|
Post by bsutravis on Nov 8, 2006 10:04:05 GMT -5
Well......after spending the entire day/night/wee-hours of the morning immersed in the folds of the Democrat agenda I can with even more clarity say how proud I am to be a Republican.
No, seemingly nothing went right for the GOP last night....but I have MY values and nothing those left-wingers can do will rattle MY resolve. Hatred....hatred beyond belief fellas......that's what I had to deal with yesterday. When the cameras are on, they do their whoopin' and hollerin for their candidate.....but when the lights go off and the camera is turned off do you really see what I already knew, but last night enforced. Pure hatred for our President, our Governor and anyone who supports them. I've made my fair share jokes about the Democrat party, and enjoy pointing out their flaws and ignorances.....but there is no belly-aching HATRED to the point that I would wish death upon them (although Pelosi, Billary and Teddy Kennedy are close!). The things I heard last night were genuine as the venom sprayed from the dems. "I hope they die of heart-attacks after tonight!" - "Maybe a bomb will go off as they caucus about getting beat tonight!" Those two comments are what I remember the most, but there were several other jabs that were just as malicious. As one person would make a put-down, it was always backed up by support for whatever was just said.
As far as I'm concerned.....when the Democrats try to ditch the Bush Tax Cuts, when they once again deflate our military, when socialism reigns rampant over this country, when the borders are just outright opened up, the only folks that can complain will be the Conservative Republicans....not the "Republicans" that jumped ship at the sight of bombs going off and our soldiers getting killed defending our country over there, so it doesn't happen here. Be careful what you wish for, cause you just might get it......and it looks like you did it!
I hope this country enjoys it's same-sex marriage ceremonies, abortion loving judges, tax raising, loss of 2nd amendment rights, and taking even more from your hard earned check and putting it into the pot for social programs for those too lazy to make it on their own.
2 years......this country has 2 years to figure out the huge mistake it just made. If they control the Congress AND White House this country might as well dissolve and let the UN take over. I hope the fog clears and they see what they have done.
Like I said, it all comes much clearer when you "infiltrate" their shell and hear them talk.... I'm ill over this, truly ill.....as a Hoosier, and as an American.
|
|
|
Post by LawrenceCoBowhunter on Nov 8, 2006 10:18:05 GMT -5
I agree with you 100%.I would guess it wouldn't hurt to go buy some more firearms things before the next ban comes in.Hi capacity mags and all that good stuff.I think we haven't seen nothing yet with Pelosi leading the way.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Nov 8, 2006 11:43:04 GMT -5
Travis - thanks. Now you made me sick, too.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Nov 8, 2006 12:00:17 GMT -5
The Liberal ideas of victimhood, entitlement, and jealousy are pervasive in this country. Our society is so self absorbed that most act on what feels good intead of considering what is right. Chalk another victory up for the MSM.
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Nov 8, 2006 14:36:40 GMT -5
Travis - please don't take these comments as a personal attack, but as my observations....
- A lot of republicans voted for these democrats. That's how they got elected.
- A couple of nights back, Charlie Rose had on Gen. Jack Keane, (four stars) former US Army Vice Chief of Staff, regarding the current status of Iraq. Jack stated that "the strategy which has been pursued by this Administration has clearly failed, and it is time to completely rethink our approach in Iraq." The general went on to say that the their has been a failure in leadership on the part of SecDef Rumsfeld to recognize and admit the policy has failed and do something about it.
I've met Jack Keane, and he's as conservative as you can get, but he knows the difference between fixing the leak in the boat and re-arranging the deck chairs.... if Jack tells you you're in trouble, you're in trouble.... period.
Right or wrong, a lot of voters saw Tuesday as a referendum on the job GW/Cheney/Rumsfeld have done in Iraq, and that's why the vote went like it did...
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Nov 8, 2006 14:40:47 GMT -5
Right or wrong, a lot of voters saw Tuesday as a referendum on the job GW/Cheney/Rumsfeld have done in Iraq, and that's why the vote went like it did...
Truer words were never spoken!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Nov 8, 2006 14:44:14 GMT -5
That's what happened.
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Nov 8, 2006 14:58:20 GMT -5
BTW - here's a 35 minute interview Gen. Keane did on NPR 10/26/06 which mirrors a lot of what he had to say on Charlie Rose... I urge all to give it a listen, and this guy knows his stuff and offers a lot of wisdom on an endgame strategy for Iraq... www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6387879
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Nov 8, 2006 15:32:20 GMT -5
jkd......nothing seen as a personal attack......major difference of opinion, but not a personal attack. I'll forgo the NPR interview with Gen Keane and take your word for it. If you want to cut some waste in Govt, you can start with NPR. I'd rather not give their website a "hit". To me at least.....this mid-term wasn't about 1 issue (Iraq).....people that are blinded by one issue are concentrating on the tree right in front of their faces and are forgetting about the forest behind. It's not JUST about Iraq, or abortion, or the economy.......it's WAY deeper than that to me....BUT, obviously not to other "Republicans". This economy is BOOMING....don't forget that GW GAVE you some of the money BACK to you and cut YOUR taxes. I can't wait for those tax cuts to not renew and watch your taxes skyrocket. I can see the threads now! If it was a referendum on Iraq....what the heck is THEIR plan? I certainly haven't heard one. America threw a dart at a board not knowing where it was going to land last night. If Iraq is the issue, they don't know anymore today than they knew yesterday. When will people get it through their thick skulls.......it's NOT the Republicans, it's NOT the Democrats, it's not Don Rumsfield, it's not GWB that's the problem with Iraq. The problem is fanatical extremists who want Americans to die, both here and there. Today Hamas announced for all Muslims to kill Americans.......but I'm sure we can sit down with them and make a nice peace treaty with them. The bulk of my original post wasn't about the election, it was about what I personally observed while standing side-by-side with dozens of Democrats last night. I can understand their joy from what their candidates managed last night.....but the hate, was unreal. After hearing what I heard, it makes my feelings about the "left" that much more solidified. Border safety....Patriot Act...Gun Control...Welfare....Abortion...Prayer....Flag preservation... just a few of the things that are in the sights of the "New" Congress that was elected last night. America voted for "change" Well, better buckle up cause here it comes!!! How does "The United States of the United Nations" sound???
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Nov 8, 2006 15:37:08 GMT -5
NOW Rumseld resigns. Couldn't he take one for the team a month ago?
Jack
|
|
|
Post by LawrenceCoBowhunter on Nov 8, 2006 15:51:27 GMT -5
I have a feeling things will be completely different in a couple years.Libs never change nor do their polices..Maybe I would just feel a little better if I heard some of there plans.I really haven't heard anything..It's mostly hatered for GWB and the war..
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Nov 8, 2006 16:02:01 GMT -5
Jack..... Had Don resigned the Dems would have tore the Republicans up, claiming it was a last ditch effort to save the election. I'm kinda glad that he waited.
Love GWB or hate him....he stands by his men (and woman)..... stands by them to a fault in some cases. He doesn't toss people under the bus, and has had more to deal with as a President than anyone since WWII. Lesser men would have cracked and would still be under their desks with their favorite intern.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Nov 8, 2006 19:31:06 GMT -5
Look close at the State level. Most of the Dems winning was dislike for Mitch, like the dislike for GWB. Mitch said He planned to change Indiana Government and make us fiscally balanced. That required great change in the "normal" way of doing things. He did it. Noe the Dems want to bring everything back up and try to undo it. They were even whining about not controlling both State Houses to change the Toll Road deal. Why on Earth would any one choose to give that kind of money back? It also looks like the DST issue will come back to the legislature.
