The Only Republican Plan Is to Destroy Democrats, Not Solve Problems

A lot of people in Southern Oregon voted for Bush for at least one of the following reasons.

1) Bush made the person feel smart by comparison
2) Bush looked like a guy the person could have a beer with
3) Bush was a good Christian who prayed every night

"It was the Democrat's idea to jam socialized medicine down our throats against the will of the American people"

Hahahaha omg if i hear the term "jam down our throats" one more time im gonna piss myself. Please watch something other than Fox News please. More than 1/2 as in the majority of Americans supported the bill.

Glad you enjoyed. Not nearly as much as I will see Prime Minister Pelosi deposed in November though.

Politics

Poli = poly
poly: many

tics = ticks
ticks: small blood sucking animals

Congress

Con=Opposite of Pro

Congress=Oppossite of Progress

That's why not much gets done

Aren't words fun!

I don't know, but it's kinda odd how he keeps getting removed and then keeps showing up again isn't it?

Bullshit. I believe in guns, and I know a lot of liberals who also believe in guns and/or own them. The difference is that most of the people I know wouldn't show off the gun to intimidate. You'd only see the gun if you either went out shooting with them, or if you where a serious physical threat to them and their gun was the last and/or best option.

Very ironic.

:)) [Removed]

I believe John Boenher, Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell, and the rest of their ilk care not one whit about the United States. They clearly lack any vision for the future and if your so sure of what you speak then prove the conservatives have done anything substancial for the Average American in the last thirty years. So put you money where your mouth is and recite chapter and verse what the conservative republicans have done for America in the last thirty years other than tax cuts which brought huge deficits and banking deregulation which brought us the financial disaster we are now in. Personnally I don't think you can come up with any.

still waiting

And we see through yours. :)

I agree totally!

Please, if you insist on getting off the bus...I have a plane we can hold for you that some guy named Rush has a ticket for headed for Costa...oh never mind, he went back on his word, ahhaha.

Anyways, I do agree with you that both sides of the aisle are culpable/responsible for corporations getting away with things. However, I do want to point out that the Democrats do want to regulate things such as the EPA in such a way that it holds the corporations accountable for its cleaning up after itself. Bush appointed someone from New Jersey to run the EPA and he said don't be so strict on the corporations. After all, they just want to maximize profits, and this whole global warming thing is just a made up belief (until 2006 I believe he recanted). So with more regulatory guidance and oversight I believe the corps will be held accountable. Instead of what has recently been coined the, "Free Market" allowing the banks and corps to run free and do what they want. Kind of like some Republicans in West Hollywood at a club named Voyeur...but I digress.

There are so many laws and facets of the government that it is hard to shout about everything that upsets people. There are so many splinter groups now that demand attention that a politician can run and get elected off just a few. Namely gun rights, anti-abortion, gays being allowed to exist at all, church being allowed in govt and schools, corporate rights (pharma, oil, energy), healthcare, welfare, war on drugs, war on terrorism, war on illiteracy in our schools, farm subsidies, immigration, etc...

You just tell your representative (mine is Cueller I believe) about all your interest and what is important to you. I am sure he will drop everything and...what, he has to represent the majority and not just one person? What the Sam Kindle is going on here?

Big vote up, Walks, that was perfectly said and done with so much more civility than I usually do. I'm just getting so tired of ignorance and mainstream news programming. Thanks for getting those thoughts out there, now I can sleep, lol.

That's part of his name.

I have to agree, the continuous posting after you have been removed it a bit of a mystery.

But when you click on his name to go to his account page, it says that the account has been disabled.

Then maybe he has Hacked his way back in and needs to be reported to the administrator.

Ironic that people find the Democrats to the problem when the republicans idea of tax cuts for the rich and deregulation ruined our economy.

The Democrats have to fix things and the republicans are outraged? We need healthcare reform and republicans didn't want ANY reform at all? Refused to agree on ANYTHING.

I find that the republicans are the problem and do not want to agree with anything that helps the people, hard working people of this country.

In all honesty, I think it began when Reagan began his Trickle Down Theory, and Bush later coined it VooDoo ecoomics (because it doesn't look like it will work). Then Bush took it to the extreme. I think we should bring back taxing the ultra wealthy at 70%. Bob Doles plan to have a flat tax of 15% made the wealthy extremely happy.

