|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 2:20:41 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 556
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
Aren't you Christians who are voting for Obama concerned at all with the idea of an ultra-liberal president along with possibly 60 Democrats in the Senate and a good majority in the house also?
The far left will potentially get anything they want! Possibilities:
* The Supreme Court would become radically biased towards the left. Right now it's pretty balanced. With 60 Democrats in the Senate, Obama could pick the most leftist people he knows, and could probably get them in.
* The almost certain instantaneous passage of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would do away with all common sense restrictions on abortion.
* Defining marriage to include gays -- if not right away, then down the line due to the liberal court.
* Additional restrictions on home schooling, maybe making it illegal all together, despite overwhelming evidence that homeschooling produces the best educated students.
* Legal defense of things like transgender behavior to the extreme. Colorado's Democrats passed Senate Bill 200 which, for example, prohibits discrimination for restroom access. So a guy who thinks he's a girl can use the lady's restroom. (What about a guy with other intentions going in there under such a guise?)
The far left throw all traditional values and common sense out the window. And the Democrats as a party are pretty much tied to them. For that reason I never vote for Democrats on any level, even though there are some good decent Democratic politicians. Whenever you vote for a Democrat, who would then vote for Democratic leadership, you give power to the far left.
Even if you do lean left on some issues (which is reasonable), wouldn't it be better to vote for a Republican president who would at least stop the extremes of the far left?
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 3:26:55 AM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 1268
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
PB! Welcome to the Election folder.
You have identified one of the biggest reasons to keep 0bama out of the Whitehouse: the Supermajority.
It is exactly like the legendary "perfect storms" of the northeast: somehow all of these elements came together at the exact right time in the exact right way to produce the most disastrous result possible for the USA (Democrats in control of all three branches of government). That is a pretty depressing possibility, though it may be exactly in line with removing the USA as a world power as the end times draw to a close.
_____________________________
"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." - 2nd Peter 3:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 4:23:49 AM
|
|
|
His_4_Ever
Posts: 605
Joined: 10/4/2008
From: Idaho
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
* Defining marriage to include gays -- if not right away, then down the line due to the liberal court.
Obama is against same sex marriage. He is not going to re-define the definition of marriage. He is for giving same sex couples "all" of the benefits of marriage through civil unions. I am for this because of the children caught in the middle of these relationships, who have no choice. Some of those benefits will benefit them. I don't feel they should be excluded from receiving these benefits (such as medical coverage etc.) because of their parents sexual orientation, when they have no control over that. I believe if just one of these children had some terrible illness and were denied medical coverage then died, that would be murder. I really don't care about the adults though.
Why are people coming up these catastrophic scenario's? No one can predict what will happen for sure. If people put their faith and trust in God, instead of concentrating on the bad things they think are going to happen, maybe God would surprise them.
< Message edited by campbe33 -- 11/1/2008 4:31:53 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 7:42:56 AM
|
|
|
zamdad
Posts: 1755
Joined: 4/8/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Obama is against same sex marriage. He is not going to re-define the definition of marriage. He is for giving same sex couples "all" of the benefits of marriage through civil unions. I am for this because of the children caught in the middle of these relationships, who have no choice. Some of those benefits will benefit them. I don't feel they should be excluded from receiving these benefits (such as medical coverage etc.) because of their parents sexual orientation, when they have no control over that. I believe if just one of these children had some terrible illness and were denied medical coverage then died, that would be murder. I really don't care about the adults though.
Even if Obama is against same sex marriage, the justices he would appoint to the supreme court won't be. Obama himself won't redefine marriage, we as a society will do that and Obama will put people in positions to engineer this.
Yes, it's too bad for the kids caught in the middle. Perhaps Obama will appoint people who will make it necessary to have a license to breed. The thing is, if someone is truly homosexual as in "born that way," they can't reproduce. If they have kids outside a homosexual relationship it means they are not truly homosexual. I can tell you this, as a cop and a former probation officer, I have seen too many kids caught in the middle of adults who are too stupid to be parents. The homosexual agenda has, perhaps, misplaced your sympathies. And, on a final note, failing to care for the adults is failing to care for the kids. Kids need adults to lead, guide and instruct them. If adults don't care for thmselves, they won't care for the kids.
