• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A Canadian's perspective on President Bush..

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No matter what side of the political fence your on you have to agree their is a lot of truth here:


George Bush, the man by David Warren.The Ottawa Citizen

Sunday, September 11, 2005


There's plenty wrong with America, since you asked. I'm tempted to say that the only difference from Canada is that they have a few things right. That would be unfair, of course -- I am often pleased to discover things we still get right.

But one of them would not be disaster preparation. If something happened up here, on the scale of Katrina, we wouldn't even have the resources to arrive late. We would be waiting for the Americans to come save us, the same way the government in Louisiana just waved and pointed at
Washington,D.C. The theory being that, when you're in real trouble, that's where the adults live.

And that isn't an exaggeration. Almost everything that has worked in the recovery operation along the U.S. Gulf Coast has been military and National Guard. Within a few days, under several commands, finally consolidated under the remarkable Lt.-Gen. Russell Honore, it was once again the U.S. military efficiently cobbling together a recovery operation on a scale beyond the capacity of any other earthly institution.

We hardly have a military up here. We have elected one feckless government after another that has cut corners until there is nothing substantial left.

We don't have the ability even to transport and equip our few soldiers. Should disaster strike at home, on a big scale, we become a Third World country. At which point, our national smugness is of no avail.

From Democrats and the American Left -- the U.S. equivalent to the people who run Canada -- we are still hearing that the disaster in New Orleans showed that a heartless, white Republican America had abandoned its underclass.

This is garbage. The great majority of those not evacuated lived in assisted housing and receive food stamps, prescription medicine and government support through many other programs. Many have, all their lives, expected someone to lift them to safety, without input from themselves.
And the demagogic mayor they elected left, quite literally, hundreds of transit and school buses that could have driven them out of town parked in rows, to be lost in the flood.

Yes, that was insensitive. But it is also the truth; and sooner or later we must acknowledge that welfare dependency creates exactly the sort of haplessness and social degeneration we saw on display, as the floodwaters rose. Many suffered terribly, and many died, and one's heart goes out.

But already the survivors are being put up in new accommodations, and their various entitlements have been directed to new locations.

The scale of private charity has also been unprecedented. There are yet no statistics, but I'll wager the most generous state in the union will prove to have been arch-Republican Texas and that, nationally, contributions in cash and kind are coming disproportionately from people who vote Republican. For the world divides into "the mouths" and "the wallets."

The Bush-bashing, both down there and up here, has so far lost touch with reality, as to raise questions about the bashers' state of mind.

Consult any authoritative source on how government works in the United States and you will learn that the U.S. federal government's legal, constitutional, and institutional responsibility for first response to Katrina, as to any natural disaster, was zero.

Notwithstanding, President Bush took the prescient step of declaring a disaster, in order to begin deploying FEMA and other federal assets, two full days in advance of the storm fall. In the little time since, he has managed to co-ordinate an immense recovery operation -- the largest in
human history -- without invoking martial powers. He has been sufficiently presidential to respond, not even once, to the extraordinarily mendacious and childish blame-throwing.

One thinks of Kipling's poem If, which I learned to recite as a lad, and mention now in the full knowledge that it drives postmodern leftoids and gliberals to apoplexy -- as anything that is good, beautiful, or true:

If you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,

But make allowance for their doubting too;

If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,

Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,

Or being hated, don't give way to hating,

! And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise.

Unlike his critics, Bush is a man, in the full sense presented
by these verses. A fallible man, like all the rest, but a man.
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,365
Reaction score
13,585
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Ok, so he has one Canadian out of how many million on his side. Wow, I guess that makes you feel all warm in side eh?

Moreover, unlike his assertion, charitable contributions have historically been higher in Northeastern Blue States and Liberal West Coast states than anywhere else. Now, by charitable contributions I mean contributions that are not given to ones local church. In terms of Tithing, the South and Utah are the biggest givers. You know, they got to really dip into their pockets to afford those big suburban all white tax exempt country clubs.

