look at each situation and determine what is the best thing to do in relation to everything involved. Yes, this often times leads to debate but that is what our founders wanted. The Senate is the most deliberative governmental body in the world. Yes you have to take action but that doesn't mean you can't think about it first.

I'm against shoot first and ask question later...how about we figure out who to shoot and if we really need to shoot them and then shoot?

There is nothing general about specifically saying that Bush is stubborn and blind. Some call it committed and focused. Talking has been going on for years regarding Saddam. We decided it was time for action. Is it a bad thing when debate leads to action? Debating is to determine which course of ACTION to take, NOT just for the sake of hearing ourselves talk!