Republican Party is pretty much done!
Wasblind *** What's best for the country is people who can prosper because those are the people who can contribute to the good of the country****
Exactly, I agree what's best for the country and it's citizens.
The Republicians had ONLY ONE agenda for the past 4 years, from their own mouth "our one agenda is to make president Obama a one time president". They were and are willing to drive this country into a financial ditch again to make Obama look bad. They have used and more correctly ABUSED the fillibuster to block votes on issues for the good of the country.
They even blocked a vote on health benefits for the 9/11 first responders until they were shamed into by the Jon Steward, to name a few. The wisdom of Samson did NOT cut the baby in half but this far right GOP influenced by the tea part and far right evangelicals are will to let this country be a deadbeat nation as they call for austerity measures on the poor and middle class while they kiss the top rich of society. What side do you think Jesus would be on in an unjust, unbalanced society, even the RCC that is labelled as the whore of Babylon has more heart for the underprivileged in this society.
Well their one agenda failed, American citizens have voted, they are in favor of taxing the rich while they accept some just hardships to solve the debt issue. Debt only seems to be an issue when the Republician are in power, on % basis it has been shown that under president Bush the dept was higher, He inherintence a SURPLUS and waisted it on Two unnecessary wars and tax cuts for the rich that resulted in the biggest financial crisis ever, that not alone crippled USA but the whole western world. And your talking about the good of the people, give me a break !
"American citizens have voted, they are in favor of taxing the rich while they accept some just hardships to solve the debt issue."
I gross $53,000.00 a year. My FICA tax went up 2% on January 1st, 2013. Does that mean I am "rich". Oh, wait; EVERYONE'S payroll tax went up.
“Now that B. Obama is secured in history as a success, who's next for the Dems? Hilary, Joe Biden?”
I won’t be a bit surprised when Michelle Obama decides to run for the big house.
Biden’s a joke.
Hillary is past prime.
Don’t be surprised when Mrs. President Barack Obama opts to make a statement for the history books.
PS: For readers who don’t think this matters, remember this: Unlike Barack, Michelle is directly descended from pre-civil war slaves. For a lot of folks in America, that matters.
Moshe has stated the brutal fact.
Urban areas need big government. Big cities require more rules to manage large populations. Big cities require more services to function.
The safety net for rural populations has always been the land. If crop prices are low you can always eat your own live stock, plant a larger garden and fill your root cellar. Or you can just sit on your back porch with your gun and shoot a deer or whatever varmint scampers by. People in rural areas know each other. People in cities know very few of the people in their neighborhoods.
Creative types like to be around a lot of other people. More stable conventional types prefer wilderness. It's a temperament issue more than an ideological problem and that's why it can't be resolved unless there is good faith compromise.
Libertarians are pot smoking republicans. They just want to be left alone to do what they want to do.
There will be a rush this year by Democrats to make millions of illegal immigrants (mostly hispanic) legal citizens asap, so they can legally vote in the next presidential election and in so doing maintain the Democratic power in Washington- even if it means inner city minorities won't be able to find a good paying job due to the millions of newly legal immigrant workers, who will quit picking tomatoes just as soon as they get their green card and SS card and get a better paying job in the city. Democrats can sacrifice their minorities and give the jobs to the newly minted green card holders, because just like the GB tells the JWs, their democratic political officials will tell them, "where will you go to, if you leave our party?"
I am a blue dog Democrat, which is a section of the party that is pro business. Democrats favor business. Too many people believe 20 second sound bites. Wall St. lawyers and investment bankers are primarily blue dog Democrats. There was a small group of Republicans but they were moderate Republicans. I never met with a birther CEO.
Democrats typically support contraception and its availability to the poor. Rather than breed children, we are more likely to not breed children.
I have taken part in countless pro choice actions. This notion that we breed like a bunch of hillbillies is utterly ridiculous.
Before you take sides, why not research from neutral sites and the official sites of the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee. Politico, a website, appears to cover politics from many vantage points.
Within the Ivy League and comps, there are only a few conservatives. Life is complex. Soundbites from either side distort the reality. One factor for political choice often cited now is personal world view and life style choice. Your purchases of consumer goods, such as toothpaste and colas, indicate what party you identify with far more than ideology. Urban people, exposed to many life styles and cultures, tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Rural people tend to favor Republicans. There are some state farmers groups that are Democratic b/c of historical circumstance.
There are volumes and countless millions are spent each election cycle discussing politics from a neutral viewpoint. My major was Political Science. Major campaigns are run by professionals. When you reference Dems as lazy bums having 30 children, you reference me. I object. It simply is not true. No one II met during volunteering for Obama even remotely qualified for your view.
Commentators have also argued that it has to do with temperament more than ideology. Some people crave authority and don't do their own research. Others refuse to have someone impose authority on them.
I attend lectures with members of both parties at the National Const'n Center. It attracts a refined, educated group. Much to my shock, these politicians actually do have brains. As I noticed when I worked for the Senate, they bond together well when the mass media is not present. I hear a level of discourse that I never hear in any campaign. My wonder if that such bright, informed people can lower themselves to a campaign.
I thought there might be political respect here with the election determiined.
My experience with former JWs living in the USA is this:
Ex-JWs who do not take up a new religion and either remain nominal Christians, agnostics, or atheists, will tend to be Democrats, very moderate Republicans, or independents.
Ex-JWs who wrap themselves in conservative churches (Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, etc) or evangelical (Southern Baptists, Pentecostal, independent churches founded by self-appointed pastors, and so-called community churches that are almost always evangelical) tend to be Republicans - often of the Tea Party variety.
We have a fair smattering of both types on this discussion forum. It is relatively easy to identify who is who and which way they lean.
I also know a few former JWs who stick to their guns and remain totally neutral politically - figuring that all politicians (and their parties) are inherently corrupt and only looking out for their biggest contributors.
The media gushed over Michelle's coat, dress, her bangs, Obama's social engineering agenda and then gave him a pass over his failure to have any plans for the economy, jobs and business creation. People are so easily distracted. Just an admission by Obama that the economic recovery is still underway was enough for the mainstream news media.
The news media, after four years of saying Obama is a centrist, now admits what conservative Republicans have always said-"Obama is a liberal"-
Obama Offers Liberal Vision: ‘We Must Act'