Sources:

http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/profileDrillDown.php?rpt=US-STATE

http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/profileDrillDown.php?rpt=US-PC-STATE
 
Last edited:

MiamiFlorida

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
434
Reaction score
1
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Navy Pride said:
No matter what side of the political fence your on you have to agree their is a lot of truth here:


George Bush, the man by David Warren.The Ottawa Citizen

Sunday, September 11, 2005


There's plenty wrong with America, since you asked. I'm tempted to say that the only difference from Canada is that they have a few things right. That would be unfair, of course -- I am often pleased to discover things we still get right.

But one of them would not be disaster preparation. If something happened up here, on the scale of Katrina, we wouldn't even have the resources to arrive late. We would be waiting for the Americans to come save us, the same way the government in Louisiana just waved and pointed at
Washington,D.C. The theory being that, when you're in real trouble, that's where the adults live.

And that isn't an exaggeration. Almost everything that has worked in the recovery operation along the U.S. Gulf Coast has been military and National Guard. Within a few days, under several commands, finally consolidated under the remarkable Lt.-Gen. Russell Honore, it was once again the U.S. military efficiently cobbling together a recovery operation on a scale beyond the capacity of any other earthly institution.

We hardly have a military up here. We have elected one feckless government after another that has cut corners until there is nothing substantial left.

We don't have the ability even to transport and equip our few soldiers. Should disaster strike at home, on a big scale, we become a Third World country. At which point, our national smugness is of no avail.

From Democrats and the American Left -- the U.S. equivalent to the people who run Canada -- we are still hearing that the disaster in New Orleans showed that a heartless, white Republican America had abandoned its underclass.

This is garbage. The great majority of those not evacuated lived in assisted housing and receive food stamps, prescription medicine and government support through many other programs. Many have, all their lives, expected someone to lift them to safety, without input from themselves.
And the demagogic mayor they elected left, quite literally, hundreds of transit and school buses that could have driven them out of town parked in rows, to be lost in the flood.

Yes, that was insensitive. But it is also the truth; and sooner or later we must acknowledge that welfare dependency creates exactly the sort of haplessness and social degeneration we saw on display, as the floodwaters rose. Many suffered terribly, and many died, and one's heart goes out.

But already the survivors are being put up in new accommodations, and their various entitlements have been directed to new locations.

The scale of private charity has also been unprecedented. There are yet no statistics, but I'll wager the most generous state in the union will prove to have been arch-Republican Texas and that, nationally, contributions in cash and kind are coming disproportionately from people who vote Republican. For the world divides into "the mouths" and "the wallets."

The Bush-bashing, both down there and up here, has so far lost touch with reality, as to raise questions about the bashers' state of mind.

Consult any authoritative source on how government works in the United States and you will learn that the U.S. federal government's legal, constitutional, and institutional responsibility for first response to Katrina, as to any natural disaster, was zero.

Notwithstanding, President Bush took the prescient step of declaring a disaster, in order to begin deploying FEMA and other federal assets, two full days in advance of the storm fall. In the little time since, he has managed to co-ordinate an immense recovery operation -- the largest in
human history -- without invoking martial powers. He has been sufficiently presidential to respond, not even once, to the extraordinarily mendacious and childish blame-throwing.

One thinks of Kipling's poem If, which I learned to recite as a lad, and mention now in the full knowledge that it drives postmodern leftoids and gliberals to apoplexy -- as anything that is good, beautiful, or true:

If you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,

But make allowance for their doubting too;

If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,

Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,

Or being hated, don't give way to hating,

! And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise.

Unlike his critics, Bush is a man, in the full sense presented
by these verses. A fallible man, like all the rest, but a man.
Some very good observations.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
SouthernDemocrat said:
Ok, so he has one Canadian out of how many million on his side. Wow, I guess that makes you feel all warm in side eh?

Moreover, unlike his assertion, charitable contributions have historically been higher in Northeastern Blue States and Liberal West Coast states than anywhere else. Now, by charitable contributions I mean contributions that are not given to ones local church. In terms of Tithing, the South and Utah are the biggest givers. You know, they got to really dip into their pockets to afford those big suburban all white tax exempt country clubs.

Sources:

http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/profileDrillDown.php?rpt=US-STATE

http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/profileDrillDown.php?rpt=US-PC-STATE


Never the less, this is still the USA at a whole, also.


not even 40% of our population votes, so to label any state red or blue seems absurd.
 