It seems that many Obama supporters on this forum are not seeing the bigger picture. They're all to willing to vote for someone who has beliefs that conflict with their values. It seems they see some changes taking place that go against the values they express to believe, yet they see no personal conflict because it "won't affect me personally." However, somewhere down the road, each and every one will be hit personally in some way and then will fail to see the connection between this choice and the eventual consequence. And, you won't have Bush to blame anymore. I hear many calling themselves independants or centrists. In other words, pweople who re unwilling to take a stand which means they'll fall for anything.
_____________________________
The two hardest things to handle: failure and success.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 7:56:05 AM
|
|
|
TaoPoohBear
Posts: 589
Joined: 1/18/2008
Status: offline
|
The last time the Democratic party had that kind of control was over 40 years ago, did they advance all these things you fear?
We've seen how Republicans run this country when they have complete control (into the ground); What makes you think the Dems will have time to do this ambitious "liberal agenda"? It'll take longer than 4 years just to climb back out of the hole we're in.
I understand a fear of the future, what I will never understand is to use it as an excuse to wallow in the failed past.
"I steer my bark with hope in the head, leaving fear astern. My hopes indeed sometimes fail, but not oftener than the forebodings of the gloomy." - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 8:19:15 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 556
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TaoPoohBear
The last time the Democratic party had that kind of control was over 40 years ago, did they advance all these things you fear?
Actually they sort of had it the first two years of Clinton, albeit not with 60 Senate seats. We almost got government-run health care then, which is in itself sort of a liberal wet dream, but not quite in the same ballpark as some of the moral issues I've addressed.
I think they didn't try to advance them the last time because the far left were not as advanced and emboldened in the US then as they are now.
Now the left are off the charts. You may have seen earlier this year where some gay activists in San Francisco went into a Catholic church and desecrated communion. No one in the city did anything about it. The left are the people who want to stamp out all vestiges of traditional religion, particularly true Christianity. Any vote for a Democrat gives them more power.
quote:
We've seen how Republicans run this country when they have complete control (into the ground);
No major disagreement there. I'm not a major Republican supporter, especially not right now. I'm mighty ticked about many of the actions of Republicans over the last decade or so. I vote for good Republicans, and also independents, Libertarians, and Constitution Party folks. I try not to vote for spectacularly bad Republicans. If Bush was running again, for example, I'd probably vote for Bob Barr. But McCain isn't Bush.
quote:
What makes you think the Dems will have time to do this ambitious "liberal agenda"?
It doesn't take long at all to rush through legislation when they want to. Plus it doesn't have to be done in 4 years. When the SC has 6-7 liberals on it, damage will be done over decades.
Didn't Obama promise to sign FOCA as his first act as president?
quote:
It'll take longer than 4 years just to climb back out of the hole we're in.
Whatever. But that doesn't mean that a lot of other garbage can't get passed in the meantime.
quote:
I understand a fear of the future, what I will never understand is to use it as an excuse to wallow in the failed past.
Just saying -- why not balance? Why do you want to give complete power to the far left? In a mixed government you at least need to get some consensus across the spectrum.
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 9:07:57 AM
|
|
|
TaoPoohBear
Posts: 589
Joined: 1/18/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: TaoPoohBear
What makes you think the Dems will have time to do this ambitious "liberal agenda"?
It doesn't take long at all to rush through legislation when they want to. Plus it doesn't have to be done in 4 years. When the SC has 6-7 liberals on it, damage will be done over decades.
Didn't Obama promise to sign FOCA as his first act as president?
It's true that in July 2007, Obama told a Planned Parenthood audience: “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” I think that 2 years later he'll have a FEW prorites ahead of his boast - The economy, Iraq, Afghanistan, the debt, the climate, our aging infrastructure, anything elese that happens in the next few months........
You & I both know all about "campaign promises".
Any legislation that is "rushed thru" had better deal with current problems, or the press will roast him & his buddies; As will some of us Dems! 
Do you really think more than a couple of SC judges will be leaving in the next 4 years?!
(and only a couple won't make much of a difference)
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: TaoPoohBear
I understand a fear of the future, what I will never understand is to use it as an excuse to wallow in the failed past.
