Why do people (and Democrats) overlook the trades as providers of a good livin

[Rekd]

Why do people (and Democrats) overlook the trades as providers of a good livin

I've found the Democrats just want you to be dependent on them. They get bigger government that way and secure their future.

[dang]

I've found the Democrats just want you to be dependent on them. They get bigger government that way and secure their future.

That's a good point. I'd address that by saying that Pros and Cons look at Govt in two different ways. Pros look at it as being there to help people live up to they're fullest and freeest version of self. Sales pitch aside, progressive gov't is accountable every 2-4 years. If they aren't in your best interest, kick them out.

Cons look at Govt as being evil and want to de-regulate everything and put it all into the hands of corporations, who's board members aren't accountable to anyone, for anything.

For me it's a simple choice. I crave accountability for for those who would write laws that effect me and mine.

Therefore, I want socialized medicine. Just from a cost perspective, it'd be good for anyone in business.

[dang]

Big government and big unions produce NOTHING! Both are better known these days for corruption, graft and dishonesty.

Really? Because my Grandfather died many years before my Grandmother did. Thanks to The HUGE Union he was a member of, she didn't have to worry about money for almost 40 years.
See, the UNION in question protected my Grandfather's pension, and then paid it out for 4 decades. Now, Grandma was a smart Irish lady, but financially saavy she was not. I'd assume that if her social security or pension plans were privatized, that she'd have starved. Why do you hate my Grandma Cons?

And what about Bush's wet dream to privatize Social Security? Who would handle such a large outpouring of funds? Would it be the large banking institutions? Big companies?

Conservatism has accomplished something. They've destroyed this nation from Reagan on up. Those years were productive because of all the borrowing. The following years, the 1990's were really productive for the Chinese, ya know, as they took almost all our manufacturing based on text book, conservative economic practices. Clinton wasn't liberal, he was just Reagan Lite.

Also, I'm sensing a lot of Hillary bashing. I know, it's the Con's way. Not to rub it in too much, but you're bashing on Hill because your side's got nothin this cycle. I'd be angry too.

[307startup]

So let's see here...I should want MORE gov't because MORE regulation determines that the REGULATIONS are being followed? How will more rules prevent the rules that are currently being broken, manipulated and mangled from happening?

I'm liberal in that I can think for myself and judge situations using reason and experience. I'm conservative in that I respect the ideals and traditions that people before me instituted to protect MY freedoms.

Taxonomically speaking...I'm a libertarian. If we must have labels and names, let that be mine.

Taxes are abominable. They should not be imposed on the citizens. Period. Paying a TAX for the honor of being employed? The amount of money that I'm taxed doesn't even make it as far as the national budget. The tax monies collected from private citizens, rich & poor, never make it to the books. Well, in a loony sort of write it in, write it out, funny-book ledger way it does. Yours, my & ours tax dollars don't pay for a single item that we TAXPAYERS like to say was "paid for with your tax dollars". The federal budget is based on wants, wishes & pork funds. Add on a cost of living increase. Now borrow that and spend MORE than what was budgeted. Even if ALL of our tax monies were allocated to the federal deficit, it would take something on the order of 42 years to pay down the debt...at current levels. With no growth or expenditure from "tax dollars" during that time. God would I hate to see the conditions of the federal interstate system by that time! Taxing corporations...taxing incoming products (tariffs)....taxing outgoing products (levies)...these are constitutionally supported and I agree with 100%. These are also where the majority of TAX DOLLARS originate, that are spent on federal projects. Whether you think XYZ Corp. is paying ENOUGH taxes is not the point, the point is that whatever taxes they do pay is far more than most states citizens federal income tax dollars combined is. And there are 1000's of these corporations that are paying.

Nationalized health care? No thanks. Swedens tax rate is something between 35-40% per person. For free health care & education? Thanks, but no thanks. Any federal program that I'm unwillingly forced into with its attendant loss of individuality so that my fellow Americans can enjoy cheap drugs is abhorrent. Diabetes? Heart Disease? Liver Cancer? Sorry, take care of your body...not MY problem. Until you dip into my pocket to help yourself to money I've earned to correct a problem you helped cause. Not all diseases are self-inflicted, I understand. The top health problems in America ARE self-inflicted due to lack of exercise, improper diet, lack of attention to medical issues BEFORE they become out of control, etc AD NAUSEUM!

