[Kevin Curry]

Gridlock is preferable to progressivism whether it is denoted the liberal welfare state or compassionate conservatism.

I have seen no intelligent and thoughtful posts to the contrary. None.

I really don't expect to. The dearth of such posts--contrasted with the frenzy of cult-of-personality groupthink that predominates on this thread--proves most elequently that prime assertion.

[FSPress]

Remove my account

[sinkspur]

Gridlock is preferable to progressivism whether it is denoted the liberal welfare state or compassionate conservatism.

So, you'll vote for a Democrat, is that right, Kev?

[Kryptonite]

*birds chirping* . . .

[cyncooper]

Gridlock is preferable to progressivism whether it is denoted the liberal welfare state or compassionate conservatism.

I have seen no intelligent and thoughtful posts to the contrary. None

There have been many posts made explaining how a dem president would result in worse than harmless old gridlock. For you to even post that you've seen nobody offer these points is beyond belief.

[nopardons]

There have been many valid refutations to your miserably naive position, but you refuse to consider them worthwhile. Well,THE MAN has spoken, so either get with the program or leave, Kevin. You've gone over to the DARK SIDE and are using their code words.

I don't " worship " the president, I don't talk about what he wears,, how he looks, and as for your pathetic use of " the cult of personality " drivel, it is you and those here, who do nothing but trash the president,you people have a " cult of hate " .

[arasina]

I have seen no intelligent and thoughtful posts to the contrary. None.

You ignored any thoughtful posts because they challenged your false premise. I will repeat what I said and what some others have posted, but which you chose to shrug off because it didn't match your supposedly perfect Paradox of Unified Control formula:

Even if one accepts that gridlock may be a good thing in limiting government intrusion into personal freedoms, you cannot guarantee that by electing someone other than our Republican candidate gridlock will occur.

The majority in the Senate is so slim that if Democrat voters come out in droves this November and defeat GOP Senate candidates, they will regain the majority. Add in the fact that Zell Miller is retiring and the possibility of another Jeffords-like move and you sure don't end up with gridlock. You end up with a liberal Democrat president and a Senate composed of rabid liberals ready to "take back their country." And when liberals get ahold of "their country," it isn't going to move toward Constitutional conservatism, but toward even bigger government. I think THAT is more of a guaranteed thing than your supposition of Good Gridlock.

You don't convince thinking people to come to your point of view when you acuse them of "frenzy of cult-of-personality groupthink," either.