Volkswagen Passat Forum banner

1 - 20 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,885 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Chris Mathews said it best, "I think we need to come to grips with the fact that the liberal years are over in America."

The Democratic Party in the United States is toast. The only person willing to make an optimistic statement today is Obama.

Despite the media's best efforts, they lost -- ALL of them.

The White House, the Senate, the House, and soon the Supreme Court: the people have spoken, the liberals have lost. America has spoken.

Their strategy of complaining for four years straight has failed. They need to go back to square one. Pandering to the poor, drug addicts, labor unions, atheists, ambulance chasers, jews, gays, tree huggers, abortion-crazed sluts, and bleeding-heart elitists has failed. America has spoken.

I live in a "blue" state where tolerance is praised, but only if you share the popular "feel good" socialist agenda. Intelligent debate is dead -- but not as dead as the Democratic Party and their so-called message.

John Kerry did his part to be "anyone but Bush." Too bad he didn't take that a step further and act like a human being that voters could relate to.

Being a Libertarian, I'm not a huge fan of Bush. However, I am a fan of capitalism. I was pretty certain that Kerry was going to win and was minutes away from cashing out my pharma stocks. Now we're gonna see the Dow hit 11,000 and our drug companies will have the resources to fill the pipelines with new drugs and treatments.

With the Republican Party taking further control of the House and Senate, we will see the President's Energy Bill passed and we will all have lower gas prices and a faster growing GDP.

I'm looking forward to seeing Alaska drilled. And so are the people of Alaska -- otherwise they wouldn't have voted overwhelming for Bush both times around. New England liberal elitists can complain about Alaska, how about we hear from the ALASKANS for once regarding their own state?

The liberal media can go on and on about Kerry winning all the debates and how college student activism "really matters." But they are silenced now. Now, like the Democratic Party, they have no choice but to review their broken agenda. No longer will the Michael Moores and Al Frankens define their party -- a party that not just hates Bush, but hates the very country that would elect such a man.

November 2nd this country cut straight through the liberal BS. We showed Europe just how little their opinion matters and that we can’t continue to subsidize their health care. Daschle got put in his place like a little baby. America has spoken.

It's going to be a beautiful next 4 years.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,046 Posts
I googled like crazy and couldn't confirm he said this. You have a linky?
 

·
Rogue Assassin
Joined
·
2,977 Posts
I'm going to save your post and repost it on the first Wednesday in November, 2008.

One should always temper one's words in the flush of victory, because if there's one sure thing in American politics, it's that the pendulum will absolutely, positively swing back... and nail you in the ass if you're not looking.

As I predicted, Bush won handily. (I think I predicted a 53% - 46% margin in the "predictions" thread). So let me go on the record right now: In 2008, the Democratic Party will win back the White House and the House of Representatives; the Senate will remain Republican, but the margin will narrow to 51-48.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,046 Posts
I agree it will swing back.....took 75 years to swing this time. See ya in another 30 or so Jazz.
 

·
Rogue Assassin
Joined
·
2,977 Posts
Urlik said:
I agree it will swing back.....took 75 years to swing this time. See ya in another 30 or so Jazz.
What in the world are you talking about, Urlik? This wasn't a "realigning election." It was simply the reelection (by a very slim margin) of a flawed incumbent over an equally flawed challenger.

The only thing that stands out in the election is the very scary role of the religious right. Religious intolerence is rearing its ugly head, and President Bush is leading the charge toward an increasingly monotheistic society with his insistence on incorporating his very narrow view of religion into his everyday governing strategy. This trend will be repudiated. Just a matter of time. And it most certainly will not take 30 years.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,046 Posts
We've been moving right since 1980 after decades of the Democrats running Congress (short time split in the 50's). The pendulum has further to go IMHO. Since you edited your original post while I was posting, guess my post wouldn't make as much sense to you now.
 

·
Rogue Assassin
Joined
·
2,977 Posts
I didn't edit my post; just completed it, I leaned over to pick up something I dropped on the floor, and hit the enter key by mistake. Didn't change a word of what I had psoted up to that point. Just completed everything from "...Bush won..." on.

So your post didn't make sense then and doesn't make sense now.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,046 Posts
pendulum....think pendulum as it goes from a Dem controlled Congress to a Repub controlled one as you stated in your post.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,663 Posts
I'll echo loudly on JazzMat's comments and concerns about the religious right's infiltration of politics. I have an almost fanatical passion for separation of church and state. As many as 80% of Bush voters in some areas stated in poll exit interviews that "Moral Character" was a primary decision factor in their voting for president.

- How will moral character efficiently govern the nation with fiscal responsibility?
- How is moral character going to create more jobs?
- How is moral character going to better equip and protect our soldiers in Iraq?
- How is moral character going to reduce health care costs & improve quality?
- How is moral character going to reduce violent crime? (The President having moral character doesn't reduce the real roots of crime like poverty, poor education & lack of jobs)
- How is moral character going to address the REAL threat of global warming?
- How is moral character going to reduce the GIGANTIC deficit?
- How is moral character going to resolve the mess in Iraq?
- Why wasn't moral character a factor at ENRON?
- Why didn't moral character stop Bush from invading Iraq on flimsy pretences and faulty intelligence?

Many will say, "We're a Christian nation so Christian ideology should certainly influence our government!" Yes, Christians did settle in the colonies:

Catholics to Maryland
Pilgrims to Mass.
Quakers to Penn's Colony
Dutch Reformed to New Amsterdam (New York)

These groups were free to practice their religion in the colonies. Many of these groups had fled England in a time when the Anglican Church was "The Church of England" and thus the only authorized religion. My own ancestral family was part of the Society of Friends (Quakers) who left England in 1682 to avoid religious persecution in England. It was not until the 1689 Tolerance Act that other religions were permitted to practice without harassment in England.

Some of the colonies (like Georgia) had no particular religious bent, largely endentured servants populated it and many former prison inmates brought to work. Some refer to Georgia as more of a corporation than a colony!

I'm getting around to my point... The "Founding Fathers" of our country wrote the constitution to ensure freedom of religion -- this means freedom to practice your personal religion (or practice no religion) without government influence. Honestly, I firmly believe this also extends to FREEDOM FROM RELIGION originating from governmental source. Allowing increasing influence of religion in our government is a threat to these very religious freedoms. Although theologically different, this would make us no different than the theocracies of the world, many of them have become our ideological, political and terrorist enemies.

I'm looking for the ideal bumper sticker: "Bush Leads the American Taliban!"

I could go on for days about this, don't push me! :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,270 Posts
BobV said:
I'll echo loudly on JazzMat's comments and concerns about the religious right' infiltration politics. I have an almost fanatical passion for separation of church and state. As many as 80% of Bush voters in some areas stated in poll exit interviews that "Moral Character" was a primary decision factor in their voting for president.

- How will moral character efficiently govern the nation with fiscal responsibility?
- How is moral character going to create more jobs?
- How is moral character going to better equip and protect our soldiers in Iraq?
- How is moral character going to reduce health care costs?
- How is moral character going to reduce violent crime? (The President having moral character doesn't reduce the real roots of crime like poverty, poor education & lack of jobs)
- How is moral character going to address the REAL threat of global warming?
- How is moral character going to reduce the GIGANTIC deficit?
- How is moral character going to resolve the mess in Iraq?
- Why wasn't moral character a factor at ENRON?
- Why didn't moral character stop Bush from invading Iraq on flimsy pretences and faulty intelligence?

Many will say, "We're a Christian nation so Christian ideology should certainly influence our government!" Yes, Christians did settle in the colonies:

Catholics to Maryland
Pilgrims to Mass.
Quakers to Penn's Colony
Dutch Reformed to New Amsterdam (New York)

These groups were free to practice their religion in the colonies. Many of these groups had fled England in a time when the Anglican Church was "The Church of England" and thus the only authorized religion. My own ancestral family was part of the Society of Friends (Quakers) who left England in 1682 to avoid religious persecution in England. It was not until the 1689 Tolerance Act that other religions were permitted to practice without harassment in England.