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Nov 8, 2006 19:55:05 GMT -5
Travis-you have authored a very good thread here, and I agree completely with your assessment of the political situation, as well as what`s coming now with the Dems firmly in place. Being the politically incorrect goon that I am-I`ve never been secretive about my love for the GOP and my complete disdain for the, as I call `em, demon-crats. The GOP platform embodies what I value-the demon-cratic platform pays homage to all I loath. You can say `till you`re blue in the face-be careful what you wish for, you might get it-well, a bunch of folks got what they wished for last night, and now ALL of us will have to live with it for a long, long time. As you said, agree or disagree with GW-at least the man stands for SOMETHING-he DOES NOT consult polls to decide what his agenda is today, he stands up for what he believes is the RIGHT thing to do-a ton more than you can say for even ONE of the demon-crats. I was making a point in a different thread months ago, about how this generation of people would never have had the stomach to do the right thing, and if either of the World Wars were being fought today-we`d lose by default-because the American public today, does not have the stomach nor the will to engage in, and persevere through a long, difficult war-case in point-voting against the Republicans due to the current war in Iraq. We are a weak, twisted society, and I`ll make NO apologies for that statement. I remember reading about a dude on the north side of Indy, who for the entire time slick willie was in office, flew his American flag upside down-a distress symbol. In an interview, he stated that he wouldn`t fly the flag right-side-up again until a Republican was in the Oval Office. I`m about to take a page from his book and fly my flag up-side-down, in despair over all the elections the demon-crats won last night. We are not only at war in Iraq folks-we are smack dap in the middle of a cultural was here in the good ol` US of A, and we lost a lot of ground last night. It makes me shudder to imagine howard dean`s party having won so many races-what the hell have we done.
|
|
|
Post by danf on Nov 8, 2006 21:54:45 GMT -5
I'm not looking forward to Thanksgiving at all- my step-sister-in-law throws her liberal views out without being prompted and I'm sure this year will be worse than years past... Just saw a blurb on the TV that the Dems will also control the Senate.... Not looking forward to the next 2 years, I'm afraid that it's merely setting up a successfull Democratic bid for the presidency. As for Major Moves, do you all not realize just how much money the state is getting from interest alone? I don't remember the figure, but I know it's over a million per *day*!! Hard to get that kind of money by simply raising tolls.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Nov 9, 2006 1:50:30 GMT -5
The thing I noticed was that the margins of defeat were close in many cases, and without taking a case-by-case account, it seemed that the biggest losers among the Republican incumbents were people who were outspoken social conservatives, like Rick Santorum of PA. I also noticed that the more moderate Democrats seemed to do best in most of their races.
I take those to be hopeful signs that we may be drifting back towards a more central and less polarized Congress. I can't recall which race it was, but one of the Dems who was leading a race somewhere in the west was described as being hard to tell from a Republican in some ways, being long-time strongly pro-gun and anti-choice.
I know it won't be a popular opinion here, where we're so polarized on most social issues such as gay marriages and abortion, but I see those as examples of the right wing hard-liners of the Republican Party taking the party too far in trying to please the so-called "base", and losing the center in doing so.
I've been a conservative (Goldwater type, not neo-con) Republican since high school, normally only varying from a straight ticket in the polling booth when I could vote for a Libertarian without risking putting a Democrat in office. I was really proud of my precinct one year, I think it was '84, when the Democrats ran third behind the Reagan Republicans and the Libertarians!
I consider the anti-gay-marriage amendment to be nothing more than gay-bashing, and an absolutely shameful abuse of governmental power. I don't know any gays personally, and I wince the same as you do when I see them kissing on TV, but I'm pretty sure they're people, and citizens, and entitled to the same pursuit of happiness as the wife and I were when we married over forty years ago. Anyone sworn to uphold the Constitution who then panders to the public's worst sentiments to inflame them against allowing their fellow citizens the same rights as they enjoy, using the mob mentality to try to gain votes by leading the mob in their bigotry, is beyond contempt and unworthy of retaining their office. We ordinary citizens might be excused for that kind of position, but the legislators are mostly lawyers and know better.
I'm also pro-choice, as was Senator Goldwater. I believe that the Roe v. Wade decision was a good one. The first resulting partition.... of abortion at will in the first trimester, for reason in the second, and only in extreme cases in the third,..... seems like the most reasonable compromise possible to me. It later changed, through additional court decisions, and noone seemed to want to defend the original compromise. Both sides were far more interested in using that opportunity to polarize the public and demonize the other side in an attempt to further their cause, and it's been downhill since. I agree that there's little difference between an abortion of a fetus that's two weeks from birth and killing a newborn, but I also see little difference between aborting a few cells that have joined in the uterus for a couple of weeks and the natural expulsion that takes place every month quite naturally. It's all in the timing, and the original decision made that distinction as well as anything I could have dreamed up.
