What exactly are Democrats afraid of?

[Munky]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Prior to 9-11 we were headed for a correction, after 9-11, we bandaged the economy and blew all common sense out the window with moronically devised mortgages and personal finances.

We'll pay for this mistake for a long time....

Peeps in CA are still flipping houses, it's goddamn insane...

As far as the OP's question, the Democrats should be afraid, we can only heap so much debit on our children.

I hear this a lot. How do you think we're 'heaping debt on our children'? Do you think our children are going to have to build cars and send them back in time to 2009 to repay our debt? The vast majority of our debt is internal debt, meaning we owe it to ourselves. We'll get by with the goods and services we produce as a country in the future the same way we get by today.

I'm not sure what you mean by "we", but if the government is steering the nation into debt, I'm pretty sure the money is gonna come out of the tax payer's pocket, regardless if the debt is external or internal. How is one better than the other?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87
Republicans biggest area to grow is with Latino voters. Will they figure it out? I dont know. Immigration issue could really solidy a latino base for Republicans. But I question whether the Republicans will figure it out.

If you are referring to lifting regulations against illegal immigration, then this is one area where I DON'T want a political party to solidify a latino base. What's best for the politicians isn't necessarily best for this country.

Lifting? I say streamlining. Make it easier for people from Mexico to become full fledged citizens.

What is the process like right now? How many years does it take? I have heard upwards of a decade? You expect some poor Mexican to wait that long for citizenship?

I don't condone illegal immigration at all. That poor Mexican shouldn't be here in the first place, IMO.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87
Republicans biggest area to grow is with Latino voters. Will they figure it out? I dont know. Immigration issue could really solidy a latino base for Republicans. But I question whether the Republicans will figure it out.

If you are referring to lifting regulations against illegal immigration, then this is one area where I DON'T want a political party to solidify a latino base. What's best for the politicians isn't necessarily best for this country.

Lifting? I say streamlining. Make it easier for people from Mexico to become full fledged citizens.

What is the process like right now? How many years does it take? I have heard upwards of a decade? You expect some poor Mexican to wait that long for citizenship?

I don't condone illegal immigration at all. That poor Mexican shouldn't be here in the first place, IMO.

Neither do I. But what is the point of making it so difficult to become a United States citizen? Streamlining the process will allow that poor mexican to become a productive legal citizen instead of a 2nd class underpaid worker.

 

[mattpegher]

I'm actually for the elimination of all parties.
I have yet to see how the party system helps the average american.
It's primary goal is backing for election, a process that overwhelming preoccupies all polititians to the point where they spend more energy catering to there contributers than there constituancy.
Sure it makes it simple for the simple minded to back the guy on there team, but in the end we all loose because radical fringes dominate the agenda because the elected official has to mobilize these zealots to get enough votes.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: bamacre

I will have to disagree with you, Moonbeam.

I argue that we certainly are not aiding nor abetting the "greater of two other evils," i.e., the Republicans. We have become either a thorn in their side or the medicine in their cabinet. We have not become a tool on their belt, that is for sure. And I thought this was quite evident in the past election, not just in the campaign, but perhaps even affecting the vote. At the very minimum, a million Republicans refused to vote for McCain.

We are whacking them over the heads, reminding them just how far economically left and socially right they have moved.

During the election, we may have recommended people vote 3rd party, but not in attempt to take votes away from Obama, but McCain. And while I think Bush was more responsible for Obama's success than us, we didn't hurt. What is ironic is that so many on the Left bashed the one Republican who made sense, the one who opposed the warfare state, the one who opposed the trampling of our rights, the one who opposed the social conservatism. And did he run to win? Certainly not. He ran because he's a doctor and people needed help.

In the face of attack and ridicule, he stood up to the enemy on their own turf. IMO, he did such a good job they refused to invite him back. And while a few will never accept their needed medicine, just enough of them are.

And I think that many do not understand that in order to win, in order to fix the Republican party, it is not necessary that our message, our beliefs, be embraced 100%, but just enough to rid the party of its disease. But perhaps this is what you fear, that one day, the Republicans will no longer be be the worse of two evils.

I see. You are voting third party until the Republican party becomes the lesser of two evils and then you will vote Republican again. Hehehehehe!

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: bamacre

I will have to disagree with you, Moonbeam.

I argue that we certainly are not aiding nor abetting the "greater of two other evils," i.e., the Republicans. We have become either a thorn in their side or the medicine in their cabinet. We have not become a tool on their belt, that is for sure. And I thought this was quite evident in the past election, not just in the campaign, but perhaps even affecting the vote. At the very minimum, a million Republicans refused to vote for McCain.

We are whacking them over the heads, reminding them just how far economically left and socially right they have moved.

During the election, we may have recommended people vote 3rd party, but not in attempt to take votes away from Obama, but McCain. And while I think Bush was more responsible for Obama's success than us, we didn't hurt. What is ironic is that so many on the Left bashed the one Republican who made sense, the one who opposed the warfare state, the one who opposed the trampling of our rights, the one who opposed the social conservatism. And did he run to win? Certainly not. He ran because he's a doctor and people needed help.

In the face of attack and ridicule, he stood up to the enemy on their own turf. IMO, he did such a good job they refused to invite him back. And while a few will never accept their needed medicine, just enough of them are.

And I think that many do not understand that in order to win, in order to fix the Republican party, it is not necessary that our message, our beliefs, be embraced 100%, but just enough to rid the party of its disease. But perhaps this is what you fear, that one day, the Republicans will no longer be be the worse of two evils.

I see. You are voting third party until the Republican party becomes the lesser of two evils and then you will vote Republican again. Hehehehehe!

A bit of a straw man joke.

But I think you get my point.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I think the sheer amount of successful legislation that he has pushed through in such a short period of time is nothing short of mind boggling

It's actually quite easy when your party controls the Executive and Legislative branches...the Republicans are in such disarray that they are incapable of providing oversight in the form of rational opposition.

he's nominated a new USSC justice that the Republicans are frightened to oppose despite her pro-choice and liberal views

Anyone Obama nominated would have been liberal...the Republicans don't have the votes to oppose her, and Obama picked someone who the Repubicans cannot oppose because of her ethnicity...race baiting policies and divisiveness we can believe in.

I don't think people realize it because he doesn't strut his stuff like Bush did

He certainly gets in front of a television camera more than Bush did...I don't recall former Presidents hitting the late night talk show circuit to garner support for policy initiatives...interesting that you perceive Obama as humble, where others perceive him as the celebrity President, perhaps more so than even Kennedy.

Now that doesn't mean you have to LIKE what Obama is doing, but he's most certainly taking active leadership.

Yes he is certainly being active. Bush was active and decisive when he decided to invade Iraq. I could be wrong, but the long term ripples of Obama's policy decisions are not too encouraging.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
You have to remember that P&N is a collection of a lot of polar opposites and few moderates. People like me want to see the complete and total destruction of the Republican party.

:thumbsup: