![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() Patriot Act: good example. In the midst of war - while ground zero was still burning - which party more supported removing our civil liberties? 2001 House Vote: Republican Yes: 211 No: 3 Democratic Yes: 145 No: 62 Independent: Yes: 1 1 Looks like the Republicans supported the Patriot Act noticeably more than the Democrats in the House. 2001 Senate Vote: Republican Yes 49 No 0 Democratic Yes 49 No 1 Not voting 1 Now: what parties tend to support, and which tend to oppose, voting rights? Glass-Steagall? abortion rights? unionization rights? worker rights? "70 years of progress, and we've been against all of it" - The Republican Party
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Still the arguing of democrats and republicans.
Who's wrong, who's right,who's better, who's worse, one stole the letter---one stole the purse. They do just what we hate the senate and house still do. AWP!.....too late anyways. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
If unions supported political parties equally I'm sure they would see more GOP support. They are nothing but political activist/lobbying groups now and are in the pockets of the Dems. Abortion rights? Seriously? When was the last serious challenge to abortion? Workers rights? lol Your take on political issues is so black and white it completely misses the mark, almost all the time What party opposes businesses, successful people, white males, the 2nd amendment, most of the the 1st amendment (free speech via the fairness doctrine) (impeding the free exercise of religion), ect.... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() i think what it comes down to is that both parties completely suck. they both have issues they suck less at, but they still suck just the same.
arguing abortion is like arguing gun rights. both are high emotion issues, neither will ever see significant changes. but both get people riled up so they ignore the real problems. and we have plenty of those to try to tackle, but no one will step up to the plate and tackle them. NO ONE. everyone in office is too chickensh!t to actually grab any bull by the horns, as they don't want to piss off a segment of voters and possibly lose re-election. it's all that matters to the pol and the party. keeping their seats. not jobs, not ss, medicare, etc, etc....elections. our 'leaders' are in permanent election mode-but there's a way to stop that. but we know that won't happen. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
That's the second time you have said a swell thing. ![]() ![]() |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() If somebody thinks that both of the current political parties, and all politicians, are of the same suckiness and thus interchangable, I'd say they are definitely not paying attention.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
i pay plenty of attention. i'm not enamored of any of them, and thus able to applaud if/when they come up with a good idea...not that it matters, that town operates on a you scratch my back/i will scratch yours basis. people go there with the best of intentions, but they quickly adapt. the party rules the roost. the pols pay attention and follow the party line, else they don't get support in the next primary, ala joe liebermann. just like i have no doubt that obama quickly had things explained to him after his 'i will do what's right, even if i only have one term' line. i keep my expecations low for a reason...never disappointed, almost never amazed. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() i think it's interesting that the patriot act is brought up with regards to the senate voting record, and instead of conceding the point, riot starts talking about everything except that senate vote...
the fact is that although on occasion, dems seem more inclined to support an individuals rights, you still have that vote referenced above, and of course a democratic president signing the defense of marriage act into law. for votes, of course. not because the dems wanted to protect rights, but to protect their own phoney baloney jobs. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
How in the world is listing the actual votes (disproving Chuck's claim) "talking about everything except that vote"??? That's a crazy statement.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts Last edited by Riot : 09-19-2011 at 04:15 PM. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() Quote:
![]() Quote:
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts Last edited by Riot : 09-18-2011 at 09:09 PM. |