Deregulation and allowing the corporations do to what they want with little to no govt oversight led to the banks making risky investments. Even betting against the same funds they sell to us. With crazy tax cuts for the wealthy, and dishonest practices of the wealthy and corporations it led to our economy failing. Bush just gets the brunt of the blame. Clinton tried to fix it, and Bush overturned and reversed many things Clinton did. Can you say balanced budget? Paying off the deficit, well Clinton left Bush the opportunity. Bush spent like a madman, increased the size of the govt, and then cut taxes so we couldn't possibly pay for any it. Culminating wtih Enron and the banks to do what they want without any oversight.

Tell me again how Bush is a hero again? How Bush was rated the 3rd worst president in history for a reason. I think Bush had a banner, "Mission Accomplished". I think it was referring to making money for the wealthy and ruining our country, had nothing to do with the wars he started. He had no end plan or no concept of what he was doing. As in most things he undertook.

Good idea. I can remember a similar idea proposed by the Green Party back in 2002. They were calling it Electronic Town Hall, or maybe it was eTownHall.

The corporations controlling America fear such an idea. They would not be able to claim personhood and flood the network with your money.

Except that our country was founded based on the electoral college. To change our very form of government to an internet based blog vote seems as likely as changing to voting based on numbers.

The republicans will never allow the vote to come down to just the populace. There are more democrats overall, so the republicans benefit from the current system. Gore would have won if it were up to a popular vote. Instead Bush had to steal it in Florida.

What is to stop a corporation making up persona's to agree with their particular ideology? Then flooding the electronic vote with artificial votes? This will not happen while I am still alive.

I think that because the Supreme Court ruled that they have the rights of an individual that they would also have “ONE” vote, or post. Everyone would have to have a way to be approved by the “Submission Commission”, like being approved to vote, before being allowed to post.
Just an observation of the thread. Anyway, it could never happen under our system.

I agree with you. I don't know if the corporate interest necessarily feeds all they say. I think to a certain extent that they are shock jocks akin to Howard Stern. Look how outrageous they have become with their rhetoric. The more outrageous and fate filled the more viewers they garner. Which equates to millions in bonuses and contracts. If I wanted to make millions and didn't have a problem compromising my ethics and morality I would consider becoming a shock jock. Rush, Glenn Beck, OReilly, Ann Coulter. They promote hatred and vitriol that is akin to some parties from Germany back in the day, or Rwanda in the 90's, or South Africa in the 80's.

To be candid with you, and this is going to seem biased. I honestly do NOT see Ed Schultz, Olberman, or Franken being openly hateful and saying things like Rush or Ann Coulter or Sara Palin says. Or the others I mentioned earlier. The republicans would lose their minds if the democrats started emulating their brand of shock jock journalism.

Just look at the way they talk and what comes out of their mouths. Faux news openly distorts photos to make liberals look evil and fat. Is that honest? Is telling the poor that presidential voting is actually on Nov 5 honest and christian like? Is Sarah Palin placing bulls eye targets on 20 representatives she wants out of office responsible and non-violent? Is her saying that the republicans should not retreat, but rather reload? She is a big gun advocate, is she not insinuating that somehow guns be raised in protest?

I know you will state these are all just honest oversights. I say they are intellectually dishonest and it reminds me of politics in New York 1860 style.

So let me get this straight...you state that men should rule the country. That any women that leaves a man will be raped. Then to defend your misogynistic ideas you did a sociological study to suggest that women buy gossip magazines? Hence, it all makes sense. Your facts are unaltered by bias, you are a straight up misogynistic male that grew up in the 50's and thank the gods that times have changed and your ideas our out of touch.

I can't believe that you also state that Ann, Rush, Beck, and OReilly are in no way negative or inflammatory. In fact, you find the liberals to be just as inflammatory and creating the same hatred? Yeah...about that.

I think you misunderstood what Walks said in that post. I completely agree with Walks on his perfect description of how it is.

Look at your comments and you will see that when you state such things that it can be inferred that women being raped is possibly negative?

So you have anti-feminism views. So I have to ask if you feel the same as possibly the Taliban. Do you feel that women should be taught to read? Should women be allowed to go to school? Should women have the same rights as men?

Or, since you did an extensive scientifically based quantitative research project on the reading habits of women in supermarkets over 20 years you have determined what again? That they are weaker? I have a little secret to tell you...women read more Harlequin romance novels, are more emtional beings and express their feelings differently than men. Women also buy more skin softening products? As well as make up. Oh my gosh. Is this the end of civilization as we know it?

You are old and your ideas are old. Women ARE allowed to vote and have every right that a man does. If a man does happen to break the law and rape a women the law will deal with him. Thankfully sexual predators are treated harsher in prison. Or you are somehow rationalizing rape?

I know you're stating this to try and argue. I know you do not believe like him. If you do take his stances, it is only to argue, hahaha.

