Quoted by roy reali:
Fair or not, that is the way its always been and the way it will always be.
I do agree. It's a shame that it is, but it falls under the category of how either ignorant or needy (or both) the general population is.
I really hope I am wrong about all this.
I don't think you're entirely wrong. Right about America is going through quite a hit on most aspects of govt structure, economics, basic rights, etc. But, I think our country's roots are dug deeper than ever before. We may lose quite a few leaves and branches in the coming years. But, with strong roots we will always have the ability to recover...
Quoted by SecDef:
Wait, your argument is that the 6 years of republican in charge of presidency and congress was simply due to being handed a slowing economy, but then say that 2 years is PLENTY of time for the dems?
Reread what I just said that made you ask this very question. The answer is there....and clearer than fancy charts/graphs and stats that can be skewered to show support for ones' bias...
You going to skewer the dems for this but reward the republicans for leading the way?
Again, I've answered this question over and over in detail yet in lamens terms. If it's anybody that's biased, I have to state from my observations of your posts here and in others that you're the one that's biased. Kinda strange that I see very little dissent coming from you about other politicians that aren't tied to the Bush Adm.
You also say DIRECTLY responsible (your capitalization) but don't say what those direct actions were. You mean that they haven't been caving in to the white house at every turn!?!?
My diatribe was quite long enough. Didn't think you needed a list. I'll give one that sticks in my head...
Last I checked Pelosi and her cohorts spouted off "The first 100 days of change..." was all about correcting Bushes mistakes. So, what all have they done? What efforts were actually put forth to make their "changes"?
My question to you is how long DOES your party need to get the ball rolling? Two years is a lifetime in political office. Are you telling me that 730 days isn't enough?
Hmm, let's see. ahh, yes, the FACTS are that it was signed by George H.W. Bush and pushed through congress by Bill Clinton who didn't change a word. Now shoot, I just can't remember which party George H.W. Bush was affiliated with...
And you again missed my entire point. Several of the current problems we have can be tied to NAFTA. Reread my statements. I beg of you. Here's yet ANOTHER hint: The genesis and driving factors do NOT have anything to do with the
CURRENT ADMINISTRATION .
And yet you absolutely ignored the previous 4 years. Unfortunately for you, there is a fairly smooth curve. Since you want to see a chart, HERE you go. Notice the inflection point in 2006. It goes the opposite direction you seem to desire.
Gas has risen immensely since 1999. Not really so much before that.
And another false claim by you. I didn't ignore the previous 4 years. I ventured a guess. I didn't stake claim that my assertion was fact. Up until recent years, an American's dollar would buy more gas today than it would have several years ago.
Your "when the republicans controlled the house" line is amusing. Look at 2000-2006 and tell me that the republicans saved the day (for gas prices) with a straight face.
Yes, they've risen quite a bit in the last 4-6 years. On the same token, the rise in prices have also GONE THROUGH THE ROOF under a Dem controlled Congress the past 2 years. Where have you belted at them for their inaction?
Quoted by Danzig:
Tuttle8, we are on the same page.
I have to admit to you, Danzig. I think the current thoughts on the issue is very similar. The difference between you and me is that I don't have the intestinal fortitude to vote Libertarian.....yet. I'm at a crossroad right now...
Do I vote for the candidate that keeps Obama out? I honestly think he's the worst candidate to take office over ANYONE out there. I would rather have had Hillary in there. You being a soldier would probably understand my angle. At least I and most of America would know thy enemy. We could keep her in check. Obama just opens his mouth to speak and the general public thinks he sings like an arch angel.
On the other side, there's the liberal(modern day context) in conservative's clothing. The ONLY 2 major reasons why I might vote for McCain is that I honestly believe he will most likely appoint SC justices that judge based on the Constitution's intent, not legislate from the bench. The other is that I don't think he will erode our 2A rights quite as fast as Obama. Preserve? Probably not. But, he won't be hell-bent on stripping them away as Obama has in Illinois.
I personally have several disagreements about the Libertarian Party. However, I'm trying to further understand that the main foundation of the party is sound and I'm stuck on nit picking the details of it. I do know the cold hard fact is if I vote Libertarian, it's basically a vote for Obama. The driving factor for me is this: If I don't vote my convictions and principles, then who will? Somebody's got to do it in order to send the message. The only way is to have the cajones to check the Independent box in November and accept Obama as our next president.