As long as people are too lazy or too stupid to realize the cause of their problems or "issues" originate with THEMSELVES, no politician or program will fix the problem. And most people aren't ignorant...they're stupid. If you have access to information and choose to disregard it, you can't say you didn't know. But if you choose to ignore it, that's where stupidity steps in.

Sorry for all the people who were busy spending themselves into debt...not my job or responsibility to provide a pension for you. Try something called SAVING money. It works. It might not make you rich, but it will be more than nothing and won't require you FORCING your neighbors to carry your weight. Your kid is a senior in high school and can't read? Sure, blame the teachers and society at large. Why should YOUR kid be YOUR responsibility? Just TAX me some more. That'll fix the problem. Seriously, regardless of which color kool-aid you've been drinking, the problem isn't the kool-aid, it's the goddamned person drinking it. If you don't like the candidates, DON'T vote for them. WRITE your candidate of choice in. We don't have to accept the jackasses who run or their so-called policies. And I don't have to accept the jackasses who think that helping themselves to money that I earned is the correct and proper thing to do. Those people are called thieves. And if I caught an individual emptying my wallet for their personal gratification, I'd break their hands for MINE. Wake up people. THINK. It's the one thing that's private and no one else can take from you or force on you. Be objective. Be fair. Or don't ask myself or other service people like myself to help you retrieve what you willingly gave away.

End of rant

[One of Many]

Really? Because my Grandfather died many years before my Grandmother did. Thanks to The HUGE Union he was a member of, she didn't have to worry about money for almost 40 years.
See, the UNION in question protected my Grandfather's pension, and then paid it out for 4 decades. Now, Grandma was a smart Irish lady, but financially saavy she was not. I'd assume that if her social security or pension plans were privatized, that she'd have starved. Why do you hate my Grandma Cons?

What an absurd question full of spite and intolerance to opposing views. Over 40 years only 10-15 were actually earned income based on statistics of withholding. The remainder was placed on the backs of many whom were strong armed into paying dues. Not much different than paying taxes in other social programs that were sold as voluntary, only not?

If there were a threat of her starving, how much responsibility would you have taken to prevent that? Maybe seeking out another social program to foot the bill? How noble of you! Should the "con's" ask if this would implicate that you and your family cared less about her by avoiding footing the FULL bill for one of your own?

Social Security was a gamble the government never expected to be collected long term. Having it voluntary was surely a flawed concept to fund without a cash flow. You can opt out of collecting, but you couldn't opt out of paying. Then some numbskulls turned it into a readily tappable cash cow for totally unrelated governmental purposes.

And what about Bush's wet dream to privatize Social Security? Who would handle such a large outpouring of funds? Would it be the large banking institutions? Big companies?

Again, isn't the above a perfect example "privatized" or should we label it "communized" income that has no set value of return or guarantee of benefits? Sounds like a wet dream that paid off in your world as the economy flourished. Fills ya with a sense of pride does it? It is still another piramid scheme since those at the end of the line will eventually be the first to get screwed.

Who would handle such a large outpouring of funds? Probably the same that would handle funding for socialized medicine. Which is more managable, a percentage of retirees once a month or the whole country legal or not 365 days a year?

Conservatism has accomplished something. They've destroyed this nation from Reagan on up. Those years were productive because of all the borrowing. The following years, the 1990's were really productive for the Chinese, ya know, as they took almost all our manufacturing based on text book, conservative economic practices. Clinton wasn't liberal, he was just Reagan Lite.

The argument can be made that Clinton was paying back favors to the Chinese for helping him get elected. I even see a similar scenario with Gore's satellite company. Some can make a fairly reasonable case that this administration road the wave started by Reagan, but take full credit for things in the economy far outside of their control. More shell games, but same little pea~

Destroyed? If you have a job, a roof over your head and can afford to be here on the web, I'd think destroyed is a major exageration. Look at the rest of the world and prove how much worse off you are than 90% of other living humans on this planet.

If it is all borrowed money debt created by "con's", where is the funding going to come from to pay for all the new proposed social programs that get offered as voter bait in progressive promises? Self evident why they no longer call it "FREE HEATH CARE". Another program you can opt out of but you will probably be fined for not participating.

Also, I'm sensing a lot of Hillary bashing. I know, it's the Con's way. Not to rub it in too much, but you're bashing on Hill because your side's got nothin this cycle. I'd be angry too.