Some of the colonies (like Georgia) had no particular religious bent, largely endentured servants populated it and many former prison inmates brought to work. Some refer to Georgia as more of a corporation than a colony!

I'm getting around to my point... The "Founding Fathers" of our country wrote the constitution to ensure freedom of religion -- this means freedom to practice your personal religion (or practice no religion) without government influence. Honestly, I firmly believe this also extends to FREEDOM FROM RELIGION originating from governmental source. Allowing increasing influence of religion in our government is a threat to these very religious freedoms. Although theologically different, this would make us no different than the theocracies of the world, many of them have become our ideological, political and terrorist enemies.

I'm looking for the ideal bumper sticker: "Bush is the leader of the American Taliban!"

I could go on for days about this, don't push me! :wink:
Amen :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,885 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I didn't vote for Bush, but if I did, I would have voted for him for economic reasons, not religious ones. I too am a strong believer of seperation of church and state. Organized religion is one of mankind's greatest failures.

The point is, the Democratic Party is so far out of touch with so much of the country that they can only blame themselves. Running against someone like G. W. Bush they select the single MOST LIBERAL Senator from NEW ENGLAND. WTF were they thinking? It's like they wanted to lose.

Instead of taking a rock star on the road with him, Kerry should have taken a minister. I'm not happy about it, but its the truth. You can hate the majority that elected Bush for what they believe in, don't hate them for who they are. They're all Americans and it appears that their "uneducated" voices speak louder than yours -- sorry.

Maybe middle America was sick of watching "Will and Grace" and wanted "Bonanza" re-runs instead...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,663 Posts
I'm a strange bird politically, I don't fit any stereotypes. I, too, have habitually voted republican but mostly for fiscal reasons. I'm a patchwork quilt... a gun owner, and retired military officer but married to a very independent professional woman who won't use my last name plus I'm pro-choice! I read A LOT and do not restrict my eyes from any political writings on any side of the issues. I have multiple degrees in both scientific and liberal arts fields - I'm a total nerd who analyses EVERYTHING to death and relies on reason, logic and a heathy dose of skepticism. While I was raised a Lutheran, my real theological thought is probably more closely aligned with the Unitarians. Organized religion bothers me a lot, I am mighty close to declaring myself an agnostic... I figure the next step is atheism!

I usually research candidates and issues extensively and never vote straight down any party line. My vote for Kerry was essentially a backlash vote.

I think "Will and Grace" is stupid, I'd rather watch Public Television, CNN, Discovery or the History Channel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,885 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Macabre said:
JamesBondage said:
Maybe middle America was sick of watching "Will and Grace" and wanted "Bonanza" re-runs instead...
Jon Stewart sure seemed bitter tonight!
He sure did. He sure wasn't happy with the Bush win. But, he also seemed disgusted with the Democrats' total failure.


Thank God someone else here watches that show.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,026 Posts
Reminder: The last time Republicans had this much control was the 1920's. And we know how THAT ended up.

What saved us? FDR and the New Deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
BTW,

Bush had a larger popular vote margin of victory with 3.5+ mill votes than the following democratic presidents:
1976 Carter - 1.7 mill
1960 JFK - 120 k
1948 Truman - 2.2 mill
and about same as 1944 FDR - 3.5 mill

source: http://www.usconstitution.net/elections.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,122 Posts
JazzMat said:
Urlik said:
I agree it will swing back.....took 75 years to swing this time. See ya in another 30 or so Jazz.
What in the world are you talking about, Urlik? This wasn't a "realigning election." It was simply the reelection (by a very slim margin) of a flawed incumbent over an equally flawed challenger.
I would say this was really a big affermation that America wants Bush & the Republicans running the country.

- More people voted for Bush than have voted to any President ever (previous record holder was Regan).
- The MAJORITY of voters voted for Bush (as apposed to a plurality)
- The Republicans made significant gains in the house & senate
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,026 Posts
I'm still baffled. The results are not consistent with "Life, Liberty, and the Purfuit of Happineff", nor with "All men are created equal". The "majority" seems to have rewritten it as "Life, Liberty, and the Purfuit of Happineff, unless we don't like it".

Talk about Radical...
 
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
Top