FiremanRyan

Active member
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
283
Reaction score
1
Location
Chico, CA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
SouthernDemocrat said:
Ok, so he has one Canadian out of how many million on his side. Wow, I guess that makes you feel all warm in side eh?
i dont think thats what the threads about, but you bring up a good point. there are a lot of Canadians and Americans alike that are on the other side of the fence on this issue. but really, its sad because this Canadian brought up good points that are hard to disagree with. it shows that the majoriy of the people are either uninformed or dont grasp this whole situation with Katrina.
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,365
Reaction score
13,585
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
FiremanRyan said:
i dont think thats what the threads about, but you bring up a good point. there are a lot of Canadians and Americans alike that are on the other side of the fence on this issue. but really, its sad because this Canadian brought up good points that are hard to disagree with. it shows that the majoriy of the people are either uninformed or dont grasp this whole situation with Katrina.
Poverty and ignorance is basically why all those people were there right?

Ok, then why is it that we have the highest poverty rate of any industrialized nation on earth?

If social programs don't work, then why is it that most European Nations, and his own country, Canada, all have very low to non-existant poverty rates?

If social programs don't work, then why did Johnson's Great Society cut the poverty rate in America in half in just 4 years. It litterally went from over 22% to 12% in 4 years.

Are social programs the entire answer? No, but they are a piece to the puzzle. Before the New Deal, the Fair Deal, and The Great Society, we would have periods of economic growth, yet the poverty rate hardly ever moved at all. Since those programs, the poverty rate dropped dramatically. Poverty is not just an economic problem.

I am not for long term handouts. Then again, you cant be on welfare more than what, 2 years now. I think that is a good thing, but if we want to do something about poverty in America, then we have to invest in public programs that attack the causes of poverty. People are born poor, but they are not born ignorant, its society turning its back on them that creates that.
 
Last edited:

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,413
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
SouthernDemocrat said:
Ok, so he has one Canadian out of how many million on his side. Wow, I guess that makes you feel all warm in side eh?

Moreover, unlike his assertion, charitable contributions have historically been higher in Northeastern Blue States and Liberal West Coast states than anywhere else. Now, by charitable contributions I mean contributions that are not given to ones local church. In terms of Tithing, the South and Utah are the biggest givers. You know, they got to really dip into their pockets to afford those big suburban all white tax exempt country clubs.

Sources:

http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/profileDrillDown.php?rpt=US-STATE

http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/profileDrillDown.php?rpt=US-PC-STATE
....and the man with the word "Democrat" in his name jumps to draw partisan lines!:ind:
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,365
Reaction score
13,585
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
GySgt said:
....and the man with the word "Democrat" in his name jumps to draw partisan lines!:ind:
Did you read the article, the author said that he believed that Republican states would be the more charitable. I only posted data that proved him wrong.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
SouthernDemocrat said:
Did you read the article, the author said that he believed that Republican states would be the more charitable. I only posted data that proved him wrong.


Lets forget that less than 40% of the USA votes shall we?


I think labeling states is absurd.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,413
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
SouthernDemocrat said:
Did you read the article, the author said that he believed that Republican states would be the more charitable. I only posted data that proved him wrong.

In your own words......"he believed that Republican states would be the more charitable." It's impossible to post data on this yet. No, what you did was leap at the chance to defend your party for no reason.

You couldn't just enjoy the fact that a foreigner has something truthful to say through all the bullshit partisan crap without rushing to throw it back in?
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,365
Reaction score
13,585
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
GySgt said:
In your own words......"he believed that Republican states would be the more charitable." It's impossible to post data on this yet. No, what you did was leap at the chance to defend your party for no reason.

You couldn't just enjoy the fact that a foreigner has something truthful to say through all the bullshit partisan crap without rushing to throw it back in?
If the writer did not want the article taken as a partisan attack, which it was and only half the truth, then he should not have put that in there. The entire premise of this thread is partisan. Hell, the premise of almost every thread on here is partisan.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,413
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
SouthernDemocrat said:
If the writer did not want the article taken as a partisan attack, which it was and only half the truth, then he should not have put that in there. The entire premise of this thread is partisan. Hell, the premise of almost every thread on here is partisan.