My personal feelings on such issues aside, our government was never meant to enforce our personal or religious ethics on anyone else. It was designed to permit us all to live our lives free from unnecessary persecution by others for our own beliefs and life choices. If we are weird enough in our choices to cause others harm, then the law should rein us in. If we only cause others distress because we won't adhere to their particular lifestyles, then government should properly keep their nose out of it and let us be free Americans.
I think a lot of folks rejected the more strident voices trying to gain votes by limiting others' freedoms unnecessarily. The folks in South Dakota voted down the extremely strict anti-abortion law that was being put forth as the challenge to Roe. The folks in Missouri seem to feel that the promise of medical advancement in stem cell research is a better use of that tissue than throwing it in the trash.
That's what I saw happening, and the unfortunate side effect was that it put some people in office or advanced some into positions of more power that will have to be watched carefully and fought against for some of their positions on other issues. But without the backlash against the far-right gay-bashers, we'd have had the votes of a lot of "log cabin Republican" gays that have been reliable Republican voters for years, and without the backlash against the drive to reverse Roe, we'd have a good many more pro-choice voters who were with us in the past. The right wing of the party lost this one for us. Those folks in the middle can switch and vote the other way in any given election without making a life-altering turnabout. Both parties need them, but the Republicans need them more. Playing to what is unfortunately considered the "base", at the expense of losing the moderate middle, will send you home eventually, no matter what your party affiliation. But it sends Republicans home sooner.
Of course, the war came into play. I happen to agree completely with the way it's been handled so far. But it's to be expected that there will be some sentiment for peace, and that such sentiment will increase as the war lingers. That's natural and has probably been pretty much the case in most wars, despite what we might see in patriotic old movies. I think the party would have survived that increasing anti-war sentiment if they hadn't chased away their "center" beforehand, openly insulting them to try to keep the "core" extremists from staying home.
Closer to home, again some close results. I fully appreciate the fact that Mitch has shaken things up and got things done. I also agree with much of what he's done. But I can't help seeing red when it comes to a scheme that leases one toll road because the state can't raise the tolls high enough to make it profitable, knowing that the company that leases it will jack those rates up enough to pay the lease and still make a profit (they didn't pay the 3.8 billion without expecting to make it back, plus interest, plus a little profit)......then uses the money to do what?.......why, build another toll road, of course! And tear up a few hundred thousand acres of Indiana farm ground and hunting land, because all that bulldozing and paving will create jobs.
I also feel like he stepped firmly on the "third rail" of Indiana politics when he pushed so hard for Playlike Saving Time. We had it when I was a kid, and voted it away. We've had several other opportunities to go to it over the years, and our politicians caught an earful from their constituents every time and voted it down. Mitch strong-armed it through. Have to give him credit for effectiveness, but he gets no points for doing the will of the people, and he's reaping the reward. I do really like the guy, despite a couple of his decisions, and the way he seems to be crawfishing out of shutting down the Pic-N-Shoot operations. But as with most jobs, one "Oh, Crap" counts as much as a hundred "Atta Boy's". You expect your mechanic to get all the parts back in your car and tightened down right. If he gets them all but one or two, you're shopping for a new mechanic. That makes a tough crowd to please, but that's politics for ya.
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Nov 9, 2006 8:26:21 GMT -5
Russ.....you are very entitled to your opinion......but how can you consider yourself a Conservative Republican and be pro-choice & pro-gay marriage? Those are two of the bedrocks that make someone a Conservative versus a Republican. If anything, I'd say you are a Moderate Republican.....but definately not a Conservative.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Nov 9, 2006 11:36:19 GMT -5
bsutravis, if we use the definition of "conservative" that has evolved (dare I use that word?) over the last decade or so, you're right.
However, some of us with white whiskers were conservatives before it was cool, back in the day when it had to do primarily with the country's fiscal policy and military readiness. Barry Goldwater was then known as the "father of conservatism", and wrote the book "Conscience of a Conservative".