As Bill Cosby tried to point out in cultural dilemma's. The reflection you cast on others is blinded by what you ignore in yourself. On those terms, I think there is plenty of bashing and kool-aid to go around. It becomes painfully obvious when your partisan complaints and annoyances are chasing your own tail, yet you remain part of the problem, not the solution! As if we just listen to you and your rhetoric, the world would be a new utopia.

No one has it all figured out, save for the perception and illusion to get you to believe one version of truth over another. Say it often enough, and it'll hold enough water regardless which side of the fence you chose.

DC

[dang]

What an absurd question full of spite and intolerance to opposing views.

Yes, it is full of spite. I'm a divider, not a uniter. After living through these past few years of conservative Gov't, after hearing what I've heard, mostly about patriots like Max Cleland, I've learned to hit hard and hit 1st. With that said, do I look like a Democrat to you?

Should the "con's" ask if this would implicate that you and your family cared less about her by avoiding footing the FULL bill for one of your own?

Go ahead, I would retort that I live in a society. In this society, we, as a society take care of those who've made it a great society by honoring Senior Citizens through quality of life payments. We all commit to contributing to the commons.

Social Security was a gamble the government never expected to be collected long term. Having it voluntary was surely a flawed concept to fund without a cash flow.

Nope. Social Security is a guaranteed retirement for the working class of The USA. Social Security has lifted about half of it's retirement aged recipients out of poverty. I like living in a world where old people aren't living in the streets. I only wish it could get better.

Then some numbskulls turned it into a readily tappable cash cow for totally unrelated governmental purposes.

Please clarify that statement for me.

Again, isn't the above a perfect example "privatized" or should we label it "communized" income that has no set value of return or guarantee of benefits?Sounds like a wet dream that paid off in your world as the economy flourished

The economy only flourished because those "Communists" as you just called them, who now receive social security payments went to work to build and support that economy. Thanks commies! Nice word usage by the way. Nevermind that ACTUAL Chinese Communists are our nation's largest importer now.

It is still another pyramid scheme since those at the end of the line will eventually be the first to get screwed.

Actually, that's not true at all. Social Security's supposed insolvency is a common conservative scare tactic. The numbers used in that particular equation are based on the lowest possible economic growth figures until 2042. Social Security will be A-OK. It would be alot better if the taxes on people who use more of our infrastructure, the wealthy, who should also, for just that usage, pay more of the cost for said infrastructure, would go up.

Which is more managable, a percentage of retirees once a month or the whole country legal or not 365 days a year?

Apparently, it's the whole population, the whole time. Veterans for instance, who use the state run system for health care, recieve better, more efficient care than anyone else. This is due to the fact that their system is more effieciently run than any other in the country. It's run by the Gov't. It's far cheaper, faster and more qualitative than your care or mine. As for illegals, that's not in my scope of protectionism. I'll only say that a country like Mexico on our borders is a little embarrassing. It's a blight. I wish they had more industry, more unions, a better life, so that they'd all stay in Mexico, that they didn't have to illegally work here. It's a bit like how many Canadians think of us Americans I'd imagine.

The argument can be made that Clinton was paying back favors to the Chinese for helping him get elected.

I'm sorry, did you just state that Clinton allowed a communist nation to run roughshod over our entire economy for campaign contributions? That's totally ridiculous. If anything at all, it's the economist Allan Greenspan and his entire school of conservative economic thought that allowed our market to be saturated with low cost goods.
It's called supply side economics. The theory goes, if there is supply, demand will follow. It's obvious that in any kind of reality based in fact, that someone has to want something in order to then commit to purchasing it.

Look at the rest of the world and prove how much worse off you are than 90% of other living humans on this planet

Really? You wanna look at the rest of the world? Should we start with the sinking value of our dollar? Should we then look at the health statistics of other industrialized nations? Maybe other industrialized nations with "Socialized Medicine?
I think you wanna compare us to 3rd world nations. Give the supply siders another decade and we'll be able to very easily make that comparison.

It becomes painfully obvious when your partisan complaints and annoyances are chasing your own tail, yet you remain part of the problem, not the solution! As if we just listen to you and your rhetoric, the world would be a new utopia.

The band Tool says that "The Universe is hostile, so impersonal, devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been." I'm with about half of that statement. Liberalism, Progressivism is the closest thing we have in politics to the natural behavior of mammals. We group together to survive a harsh environment. It's not communism because we get to vote. It's that simple. The line is drawn in the voting booth, so it is, so it's always been.