Just saying -- why not balance? Why do you want to give complete power to the far left? In a mixed government you at least need to get some consensus across the spectrum.
I'm just saying, why not give 'em 4 years to see if they can fix it?! It has been 40 years since they've had a 60 seat majority on the Senate + a large majority in the House + a President. Why not give 'em a chance? Is it so unfair to ask, after having a Republican majority? We're all Americans.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 9:12:17 AM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 2351
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Aren't you Christians who are voting for Obama concerned at all with the idea of an ultra-liberal president along with possibly 60 Democrats in the Senate and a good majority in the house also?
If conservatives hadn't sold them selves out for the Republican Party in 2000 and 2004 to George Bush in those two elections this scenario would be a complete impossibility. Dubya would have been crushed in 2000 and htey would have had a chance to take the party back in 2004. Too few of us have learned.
_____________________________
-Roger
I could wile away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 9:30:16 AM
|
|
|
earthless
Posts: 6342
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: where pigeons are wearing sweaters....
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TaoPoohBear
The last time the Democratic party had that kind of control was over 40 years ago, did they advance all these things you fear?
Things and acceptance of things are A LOT different today than they were 40 years ago.
_____________________________
Probing Today's Religious Movements | Promoting Doctrinal Discernment & Critical Thinking | Providing Reasons for Christian Faith & Ethics
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 10:19:44 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 556
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TaoPoohBear
Do you really think more than a couple of SC judges will be leaving in the next 4 years?!
(and only a couple won't make much of a difference)
A couple more liberal judges would make a leftist majority that could get just about any left-wing agenda through! Not to mention eliminating any hopes of more restrictions on abortion.
quote:
I'm just saying, why not give 'em 4 years to see if they can fix it?! It has been 40 years since they've had a 60 seat majority on the Senate + a large majority in the House + a President. Why not give 'em a chance? Is it so unfair to ask, after having a Republican majority? We're all Americans.
Well Republicans never had 60 Senate seats.
It looks like they'll have a chance whether we like it or not. Hopefully they'll do well, and they probably will on some issues. I just hope they don't do too much damage in the process.
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 10:27:47 AM
|
|
|
Peter_Gunn
Posts: 706
Joined: 6/12/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: campbe33
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
* Defining marriage to include gays -- if not right away, then down the line due to the liberal court.
Obama is against same sex marriage. He is not going to re-define the definition of marriage.
Obama has said he's "personally" against Sodomite marriage. (And, yep...that's a correct term.) I DO think he will push to legalize it, nation-wide.
Being personally against something is different. I am personally against smoking, but I don't think it should be illegal. I am personally against liver  , but I don't think it should be illegal.
Let's meet back here in a year and see if he has, indeed, tried to "re-define the definition of marriage."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 10:57:49 AM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 5798
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
quote:
Whequote:
When the Democrats control everything
(Rev 13:1) And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
(Rev 13:2) And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
(Rev 13:3) And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
(Rev 13:4) And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
(Rev 13:5) And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
(Rev 13:6) And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
(Rev 13:7) And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
(Rev 13:8) And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
(Rev 13:9) If any man have an ear, let him hear.
or something similiar.
Thanks
RC
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion
Read the first chapter of my latest book here;
http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 11:16:31 AM
|
|
|
Evangel70
Posts: 550
Joined: 10/28/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Why are people coming up these catastrophic scenario's? No one can predict what will happen for sure. If people put their faith and trust in God, instead of concentrating on the bad things they think are going to happen, maybe God would surprise them.
Back in 2000 and again in 2004 there were many moderates and democrats who believed that having the Republicans control everything would mean the creation of a theocratic government where they would be forced to convert to Christianity or loose their civil rights.
I rolled my eyes when I heard that a Republican majority would mean that abortion would be made illegal and young women would die from botched abortion attempts. I thought it insane when many said that homosexuals would be thrown in jail and if they had children they would be torn from their families and put in some orphanage or deprograming camp. Many throught that the constitution would be replaced by George Bush's version of the 10 commandments, that civil rights for some would be eliminated, that children would be forced to say a Christian prayer and read the bible in public schools, that the Supreme Court would shift to the extreme right (o.k. so this one came true) and in 2004 that the war in Iraq would go on for generations.