He's not American and he has no partisan agenda. He was merely stating his views as an outside observer. I'm inside the country and I agree with him. I'm tired of Democrats frantically and desperately doing anything they can to disrupt things. They don't do it for America. They do it, because they want the next election. If that happens, I hope the Republicans take the high road and don't practice the disgusting antics we have all seen.
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,365
Reaction score
13,585
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
GySgt said:
He's not American and he has no partisan agenda. He was merely stating his views as an outside observer. I'm inside the country and I agree with him. I'm tired of Democrats frantically and desperately doing anything they can to disrupt things. They don't do it for America. They do it, because they want the next election. If that happens, I hope the Republicans take the high road and don't practice the disgusting antics we have all seen.
Republicans? High Road? :rofl

You are talking about the Chicken Hawk party who accused our former president of being a murderer and of selling plots at the national cemetery. You are talking about a party who would swift boat Jesus Christ if he ran on the Democratic ticket.

The reasons that the Democrats are not the party in power is because they are still not as good at smearing as the Republicans are. What do you think most people actually vote on? Issues? If any politician ever took the high road, they would not be elected. With the exception of the late Paul Wellstone, and former President Jimmie Carter. Then again, its not like he won a second term.

Its kind of like my brother the electrician says about contractors: "If there were a honest contactor, he would not be in business".

Granted he may not have had a partisan agenda being that he is a Canadian, be he certainly has a very ideological agenda and the starter of this thread definitely has a partisan and ideological agenda.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,413
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
SouthernDemocrat said:
Republicans? High Road? :rofl

You are talking about the Chicken Hawk party who accused our former president of being a murderer and of selling plots at the national cemetery. You are talking about a party who would swift boat Jesus Christ if he ran on the Democratic ticket.

The reasons that the Democrats are not the party in power is because they are still not as good at smearing as the Republicans are. What do you think most people actually vote on? Issues? If any politician ever took the high road, they would not be elected. With the exception of the late Paul Wellstone, and former President Jimmie Carter. Then again, its not like he won a second term.

Its kind of like my brother the electrician says about contractors: "If there were a honest contactor, he would not be in business".

Granted he may not have had a partisan agenda being that he is a Canadian, be he certainly has a very ideological agenda and the starter of this thread definitely has a partisan and ideological agenda.

Proves my point. Partisan granstanding. I hope Republicans and Democrats lose the election next time. It would be quite the smack in the face to all of your "my party's better than yours" BS.
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
Proves my point. Partisan granstanding. I hope Republicans and Democrats lose the election next time. It would be quite the smack in the face to all of your "my party's better than yours" BS.
Yep. I would be a nice change to see the Green Party take hold of the White House. I'm sure that won't happen though.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
kal-el said:
Yep. I would be a nice change to see the Green Party take hold of the White House. I'm sure that won't happen though.
When it comes to elections in the U.S. all 3rd parties are a joke........A wasted vote.......If you don't like who is in power get out and change it......Don't just whine about it.......
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Navy Pride said:
When it comes to elections in the U.S. all 3rd parties are a joke........A wasted vote.......If you don't like who is in power get out and change it......Don't just whine about it.......
I'm kinda shocked you say that. I mean, for the last 2 elections, if it weren't for Nader, Bush wouldn't be sitting in the Oval office.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
kal-el said:
I'm kinda shocked you say that. I mean, for the last 2 elections, if it weren't for Nader, Bush wouldn't be sitting in the Oval office.
And just think if it had not been for Perot running in 1992 we would never have heard of Bill Clinton......
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
SouthernDemocrat said:
Republicans? High Road? :rofl

You are talking about the Chicken Hawk party who accused our former president of being a murderer and of selling plots at the national cemetery. You are talking about a party who would swift boat Jesus Christ if he ran on the Democratic ticket.

The reasons that the Democrats are not the party in power is because they are still not as good at smearing as the Republicans are. What do you think most people actually vote on? Issues? If any politician ever took the high road, they would not be elected. With the exception of the late Paul Wellstone, and former President Jimmie Carter. Then again, its not like he won a second term.
Its kind of like my brother the electrician says about contractors: "If there were a honest contactor, he would not be in business".