[dang]

I should want MORE gov't because MORE regulation determines that the REGULATIONS are being followed? How will more rules prevent the rules that are currently being broken, manipulated and mangled from happening

That's what regulations do. We have an endless list of toothless regualtions. The system is flawed. Lobbyists, special interests, and huge amounts of money are all very serious issues. I can certainly understand where this line of thinking comes from. I just look forthe silver lining is all.

Taxes are abominable.

I agree, partially anyway. Taxes for my part are disgusting. For corporations, especially the big, multi national corps, they're disgustingly low. The playing field is slanted in favor of making money off of moving money, capitol gains. It's really a sad state of affairs.
It's funny though, that almost everything ever done to further liberty in this nation, has been done to avoid taxation. It's very rich people who twist that message to include their helpless trust funds and faceless corporation's impoverished stock holders. It's truly sickening.

Nationalized health care? No thanks. Swedens tax rate is something between 35-40% per person. For free health care & education? Thanks, but no thanks.

We aren't in Sweden. Taxes won't ever be that severe on Joe Six Pack. We do need free education AND free health care, just to compete properly. But taxes should be severe on the very wealthy, not the very working class. Republicans are, for the most part, only defending their fiscal ideals. Any other message is only used to gain votes. Be it God, guns, gays, whatever. It's all about the money. I think Bush has proven that to all of us.

As for the rest, I think it's mostly selfish thinking. Just my opinion, certainly not an indictment of your character Wyld. To make policy for masses of people, you'd have to look at the most adversely affected segments of those same people, so as not to forget their needs. Anything else is elitism.

[307startup]

That's what regulations do. We have an endless list of toothless regualtions. The system is flawed. Lobbyists, special interests, and huge amounts of money are all very serious issues. I can certainly understand where this line of thinking comes from. I just look forthe silver lining is all.



I agree, partially anyway. Taxes for my part are disgusting. For corporations, especially the big, multi national corps, they're disgustingly low. The playing field is slanted in favor of making money off of moving money, capitol gains. It's really a sad state of affairs.
It's funny though, that almost everything ever done to further liberty in this nation, has been done to avoid taxation. It's very rich people who twist that message to include their helpless trust funds and faceless corporation's impoverished stock holders. It's truly sickening.



We aren't in Sweden. Taxes won't ever be that severe on Joe Six Pack. We do need free education AND free health care, just to compete properly. But taxes should be severe on the very wealthy, not the very working class. Republicans are, for the most part, only defending their fiscal ideals. Any other message is only used to gain votes. Be it God, guns, gays, whatever. It's all about the money. I think Bush has proven that to all of us.

As for the rest, I think it's mostly selfish thinking. Just my opinion, certainly not an indictment of your character Wyld. To make policy for masses of people, you'd have to look at the most adversely affected segments of those same people, so as not to forget their needs. Anything else is elitism.

Man is a selfish creature DANG. I don't mind thinking of myself. No one else does. I don't want handouts. If I can't earn it, I don't deserve it. Plain & simple. I'm tired of whiny cry-babies who are too lazy to get off their fat ass and work for what they want. And yes, I am speaking of 90% of Americans. My own country folk. I have two jobs, (40 hrs & 20 hrs+) plus I carry 12 credit hours or more every semester at night school. Don't see me crying because I can't afford an Escalade and a 72" plasma TV. I'm enlightened enough to realize that LIFE is a risk. That nothing goes as planned.

Ever been in battle? Shot at in the dark by people you don't know? Met the enemy face to face and had to make a decision to kill or be killed? That's about as selfish as it gets...for the most inane reasons. If I had my druthers, I'd have been on a beach in North Carolina, drinking beer, rather than shooting a rebel in Bosnia. But I didn't have my druthers, so my next best choice was to come home alive so I could have that beer on the beach. I had nothing personal against the Christians or the Muslims in Bosnia. But we were playing our roles. My role was not to be prey. We had all kinds of plans...and contingency plans. Back up plans. A, B, C plans. They all went to ****, when real life intervened. We fell back on training and on eachothers strengths. The fact that I had to take lives during my term of service does not mean that I did my job. In means that I did what I had to do to complete my mission. No job is completed if you're dead or dying.

If people don't want to be poor...SAVE MONEY! If people don't want to starve...EARN MONEY! Life does not get any simpler. Call me selfish for pointing out the obvious.