As you can see, fear is in the eye of the beholder. Obama will have his hands full trying to undue the damage caused by this administration. There are 2 wars with no end in sight, an economy nosediving into a recession, 4 million people with no health insurance, an increasing jobless rate and the elusive search for Osama Bin Laden and the terrorist that attacked us on 9/11.
I don't believe the focus of the Obama administration will be to force pregnant women and teens to abort their babies or to force anyone to become homosexual (if that's even possible). I do believe he will appoint judges to the SC that are more centrist and will protect the civil liberties of ALL individuals and not just those who live their lives according to the teaches of the bible. As another poster stated, I may believe that the KKK are reprehensible and hell-bound, but I wouldn't want their right to speak eliminated.
Obama is personally against abortion and will probably create more programs to eliminate unwanted pregnancies (prevention) but will leave legal abortion as it is. Obama is personally against gay marriage but will allow states to decide for themselves whether or not to allow gay marriage. Eventually (probably in Obama's second term) it may become a supreme court issue as it not be feasible to have a patchwork of marriage recognition throughout the nation.
Perhaps an Obama administration will force conservatives to return their focus to the "church" as an agent of change rather than put their faith and trust in the government to change the hearts and minds of man. The government SHOULD legislate criminal behavior and any act that would cause harm to an unwilling participant. That's why we have laws against murder, rape, theft, speed limits, etc. But how do you legislate sexuality? How do you legislate stupidity? These are areas where the church has enormous power. Imagine putting the same effort and prayer you put into getting a republican elected into getting your neighbor or co-worker saved or perhaps into modeling for your children or grandchildren, what it means to be a Christian. We wouldn't have to worry about who's in control if we truly had a Christian nation.
_____________________________
May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 11:45:56 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 2022
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Aren't you Christians who are voting for Obama concerned at all with the idea of an ultra-liberal president along with possibly 60 Democrats in the Senate and a good majority in the house also?
Even if you do lean left on some issues (which is reasonable), wouldn't it be better to vote for a Republican president who would at least stop the extremes of the far left?
Yes, I am concerned about some of his policies, but not all of the ones you mentioned (particularly gay marriage, which is a stupid issue IMO for conservatives to get riled up over) and certainly not to the degree that you and others are concerned.
I would vote for a Republican if I thought there was a good Republican running. I don't.
I expect both Obama and McCain to run their respective administrations in ways similar to which they've run their campaigns. Obama has been focused and steady, relying on people who are skilled at what they do (despite having a few skeletons in their closets), and has maintained a relatively positive hopeful outlook. McCain's campaign, however, has been something of a mess. There have been several high-level turnovers with a fair amount of infighting, and control given to people who are better at lobbying than campaigning. There's been a fair amount of fear generated against Obama that, IMO, is borne more out of frustratioin and desperation than out of careful strategic planning. I believe the choice of Palin was a shallow attempt to pander to the base, to "give them what they want" rather than a choice based on her experience or contributions she can make. McCain was successful in the primaries, because the other candidates for the most part (except maybe for Guiliani), were "stock Republicans" and the public was tired of that, so he used his reputation as a "maverick" to defeat them. But now that he has to actually fight on his own, he's flailing.
While I don't think that McCain == Bush, I do see some similarities in the way that McCain has run his campaign and the way that Bush has run his administration. Bush started off by nominating people who were more loyal to him and the party than they were skilled at what they were doing. He also has a habit of ignoring contrary opinions or evidence, choosing instead to go with he thinks is right. I don't know how McCain handles contrary opinions, but I can certainly see Palin acting similarly.
This election, I'm not voting based on "core conservative policies," because I don't think McCain could deliver on them anyways. Instead, I'm voting for a candidate who I believe can, at least to some degree, help fix broken government. Government is not bad; it's not evil; it has a very important role to serve and I believe that conservatives have used their distaste for government to subconsciously sabotage government and to justify governing poorly. I don't share Obama's love for government programs, but I do believe that if we're going to have these programs (and we will, regardless of who becomes president), that they should be executed well. I don't believe McCain will do a good job of that.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 12:24:26 PM
|
|
|
Peter_Gunn
Posts: 706
Joined: 6/12/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: campbe33
So, if McCain says he's personally against killing babies that would mean he will actually push for it to be legalized?
