posted on November 13, 2000 04:49:53 PM new
aka Liberal aka Socialist.
You have to believe:
- The AIDS virus is spread by a lack of funding.
- That trial lawyers are selfless heroes and doctors are overpaid.
- That guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than nuclear weapons in the hands of the Red Chinese.
- That kids with guns are more of a threat than selling supercomputers, advanced airfoil
machinery and nuclear technology to the Red Chinese.
- That global temperatures are less affected by cyclical, documented changes in the brilliance of the Sun, and more affected by yuppies driving SUVs.
- That businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.
- That hunters don't care about nature but pasty, visionist activists who've never been
outside Seattle do.
- That self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.
- There was no art before federal funding.
- The military, not corrupt politicians, start wars.
- The NRA is bad, because they stand up for certain parts of the Constitution, while the
ACLU is good, because they stand up for certain parts of the Constitution.
- Hundreds of thousands of sport fishers fishing 360 days have less impact on fishery
resources than hundreds of commercial fishermen fishing 20 days (in a good year).
- That taxes are too low but ATM fees are too high.
- That Harriet Tubman, Cesar Chavez and Gloria Steinem are more important to American
history than Thomas Jefferson, General Robert E. Lee or Thomas Edison.
- That standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides aren't.
- Hillary Clinton is really a lady and Rosie O'Donnell is not really a man.
- That the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, is because the right people haven't been in charge.
posted on November 13, 2000 05:04:08 PM new
LOL Sgtmike you are to funny!
What about those of us who are neither democrat or republican but vote according to issues?
posted on November 13, 2000 06:08:08 PM new
Well, I am a Democrat and not ashamed to say I am.
What you are doing is spouting a bunch of stereotypes and is no different than saying that blacks are lazy or Jews are cheap.
The people that I know that are Democrats are thoughtful, thinking people and they are priests, doctors, policeman, teachers, homemakers, and almost any other vocation that you could name.
And I could say the same for the many Republicans friends that I have, too.
If we all thought the same on every issue, life would be very boring.
posted on November 13, 2000 07:14:01 PM new
Eeeeeeeekkkkkk! Just want you to know I was being sarcastic when I said sgtmike was funny.
busybiddy,I agree with what you say. Very stereotyping remarks, but as keihicat says, consider the source!
I am neither a Democrat or Republican but did vote Democrat across the board this time. I hate feeling obligated to vote any particular way so prefer to stay non-partisan.
posted on November 13, 2000 07:17:14 PM new
I would prefer to not be registered with one party or the other, however, if your not registered you don't get to vote in the primary. Since I really want to be able to vote there too, I've registered. Must admit my leanings are certainly republican too.
posted on November 13, 2000 07:21:39 PM new
So far we do not have to register as one or the other to vote in the primary. Apparently we are going to have to declare soon then I will have to decide.
posted on November 13, 2000 09:55:35 PM new
I personally think it's a real shame when anyone clings diehard to partisanship, either Republican or Democrat because it unquestionably closes your mind to the candidate in the opposing party, simply because he is 'the opposing party'. I wanted to vote for McCain, a Republican. The race narrowed down to Bush and Gore, and I chose Gore because frankly I have low tolerance for idiocy and Bush, (IMO) is a firstclass idiot. But I don't dislike him just because he's a Republican, anymore than I voted for Gore just because he's a Democrat. Yes, I lean Democrat most of the time, but I don't make up my mind on a candidate before looking at the positives and negatives of both sides. And that means looking at the man, not the party.
Something as important as deciding the nation's future should be about deciding between two candidates, not deciding between two parties. And most certainly not deciding on a candidate based on his party.
Clinging to either party and voting only for that party is narrow-minded, and puts you at a disadvantage when it comes time to examine both candidates at hand with a completely open mind.
posted on November 13, 2000 11:21:28 PM new
I hate to post to a thread that starts out this nasty.
But other than the first post this is a very interesting disscussion.
My father ( who was a die hard democrat ) told us that only a lazy person votes the straight party ticket.
There are good people on both side he told us and it was our job as voters to find out who they were. I don't listen to the garbage at election time I search out voting records.
Even then you have to be informed. Just because someone voted againest something you would rather they had voted for you have to check out what nasty little bugger someone may have tacked on the end of the bill that your glad not to have passed.
I keep my ears open during the year but I start checking up two or three months before the election and I take my notes in the booth with me.
Like a lot of people I have beliefs that would probably make you believe I was a republican and some that would have you swearing I was a democrat.
Most people won't fit into that neat little stereotype that small minded people prefer because it's easier than thinking for themselves.
posted on November 13, 2000 11:22:06 PM new
I love it when a person blindly but openly expresses hypocrisy and self-contradicting statements. Some people should dissect and assess carefully what they write before they hit the button.
posted on November 14, 2000 12:04:27 AM new
It's come to be more and more the style to hold the view of looking at a candidate on his own merits rather than by his party affiliation. It seems more open minded and fair.
But take a look at the current situation. No matter if you viewed the Congressman you voted for on his own merits when he campaigned, aside from his party, there are very few Democratic or Republican politicians who are their own men right now. Whether or not you saw them then as deserving to be considered individually, for the moment they're all party hacks, aside from a few isolated turncoats, who are being villified by their own. Whether you realized it or not then, you voted for a cog in the party machine, and they're all doing their bits now to make the machinery run.
And that party machinery isn't such a bad thing. What it's doing now isn't particularly lovely to look at, but that same party solidarity and support gets things done, that you want done, that individual, fragmented politicians couldn't do on their own.
posted on November 14, 2000 01:11:25 AM new
Naaaa I don't think so SgtMike, and I am a Republican, and have worked for the party.
but this [b]That hunters don't care about nature but pasty, visionist activists who've never been
outside Seattle do.[/b]
I have to take exception with especially. Obviously you've never been to Wa state, or Seattle..... pasty? whatever! LOL! Its all rumor it rains 359 days a year!
posted on November 14, 2000 07:33:42 AM new
sgtmike: "That hunters don't care about nature but pasty, visionist activists who've never been outside Seattle do."