Have you ever read the fable of the ants and the grasshopper? The ants worked all summer to save food for the coming winter and the grasshopper played all summer only to have winter set upon him with no stores? Well guess what...I'm not a grasshopper, and I don't care if I'm outnumbered. MAJORITY RULE is DEMOCRATIC rule. Only so long as YOU'RE in the MAJORITY...aka MOB RULE. Just because someone has greater numbers does not make them correct. I pity the ignorant S.O.B.'s who think they can come on my property and help themselves to what I've earned, made or purchased because they were too lazy to provide for themselves. When I run out of ammo, there will be bodies stacked 10 high, and then they will get to see the full force of American mean via hand-to-hand combat. No Queensbury rules in QCB. Every man for himself and I have sweated in training to avoid bleeding in combat.

Most people are PARASITES. They drain, they do not help fill. Sorry if this offends you. I am not an elitist. I don't give two ****s where someone went to school or who their daddy is. If they can't hack their job, their studies, their commmitments, **** them. I'd rather stand shoulder to shoulder with people who understand that we are a power outage & a few days away from being animals again. That the thin veneer of civility wears away quickly when our creature comforts and daily routines are interrupted.

I can hunt, fish and harvest from nature. I have a garden. I can fix or repair most items. I can create a tool from basic materials. I am also well read and educated. I am trained in the arts of war. I enjoy the theatre and musical presentations. I am constantly reinventing myself and learning from the past. I do this because I am able. Just as everyone else who isn't developmentally disabled or too ****ing lazy to CONTRIBUTE to society instead of whine because 10% of the population isn't providing for the 90% who think they are ENTITLED to it, simply because they are sucking MY air and breeding like rodents.

To think that a COMMON SENSE form of gov't is impractical because I haven't considered "average Joe SixPack" is laughable. I have considered "average Joe SixPack" and I find him wanting. Dinner is served at 7. You know where the table is and you better wash your hands. If you haven't contributed you will wait until those who have, have had their fill. THAT IS REAL LIFE.

For all the CONSUMERS out there who have no idea what goes into PRODUCING their shiny bits, a real education is when you are alone, in the wilderness, with no instruction booklet or 800 number, and that shiny bit may be the difference between surviving and becoming a statistic. Appreciation is a funny thing...what we take for granted, we assume to be deserving of...until it is no longer available on a whim and we realize how truly fortunate we are to have had it while it lasted.

[dang]

No, I've never been in combat.
Thanks.
No, I'm not sleep deprived either.
I'm not a Dem because I enjoy paying taxes, taking guns or lowering the bar for Joe Six Pack. I enjoy that stuff, minus the taxes, but it ain't why.
I'm a Dem because it makes sense to me. Some of the time anyway. Honestly, I'd just as soon punch up the Dems in power right now as have a conversation with them. I wouldn't make it in politics.
I suppose I'm a Dem because I hate to see people fall into the cracks. As a simple worker bee, I'd rather fill those cracks in with regulatory granite than widen them so only corporations or generationally wealthy types can escape their grasp.
In other words, rather than just assuming that there are too many regulations, I'd alternately choose to be a part of creating and sustaining those rules. For me, it's regulations what build bridges that don't collapse a week later. It's regulations what protect people.
Since you have been in combat. I'll only say this, and I'll say it respectfully as well. If you knew what Bush and his crew have done to Veteran's benefits. How they've cut this program and scaled back that one. How they've staffed Veteran's affairs with hack political appointee's who will do only their bidding at the highest levels. How they've staffed high level positions in Iraq, in theater, with 22 year olds who know nothing about what they're doing. About how they've done all this on purpose so as to blame incompetence for any shortfall which might and will occur. If you knew that Walter Reed were in the state that it's in because the guy in charge of every army hospital in Conus tried to run those hospitals like a business, instead of a hospital, you might be voting Dem in the next election. Maybe alot more than voting.
Big Government isn't a bad thing. Like I said, it's accountable. Big corporation isn't.
Maybe next time I'll tell ya'll about the company who makes the body armor for our troops and how if they made that same body armor to any actual spec, if it worked correctly, or if they didn't have a CEO who stole 6 million bux from his company to throw a party for his daughter, a party with Kenny G greeting people at the door, with Freakin Aerosmith as it's live headliner act, how that company and that CEO wouldn't be under investigation by congress.