Well, I don't believe McCain has said that. I do believe he's said he's against Roe v. Wade.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm
Big difference.
As for Obama's stance on Sodomite-marriage...
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.samesexmarriage.html
"Opposes same-sex marriage, but also opposes a constitutional ban. Says he would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment. As stated on the Obama campaign Web site, he supports full civil unions that "give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples, including the right to assist their loved ones in times of emergency as well as equal health insurance, employment benefits, and property and adoption rights."
Says the Employment Non-Discrimination Act should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Advocated legislation that sought to expand federal hate crimes law to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
Says the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy needs to be repealed."
And before you go there...marriage = civil union. If/when "civil unions" are legalized, you won't be able to tell the difference between those and a marriage. It's semantics. Worldly speaking, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 12:26:47 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1216
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: online
|
quote:
* The almost certain instantaneous passage of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would do away with all common sense restrictions on abortion. Not as long as those "common sense" restrictions contain an exemption for the life AND HEALTH of the mother.
quote:
* Defining marriage to include gays -- if not right away, then down the line due to the liberal court. I don't think so, although civil unions will probably be recognized. I don't really care either way, gay folks getting married doesn't make me unmarried, so...
quote:
* The Supreme Court would become radically biased towards the left. Right now it's pretty balanced. With 60 Democrats in the Senate, Obama could pick the most leftist people he knows, and could probably get them in. Possibly, but if you listen to what he says about this issue it's clear that while his appointments will lean left there's no indication they will be radically so.
quote:
* Additional restrictions on home schooling, maybe making it illegal all together, despite overwhelming evidence that homeschooling produces the best educated students. Got anything to back this up? I haven't even heard it mentioned.
quote:
The far left throw all traditional values and common sense out the window. Sometimes, but I don't think Obama is that far left and I believe he respects many traditional values. I mean here is a guy who has been married to ONE woman, has two children with her and they did it in the "correct" order - marriage first, then kids. That's pretty traditional behavior if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 12:28:56 PM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 2022
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Peter_Gunn
And before you go there...marriage = civil union. If/when "civil unions" are legalized, you won't be able to tell the difference between those and a marriage. It's semantics. Worldly speaking, of course.
I don't have a problem with the legalization of gay marriage, but on this, I agree.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 12:35:33 PM
|
|
|
zamdad
Posts: 1755
Joined: 4/8/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
quote:
ORIGINAL: Peter_Gunn
And before you go there...marriage = civil union. If/when "civil unions" are legalized, you won't be able to tell the difference between those and a marriage. It's semantics. Worldly speaking, of course.
I don't have a problem with the legalization of gay marriage, but on this, I agree.
-Dan.
Just an observation, Dan. In another thread you indicated you consider yourself conservative. yet, many of your posts in these forums point to some very liberal ideology. Do you consider yourself more of an independant or centrist? You seem to be unable to take clear position.
_____________________________
The two hardest things to handle: failure and success.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 12:48:03 PM
|
|
|
FreddieD
Posts: 299
Joined: 7/23/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: zamdad
Just an observation, Dan. In another thread you indicated you consider yourself conservative. yet, many of your posts in these forums point to some very liberal ideology. Do you consider yourself more of an independant or centrist? You seem to be unable to take clear position.
What's wrong zamdad? Is he not the kind of conservative you invision? I think your question is irrelative.
FreddieD
|
|
|
|
|
RE: When the Democrats control everything ... - 11/1/2008 1:27:28 PM
|
|
|
todd_t
Posts: 1621
Joined: 6/21/2006
From: The North Woods
Status: offline
|
quote:
You have identified one of the biggest reasons to keep 0bama out of the Whitehouse: the Supermajority.
Not so long ago, Bush and the GOP had one for six years. Were you complaining then?
_____________________________
In Memoriam: 1st Sgt. Obediah Kolath, US Army, Died in Iraq War (1973-2005)
|
|
| | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
You're a bit late -- Halloween is already over! 