Nice try monkey.

I don't doubt that you are educated by your prolix responses. However, I do not agree with many of your statements. Some of which I find dangerous. Your ideas have already gotten you in trouble with the law. So I need understand you are embarrassed now of your responses. It is all good.

Just do me a favor and pay your taxes. Otherwise, the govt will be coming again. No jay walking either. Obey the law. ahhaha

I'm sure this will make you as sick as it did myself. However, the way that you deflected and then twisted and perverted Walks statement reminded me of Bill O'Reilly.

Terrible injury I have been very close too and still have some issues associated with it. I deal with death every day and become somewhat desensitized by it. Humiliation is subjective, but I have been humiliated enough where I am a loud outspoken Caucasian man that is only embarrassed by my grandmother raising her voice in Wal-mart asking me if I still wear white fruit of the looms because she had the hardest time getting the stains out. Humiliation isn't even close to describe my horror, hahaha. I have tragic humiliations, but can't share them out of people not even believing some of it.

However, all these things are subjective, I have not even come close to some of the experiences I have seen by people in foreign countries though. I am blessed to be an American. Proud of it too.

So you admit to violent acts on the road as well? You unmercifully tried to run down liberal children in a school zone with some crazed look in your eye honking and screaming with conservative stickers on your truck...twice, hahahahaha. Two citations, I knew you broke the law! haha.

Those IRS records were all fabricated. I am sure you have a chest in your backyard filled with cash and a treasure map to its location. haha. I have read many stories in "Readers Digest" (conservative magazine) where the IRS has made mistakes and ruined peoples lives. I feel as long as you are nice and respectful and don't mind paying $30,000 up front you are safe.

I will still though cling to not promoting violence. My father was all about violence and had enough weapons to make David Koresh jealous (Waco I believe). Regardless of the place (Ruby Ridge) and the govt's intent I do not think that attacking the govt like what happened at OKLA CITY should ever take place. Innocent people died, and I don't think vengeance is a good idea. I like Ghandi's methods, but probably not as effective these days.

So you agree that Bill Oreilly is not fair and balanced? haha.

Now seriously, look at some of Walks words and tell me that he didn't state men should run the country. That women shouldn't leave the protection of a man or risk being raped. That violence is acceptable if the govt does really offensive things to you (in his opinion)?

It is his right to free speech, but I find his ideas outdated.

Now, I wish I could make the money the Oreilly does.

I was completely joking trying to bring you out of your anger zone. However, I am sorry you didn't see my completely fabricated and embellished story of your traffic tickets as humorous.

I did find it funny you demanded to see any footage that the police officer had. You sound distrusting of everyone, hahaha.

I agree that I get a lot of my information from the media (i.e. newspapers, online, and television). Which is a controlled source of information and I am a lemming blinding listening and soaking it all up. I have often wondered if that is the true control is to throw in subliminal messages into movies and television?!?

Of course the police, IRS, and other authorities make mistakes.

However, I will still back up our set of laws and taxation that we have set up in our country. We have allowed it for years and neither party sees a reason to change it. The Republicans just happen to spend more overall in a historical perspective than Democrats.

Mental malaise, I find that funny. Many things concern me, my continued education being one of them. I hope I don't have mental malaise for my patients sake. However, I don't have the mental acumen I used to in my younger years. Age and life has robbed me of a few things.

Remember, pay your taxes, don't speed, and don't take life too seriously.

Most importantly...wear sunscreen. Have you ever heard of the Kurt Vonagut's (sic) commencement speech that they later turned into a song called Sunscreen?

I will gladly promote Patreus against Obama. I think Obama will win, since people are tired of the war. Every movie that comes about the war does not do well. People are tired of the wars and I think it would translate into a poor showing for Patreus. It isn't like WW2 were Eisenhauer was seen as a hero for a war that galvanized our country. The Iraq war is construed as a war that is illegal in its very nature.

So I say bring it, the republicans will have little else against Obama except for trying to reform healthcare. The "berthers" claiming he is not a U.S. citizen are Tea Party loyalist drunk off some home made moonshine.

I say bring Patraes on with Palin stumping for him on the campaign. I see Obama winning.

I say Steele would have a better showing for...well, for the strip clubs in California, hahahha.