Granted he may not have had a partisan agenda being that he is a Canadian, be he certainly has a very ideological agenda and the starter of this thread definitely has a partisan and ideological agenda.
Funny you should bring up "Paul Wellstone" & "smearing" in the same sentence...

Shall we take a look back at Wellstone's funeral service and see how "respectful" they were?

Fallout from a Memorial
Did the memorial service for Paul Wellstone cost Democrats the election?

A backlash against the politically charged service almost certainly helped Norm Coleman beat Walter Mondale for Wellstone's Minnesota Senate seat. And a private poll by Bill Clinton's former pollster, Mark Penn, suggests the service backfired on Democrats nationally as well.

Penn found that 68% of voters knew about the service—a high awareness of an event broadcast live nationally only on C-SPAN. What's more, 49% of voters said the service made them less likely to vote for a Democrat—and 67% of independents said they felt that way. One Democrat who quickly sensed that the service was a political disaster was Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a possible 2004 presidential contender.

The next morning Kerry called Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott, who had been booed at the memorial, to tell him how bad he felt. Penn believes national security was ultimately a bigger issue. His poll shows a stunning 65% of voters thought Democrats weren't supportive enough of the President's war on terror. "That was the issue," says Penn. "But the memorial didn't help."


http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,388903,00.html

As you can see, the Democratic smearing COST them the election...and it will continue to cost them as long as they hold on to the same notion that they lose because of others instead of themselves...
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,365
Reaction score
13,585
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
cnredd said:
Funny you should bring up "Paul Wellstone" & "smearing" in the same sentence...

Shall we take a look back at Wellstone's funeral service and see how "respectful" they were?

Fallout from a Memorial
Did the memorial service for Paul Wellstone cost Democrats the election?

A backlash against the politically charged service almost certainly helped Norm Coleman beat Walter Mondale for Wellstone's Minnesota Senate seat. And a private poll by Bill Clinton's former pollster, Mark Penn, suggests the service backfired on Democrats nationally as well.

Penn found that 68% of voters knew about the service—a high awareness of an event broadcast live nationally only on C-SPAN. What's more, 49% of voters said the service made them less likely to vote for a Democrat—and 67% of independents said they felt that way. One Democrat who quickly sensed that the service was a political disaster was Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a possible 2004 presidential contender.

The next morning Kerry called Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott, who had been booed at the memorial, to tell him how bad he felt. Penn believes national security was ultimately a bigger issue. His poll shows a stunning 65% of voters thought Democrats weren't supportive enough of the President's war on terror. "That was the issue," says Penn. "But the memorial didn't help."


http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,388903,00.html

As you can see, the Democratic smearing COST them the election...and it will continue to cost them as long as they hold on to the same notion that they lose because of others instead of themselves...
I will agree that Paul Wellstone's funeral was offensive. However, Paul Wellstone was not. Whether you agree with Paul Wellstone or not, I know the man's politics were largely to the left of mine, he still was by far one of the best men who have ever worked in Washington and he cared more about this country and the working families in it, than just about any politician ever has.
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,365
Reaction score
13,585
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
GySgt said:
Proves my point. Partisan granstanding. I hope Republicans and Democrats lose the election next time. It would be quite the smack in the face to all of your "my party's better than yours" BS.
I would love to see that happen, but I doubt it ever will.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,413
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
SouthernDemocrat said:
I would love to see that happen, but I doubt it ever will.

So do I, but it would beautiful. The problem with an Independent, is that no one wants to waste their vote on him and wind up having a Democrat you don't like or a Republican youu don't like get it. Thanks Perot!!!

I vote pro-military. I can't go ten years without killing someone. The Green Party is anti-military. **** that. Everything else is whatever.
 
Last edited:

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
GySgt said:
Proves my point. Partisan granstanding. I hope Republicans and Democrats lose the election next time. It would be quite the smack in the face to all of your "my party's better than yours" BS.
I couldnt agree with you more.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
so, scratching out democrat and republican. Who'd you want to win?


LIBERTARIAN HERE BABY!
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,413
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
128shot said:
so, scratching out democrat and republican. Who'd you want to win?


LIBERTARIAN HERE BABY!

Considering that I lean in so many places that I confuse myself, why not? That way if they suck, Democrats and Republicans can unite and hate together.:2party:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom