On Sep 2, 10:20*pm, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
*"Robert Green" wrote:

When I see the naked contempt people have for the government and
for Obama, *I assume they really have the same naked contempt for the
entire country.
How about the naked contempt for Bush or even Reagan? Do you assume the
same naked contempt for the entire country.

I said government, too. *It may be the crummy economy, but levels of hate
and belligerence are way up from anything I remember. *Bush never took the
sort of abuse that's been heaped upon Obama.

LOL. And you still claim to be a Republican, right?
Bush was villified by the left from the time he was
elected. They denied he was a legitimate president
because they say he really didn't win the election.
Sound familiar?
Then they called him everything from a liar to a
war criminal over Iraq, despite
most of the Dems having held similar positions
prior to the wars.


*I started thinking about why I
drifted away from the Republican party.

From your socialist, leftist views, it's clear you
never were a Republican.


*I campaigned for Goldwater as a kid
and wrote a paper saying why the US had to threaten to use nuclear weapons
on any country that tried to build an A-bomb and that we should (then -
196X) immediately forcibly disarm Russia while they still had a limited
nuclear arsenal.

I used to think every Dem president since FDR thru Clinton was a joke, each
in their own way. *I also don't think much of the Rep presidents since FDR
either.

Along the way I mellowed but the world around me has grown more strident.
You might think members of party that lost the last presidential election
would be looking to make converts. *Instead, they seem quite content to ****
people off by the boatload. *I smile whenever a Republican here loses
control of his tongue and starts insulting people. *There can't be any
better agents for the Democrats than rude Republican boosters that make the
more sane members of their party stand up and take notice.

How could they not? *They don't seem able to respect the fact that they
were outvoted and the majority has spoken. *If they can't respect the
outcome of an election how can they really respect the institution of
democracy? They can't. *They want everything to happen their way
and consider any other viewpoint, even the majority's, as wrong and
needing correction or obstruction. *And they're not shy in saying so.. )-:
* *See above.

I don't think so. *Obama worked very hard to try to be bi-partisan and
include the Republican voices. *

Oh sure he did. You mean like a few months ago, when
he took special care of Paul Ryan? Ryan at least
came up with a budget plan to tackle our deficits.
You know, a real plan, as opposed to Obama who
never put forward any specific plan at all.
How did Obama respond?
Did he call him up, invite him to the WH to discuss it?
Why no. Obama gave him a seat
in the front row of his big press conference and then
proceeded to lambast the guy and accuse him of
tying to kill grandma. That's bipartisanship for
ya.!



The *Democrats* themselves complain about
how he wasted so much time trying to work with people who were determined to
thwart every initiative he brought forth. *I don't see any reciprocal
bi-partisan efforts from the Republicans. *All I here is "we have to STOP
him" coming from the minority that lost the election.

That's because they have been tricked like in the
above example so many times and they have seen
that he is so far left that there isn't anything that will
work, short of getting him out of office.

For proof of that, look no further than what Obama
is doing to Boeing. Boeing has a $1Bil new plant
in SC ready to build parts for the new 787. The
Obama administration has it blocked because
a union in WA claims Boeing built the plant
in retaliation for a strike years ago. The impact?
Staggering. Not only are the jobs in SC
on the line, but jobs throughout the country
and world. Boeing has $100bil+ in orders and
Obama is ****ing with this during this
recession? How exactly does anyone
reason with this kind of moron?

This could be fixed by Obama picking up
the phone and firing the idiots at the NLRB.
And then holding a press conference and
telling the country that he won't stand for
stupidity standing in the way of America's
recovery or business. That will happen, but
it will only be when he's out of office.
So, see why that is so important and
necessary?






*There's been a
sea-change and a bad one and a person has to be pretty blind not to see all
the (mostly) bad changes that have occurred in the last decades.
It used to be that a political party wanting to change U.S. policy would try
to achieve that goal by building popular support for its ideas, getting
elected to office, then implementing those ideas through legislation. Our
Constitution designed our system to work that way. *But somewhere in the
last couple of decades, all that changed.

It didn't change. The above is precisely what the Tea Party
Republicans did. The only problem is that with limited
numbers, they had limited success.






Republicans decided the form of government that the Constitution dictates
wasn't good enough for them to achieve their goals. *They then discovered
there's no reason to have bargain for enough votes to pass a bill, they
could tangle the Congress in procedural knots (as in the massive increase in
the use of the filibuster by Republicans in the last two years). *They could
use all sorts of political tactics, some dirtier than others, to get their
way. *They've discovered they can override the will of the electorate and
get what they want by threatening to hurt the country if their demands aren'
t met. *While some will take offense at the term, it's the classic
definition of terrorism. *"Do what we want or we'll hurt something you care
about."

There you go again. Nice for a guy bemoaing the lack
of civility and bi-partisanship. Call Tea Party people,
terrorists. Terrorists for what? Wanting a balanced
budget ammendment? Wanting to reduce spending
that has grown 40 PERCENT in just FOUR YEARS?
Wanting to reduce spending before the USA
becomes Greece and we have a real economic
collapse?

The sad thing is that it took them pushing with all
their might to get just $60bil in spending cuts over
the next two years. During that time, we'll still be
spending $7.5tril. And you libs call them
terrorists. I call them patriots.





They were willing to risk a downgrade of our credit rating by holding the
debt-ceiling increase hostage, even though much of that money was earmarked
for the post 9/11 wars and the security fever that followed. *Now it's
happening over disaster aid with Mr. Cantor using hurricane victims as pawns
in the budget battle.

That's a lie. The total cost of the two wars to date is
around $1.2 tril. That's for 10+ years of war. One of
those is essentially over this year. So, it's nonsense
that any major part of the $2.5 tril debt increase is
because of the wars.

As for risking a downgrade, that downgrade came
because the rating agencies know we are spending
too much money.

As for the hurricane vicitms, I see absolutley nothing
wrong with wanting money for that effort to come
from some cuts in a budget that has grown
40 PERCENT in FOUR YEARS.





We'll see what happens as the Republicans in the states hardest hit by Irene
are faced with proving they don't need "Federal help for anything" by
turning down the government's disaster relief money.

They won't turn it down, nor should they.


*If they're anything
like Rick Perry, they'll take the money and run, principles be damned.


As would any reasonable person. The feds take as
much of your money as they can. Then, they decide
who to give it to. You can be damn sure if they are
handing it out all over the country, I'm going to be
taking all I can get just like everyone else.


*It's
almost biblical. *To remind Mr. Cantor of just how much Virginia might need
the Feds one day, God not only sent hurricane Irene. *He sent a nearly
magnitude 6 earthquake centered in Mr. Cantor's home state.

--
Bobby G.

So, the chance that during a hurricane some Americans
may need help justifies having govt spending that has
increased 40% in just the past 4 years?