1) Reverse the Supreme Court ruling allowing corporations unlimited election influence.
2) Go back to the Pre-Reagan tax levels.
3) Regulate Wall Street.
4) Regulate Corporate Environmental Polluters.
5) Fix Immigration laws that allow the corporations to hire illegals.
6) Eliminate health insurance companies and go to single payer healthcare.
7) Eliminate lobby organizations.
8) Make a law Requiring “Truth” in public news agency reporting.
9) Arrest people who publicly and purposefully incite violence.
10) Fix Social Security by eliminating benefits for people that don’t need them.
11) Put a Cap on campaign spending and do not allow private organizations to do political advertising.

These are just a few things that would hurt the Republicans (and many Democrats) but I believe would help our country.

Excellent posts and I hope that we can enact these ideas that translate into laws!!!

Hello Walks... You know in reading the blogs attached to this article there is a lot of absolutes being thrown around and most of those absolutes are only true part of the time, which contributes to the problem with political debate in this country. There are things that can be done to decrease the adversarial attitudes of both democrats and republicans, things that can be done without the constitutional amendment that would be required to eliminate lobbyists or reduce corporate influence over elections. Something as simple as removing political labels on ballets for all political offices; or changing the seating arrangnments in Congress to seat our representatives by senority front to back, instead of by political party so that democrats and republicans are required to sit next to each other; simple things that would help to reduce adversarial pandering: committee assignments based upon senority choice, not political party, chairmanships based upon committee election instead of by majority party designation.

Admittedly, these are minor reforms, if we want to do something major it would require a constitutional convention and the adoption of either a new constitution or major amendments. This is always dangerous as we do not know what rights will be dropped and which new ones will be created.

Anyway, based upon your blogs I know that you are probably an older man, like myself. You have been around and you have endurred much sufffering. Many of the other blogs are from kids who are content to do nothing more than slam the expression of opinion in absolute terms: "All Republicans are idiots" or "All Democrats are wimps". That is obviously not productive. We need a new method of political expression. We need to take the compassion of liberalism and fuse it with the self-reliance of conservatism to create a new generation of political leaders. Politics needs to become more than just words, it needs to become the way we live our lives. Politics has to do with "where we shop, what we eat, how we maintain our health. It has to do with the kinds of schools we create, the energy we use, the neighborhood organizations we build, the work we do." Lorraine Canoe, a Mohawk Indian leader said that we need to take our spirit in one hand and our politics in the other and fold them together. We need to create a new political paradigm. I have retired from my job as a lawyer and am now working on this new transformational political paradigm full time on a local level. We are building organizations and creating networks.

You have some good ideas, but some of your suggestions are unconstitutional, like putting a cap on campaign spending or eliminating lobby organizations. There is a way, however to do this in a constitutional manner. Maine has passed a public finance campaign law which actually works. A candidate who has collected a sufficient number of signatures to be on the ballet, (as opposed to paying a fee equal to one % of the salary for the office as is currently the law in my home state) is entitled to public financing of their campaign at a certain predefined level. To obtain public financing they have to agree not to take private contributions or to donate their own money to the campaign. If a candidate chooses to privately finance their campaign they may do so, (thus avoiding the constitutionality issue)but if they spend more than the publicly financed candidate is allowed to spend, then the publicly financed candidate is entitled to what is know as "rescue funds", additional public money to equal (up to a certain level) what the privately financed candidate is spending. If a third party spends money on a candidate, or an issue so closely associated with a candidate that it is obviously partisan, the publicly financed candidate also gets "rescue funds" to offset this expenditure.

Currently 83% of elected officials in the state legislature in Maine were elected with public money. This also reduces the influence of lobbyists. If you can run for office or reelection with public money then you do not need to listen to a lobbyist, other than the fact that they represent votes, so they have less influence. You do not need their campaign contributions. In my home state we are working to pass the Maine model of public financing of elections. I urge you to also get involved in your local election reform campaigns, if you have not already done so.

That's one of the better campaign reform ideas I have heard in a long time. Keep up the good work.

You think Obama and Co are extreme? That's a pretty sheltered point of view. To the rest of the world he's pretty much centre right. All US politics are skewed to the right and always have been, it's what defines the country.

i actually mean congress but alright

I couldn't agree with you more. The Dems need to grow a backbone and fight off the Cons!

Heh.

+^d

Our comments and statements are no where near the vitriol spewed by Fox, Rush, and Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter. I couldn't think of more hatred and intolerance coming from these four entities in the history of the U.S. besides the KKK, The Black Hand, or the white power movement.

The Re-thugs do not want to get anything done in this country. They want to leave things as they or. Or if they do want change, their change comes in the way of more tax cuts for the wealthy, more deregulation, and no union involvement at all. That is change, but not for the betterment of America.

Hahaha don't expect to destroy Liberalism when you guys pick people like Sarah Palin and George Bush to represent your party!