[One of Many]

More liberal lunacy from the left. What sources do you get this from?

What looks good on paper does not always work well in reality. Oxymoronic complaints of governmental powers that exist today, yet willing to hand your team more power to regulate gains on industry and impose greater controls, burdens and less rights on private citizens that are trying the best they can to earn an honest living with 40-60% of what is left after taxes. Bigger government means bigger taxes, but less going for the good of the people here. If 70 cents of ever dollar collected is wasted, you wanna make it 80? Where does it end?

Basic economics for Joe Six Pack, the simple worker bee is based on growth and efficiency of his employer to produce more for less. Corporations do not pay taxes, but they always end up with the same profit margin. That is a cost of doing business and is ultimately passed off in the product price. This is just another shell game while the state is milking the cash cow(you, me and Joe). The end result is Joe Six Pack must work more or make more to support his meager existence. It is inflationary and compounds the loss in value of the dollar he already worked for. This forces him to buy imported junk from the despised supply side that has been made available within his means. That creates a demand for outsourcing. If that affliction comes to your industry that can no longer afford to offer the same product, you lose and must move on. Chances are your skills won't be required so you take a lower wage in another industry, service or say the hell with that and seek entitlements from the treasury. How dense is that path?

Safety regulations on construction of bridges is a bad analogy for the sake of comparison in regulating where corporate profits get redistributed.

Round and round, you will never catch up to your tail. It is not ok when this administration screws people, but it's fine if the dem's do it with your blessing. The current admin is not conservative by any definition of the word.

The only thing you have stated that I can agree with is that SS should be funded for our elderly, which we will hopefully be part of some day. I think that can be done with the other trillions of dollars they take out of the economy already. If a union can handle privatizing retirement accounts, then why can't I control the same funds and get a better return in the future dollars value.

This is not really worth the time to post all this. It resolves nothing! Control freaks are never satisfied......but they will argue until you no longer challenge their baiting.

DC

[dang]

More liberal lunacy from the left. What sources do you get this from?

The Social Security stuff came from an op-ed written by the grandson of Former THREE TERM President FDR. FDR is that guy who saw our nation through The Great Depression, and WW2. He put our whole nation back to work building stuff like Baseball Fields, National Parks, Dams, Bridges, Roads. you name it. He also instituted Social Security. He's on the dime.

The rest comes from a brilliant radio show host/author/alotta other stuff named Thom Hartmann. Hartmann's about as liberal as you can get. Every day he has a different Conservative on, so people like me get to hear the other side of the story.
One of Thom's books, I believe the most recent is about the use of language to confuse people. The word conservative for instance, total obfuscation. It means that they're conservative with THEIR money. Not yours, not mine, not anyone's who isn't a union busting gazillionaire.

liberal lunacy from the left

Control freaks

When I have more time, I'll pick that last post apart like I did the one before it. I won't even call anyone names, or label them inhuman.

My sources:
http://www.commondreams.org
http://www.thomhartmann.com/

[One of Many]

Oh yes, there were some things that FDR did that were great. One was remove the US from the gold standard which some claim led to the collapse of the economy and err go the great depression. All relative to which FDR made gold illegal to own in coin form. Then he used the tax of fiat money to jump start an economy he may have helped ruin. I am sure there were other things at play with the rest of the world placing greater value on gold than funny money used for unit trade denominations.

His zealous use of executive powers were not looked upon with fondness, but he was a great leader when we desperately needed one. The moral character of this current lot is abysmal as the democratic party evolved into the chaos it is today. I don't trust any of them on either side. Both use obfuscation to dance around the fine print and sell mis-information to gain power, in an effort to make the people powerless.

SS was his greatest gift but it has since been used for more than intended, robbed and filled with IOU's and never really kept pace with inflation. At the time, there was speculation given the life expectancy, most would never collect from it to keep it solvent. I'll give that a bi-partisan disaster through many administrations. My take is that at least Bush had given an option to get it out of the hands of the legislative branch of thieves where some of it could have a better chance to grow.

I just flat will not support a party that forces special rights for lifestyle perversions and touts fetal death as a form of birth control when prevention and personal responsibility should be a higher priority. My vote is all I have, but activist judges dictate whether someone else's fictional rights trump my morals.



Go ahead and tear them apart with your own regurgitation of talking points, for your own justifications. This is not an entertaining or informative tit-for-tat.....

DC