Posted on 03/15/2005 5:33:57 AM PST by shortstop
..."Probably have the same effect on the republicans". Good! If they don't represent us, I could care less if a democrat or republican is in office. I vote third party anyway...
"Right. Those who call Bush a wild spending government grower have never been able to tell me how government grows LONG TERM, defying the laws of physics,"
Perhaps thats because you think government spending has something to do with the laws of physics. I mean, if thats what you think, whats the point in trying to explain it to you.
I disagree with a third party. We need to push the RINOs out and not let them take over our party.
I'm worried that a RINO could possibly get the nod in 08 though, and in that situation I will most certainly stay home.
"We need to push the RINOs out and not let them take over our party."
They already have. Or at least they are 90% of the way there.
"I'm worried that a RINO could possibly get the nod in 08 though"
Frankly, I would be absolutely shocked if the Repubs DIDN'T nominate a RINO.
"and in that situation I will most certainly stay home."
Why do that? If everyone took that attitude then a viable, TRUE conservative party like the Constitution Party would definitely stay a fringe 3rd party. It's a self fulfilling prophesy.
I upper cased the word’s “long term”. If I can “borrow and spend” long term, please tell me how or reconsider that it’s an impossibility.
If you don’t recognize that they both are subservient to the facts and mathematics, then don’t try.
"Why do that?"
My state will always be blue anyway...doesn't matter.
I mean RED....I get confused because I actually refer to the states as how they should be colored (the liberals purposefully avoided the color association).
Liberal states=RED
Repub states=BLUE
That's exactly my point. I'm from NY, unfortunately, and thus am practically guaranteed of the fact that whatever candidate the commurats put out will carry the state. So, if the republicans don't put out a candidate that I can get behind then voting for another candidate, say from the Constitution Party, could actually accomplish two things. First, I could actually vote my conscience without fearing that the republicans losing my one vote would be the difference in this state. And second, my voting for another candidate could help raise awareness of his particular party and it's platform, provided of course that don't feel that it's not worth it to vote at all if they don't like the repub candidate.
That's exactly my point. I'm from NY, unfortunately, and thus am practically guaranteed of the fact that whatever candidate the commurats put out will carry the state. So, if the republicans don't put out a candidate that I can get behind then voting for another candidate, say from the Constitution Party, could actually accomplish two things. First, I could actually vote my conscience without fearing that the republicans losing my one vote would be the difference in this state. And second, my voting for another candidate could help raise awareness of his particular party and it's platform, provided of course that others don't feel that it's not worth it to vote at all if they don't like the repub candidate.
You will have to ask Bush/Congress, they seem to have borrow and spend down to a science. I am amazed that the US is still able to borrow and spend concidering our rather large outstanding debt. But the red ink flows like a river in DC and hardly anyone seems to care, least of all Bush or Congress.
Identifying apparent contradictions in understanding is the fundamental activity of reasoning. There are no contradictions in nature.
Either it is possible to borrow for ever (and we’re in the wrong profession) or the premise that Bush is doing that is flawed.
*** IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ***
This morning on Rush's program, he started talking about a Boston Globe story which said that Mitch McConnel was not on board with the "nuclear option" - and supposedly Mitch's reason was because he wasn't sure the public was on board with it. Because of that, I went to http://www.congressvote.org and registered my complaint with the McConnell office.
A few minutes later in the program, Rush said that he had received a FAX from McConnel's staff which said that Mitch was on board with the "nuclear option" - and it was the Globe who got the story wrong.
However, the FAX also mentioned that McConnel office had been overwhelmed with phone calls, emails and faxes.
Soooooo .. while the Boston Globe was trying to sew seeds of doubt about the "nuclear option" to the public - their ineptness caused the "public" to react and I guess McConnel's office found out that THE PUBLIC KNOWS A GREAT DEAL ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND WANTS THE REPUBS TO JUST DO IT!!
I'm hoping the word will get around that the public is very aware of what is going on and very much in favor of the "nuclear option".
Thank you Boston Globe - once again your Bush-republican hatred has backfired in your face!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.