His political technique during his run for the Presidency involved travelling to the areas that would be most affected by his stance on the issues and telling the people there the truth about what his decisions would mean to them. He told the folks in the areas served by the Tennessee Valley Authority that their power rates were being subsidized by taxpyers across the country, and he wanted them to start paying their own light bill. He went to Florida and explained to the seniors there that Social Security would eventually run out of funds if it kept increasing at the rate it had been, and that some hard choices would have to be made to prevent that. It was pretty much a lesson to all other politicians in what honesty can do to your campaign, and he lost his presidential bid to Lyndon ("let the Asian boys fight the Asian war") Johnson, and his War on Poverty, by a landslide. The politicians seem to have learned the lesson well.
I don't know where we could go to get a ruling on whether it's really necessary to make the decision for other people about their love lives or life choices regarding procreation in order to be a true conservative. My definition is closer to that of Barry Goldwater's. I'm probably in the minority in that opinion now, but I'm not entirely alone.
If such a ruling came down and I'd have to become a gay-bashing neo-con imposing my life choices on others in order to label myself a conservative, I suppose I could think up some other words to describe my position. Words change meaning all the time. I like to read some older books, and its homosexual (odd) how often things don't mean the same things they did when we were gay (happy) youths 8^)
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Nov 9, 2006 11:52:43 GMT -5
bsutravis, if we use the definition of "conservative" that has evolved (dare I use that word?) over the last decade or so, you're right. However, some of us with white whiskers were conservatives before it was cool, back in the day when it had to do primarily with the country's fiscal policy and military readiness. Barry Goldwater was then known as the "father of conservatism", and wrote the book "Conscience of a Conservative". His political technique during his run for the Presidency involved travelling to the areas that would be most affected by his stance on the issues and telling the people there the truth about what his decisions would mean to them. He told the folks in the areas served by the Tennessee Valley Authority that their power rates were being subsidized by taxpyers across the country, and he wanted them to start paying their own light bill. He went to Florida and explained to the seniors there that Social Security would eventually run out of funds if it kept increasing at the rate it had been, and that some hard choices would have to be made to prevent that. It was pretty much a lesson to all other politicians in what honesty can do to your campaign, and he lost his presidential bid to Lyndon ("let the Asian boys fight the Asian war") Johnson, and his War on Poverty, by a landslide. The politicians seem to have learned the lesson well. I don't know where we could go to get a ruling on whether it's really necessary to make the decision for other people about their love lives or life choices regarding procreation in order to be a true conservative. My definition is closer to that of Barry Goldwater's. I'm probably in the minority in that opinion now, but I'm not entirely alone. If such a ruling came down and I'd have to become a gay-bashing neo-con imposing my life choices on others in order to label myself a conservative, I suppose I could think up some other words to describe my position. Words change meaning all the time. I like to read some older books, and its homosexual (odd) how often things don't mean the same things they did when we were gay (happy) youths 8^)[/quote Russ-I have family members who are "gay", and I strongly oppose gay marriage, and even civil unions. Not that I`ll change your mind, but I just feel that the family is the very basis of the structure that holds a society, a country together-and if we let that structure shift and slip on the sands of an unsure foundation-our society will begin to break down. I love my family members, and I don`t believe that standing against gay marriage and civil unions is bashing them. And I say this very honestly and NOT tougue in cheek-but gays already have the same rights we do-they have the right to marry the opposite-sex partner of their choice.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Nov 10, 2006 11:11:23 GMT -5
There are some very good posts in this thread from Travis, Hunter480, and especially firstwd on the state situation. As a state employee I can tell you exactly what being one of the very few conservatives feels like, my office often sounds similar to the election party Travis reported about.
Russ, I have a couple of problems with Roe Vs. Wade, beiang a "reasonable compromise". First of all, I don't consider sanctioning murder to be very reasonable in the first place, but that issue has been debated ad nauseum. The more fundamental problem I have with the R. Vs. W decision is that it is extreme example of judges inventing rights that do not exist in the Constitution in order to further the liberal agenda. As bad as abortion is to me it is not nearly the potential for disaster as judges legislating from the bench.
|
|