RE: RE: Yes, 'Cuz I sez so, that's why :)
Steve -> "Other than some rather tiresome posturing, those people would be utterly powerless against a Republican Senate (assuming there were any actual Republicans there) and a Republican President (assuming he grows a spine and finds his veto pen). But maybe that's what really gives you the chills. Maybe the idea of the utterly useless Republicans who are currently in office having to face an actual opposition scares you. I fail to see how you plan to cure the problem of useless Republicans governing us by electing more of them, though."
I don't believe all Republicans who are currently in office are useless. I get the feeling that if somebody doesn't agree with you 100% of the time, you find them useless. As I've said before, I understand why you got beat for reelection.
-> "Oh, I don't know. How about porous borders? Or maybe it's a stretched-thin military occupying a country we invaded despite the fact that it posed no threat to us whatsoever. GOP jingoism notwithstanding, there is no objective evidence whatsoever that the Republicans are any better at minding our security than the Democrats are."
I agree, our borders are not secure, but at least we had a group of Republicans in the House (Virginia Foxx included) that stopped the plan supported by Bush and the Senate from passing. If the Democrats take control, the Bush plan will be passed. I'm not willing to throw those Republicans off a cliff. With regard to the War in Iraq, we thought Iraq posed a threat at the time. If I saw the same intel reports that Bush saw, I would probably make the same call that Bush did.
-> "If the safety of Americans includes their future freedom, the Republicans represent a far more imminent threat than any Democrat or terrorist. That's nothing but an RNC approved, Rush Limbaugh talking point."
So, I assume you are in agreement with the liberal Democrats on this issue. Are you a member of the ACLU? What future freedoms do the Republicans want to take away?
-> "First, because I don't see any difference between putting us under the control of the UN and the establishment of a North American mega-state. Either way, our sovereignty and our freedom goes out the window. Second, if sliding under the control of the UN is our destiny, you can't provide a shred of evidence to show that the GOP is any more likely to deter that than the Democrats are."
Did Reagan want to develop a North American mega-state during his fight with the Soviets?
I don't believe all Republicans who are currently in office are useless. I get the feeling that if somebody doesn't agree with you 100% of the time, you find them useless. As I've said before, I understand why you got beat for reelection.
-> "Oh, I don't know. How about porous borders? Or maybe it's a stretched-thin military occupying a country we invaded despite the fact that it posed no threat to us whatsoever. GOP jingoism notwithstanding, there is no objective evidence whatsoever that the Republicans are any better at minding our security than the Democrats are."
I agree, our borders are not secure, but at least we had a group of Republicans in the House (Virginia Foxx included) that stopped the plan supported by Bush and the Senate from passing. If the Democrats take control, the Bush plan will be passed. I'm not willing to throw those Republicans off a cliff. With regard to the War in Iraq, we thought Iraq posed a threat at the time. If I saw the same intel reports that Bush saw, I would probably make the same call that Bush did.
-> "If the safety of Americans includes their future freedom, the Republicans represent a far more imminent threat than any Democrat or terrorist. That's nothing but an RNC approved, Rush Limbaugh talking point."
So, I assume you are in agreement with the liberal Democrats on this issue. Are you a member of the ACLU? What future freedoms do the Republicans want to take away?
-> "First, because I don't see any difference between putting us under the control of the UN and the establishment of a North American mega-state. Either way, our sovereignty and our freedom goes out the window. Second, if sliding under the control of the UN is our destiny, you can't provide a shred of evidence to show that the GOP is any more likely to deter that than the Democrats are."
Did Reagan want to develop a North American mega-state during his fight with the Soviets?
posted by Anonymous | 10:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home