NationStates Jolt Archive

Oliver Willis has come up with an idea that, much as it goes against my hopes that voters could be swayed by complex arguments instead of soundbites, may wind up being a terrific shot in the arm for the party. It's called Brand Democrat, and the idea is that the party can put what it stands for in simple terms that won't easily be refuted. You can see the early examples here (http://oliverwillis.com/branddemocrat/), but I'll post a couple of my favorites for your edification.

http://www.oliverwillis.com/images/5b950d2f5f135620a39e8bbe53e933f2-1291.png

Here's another one:

http://www.oliverwillis.com/images/c7e4f750d00cff7730ba7d30471ee88c-1296.png

And one last one:

http://www.oliverwillis.com/images/d9d759df11d1fc860f8bdc674780ce2e-1309.png

So what do you think? Does this have a chance of getting attention in our short attention span society?

lol

political parties are the downfall of democracy

Best idea in awhile.

So what do you think? Does this have a chance of getting attention in our short attention span society?

I'm sorry, what did you say again?

Seriously, though, I do think that those images would be much more effective in getting votes than trying to explain your complex arguments. Complexity tends to make you look like a flip-flopper. ;)

If anything, it has a better chance of getting attention than complex reasoned arguments.

The path to victory for the Democratic Party lies in jobs, healthcare, social security, and the economy in general. We need to push those issues more and more, and these soundbite products aren't such a bad idea.

We need party loyalty. Gotta get the name to sound good. Experiments show that when people are asked which tastes better, Coke or Pepsi, they tend to say Coke. But when blindfolded and taste-tested, they're evenly split.

Democrats have an advantage nationally in pure registration numbers, but lose on party loyalty. We need to push the name as much as the values.

If anything, it has a better chance of getting attention than complex reasoned arguments.

The path to victory for the Democratic Party lies in jobs, healthcare, social security, and the economy in general. We need to push those issues more and more, and these soundbite products aren't such a bad idea.

We need party loyalty. Gotta get the name to sound good. Experiments show that when people are asked which tastes better, Coke or Pepsi, they tend to say Coke. But when blindfolded and taste-tested, they're evenly split.

Democrats have an advantage nationally in pure registration numbers, but lose on party loyalty. We need to push the name as much as the values.
And in so many instances, our positions on issues is misrepresented by both the opposition party and by their allies in the media. In polls, the Democratic side of most social issues is overwhelmingly the more popular, but you wouldn't guess that from the beatings we've been taking at the polling booth. This might be a step toward getting people to realize that.

Excellent idea. Much better than the extended explanation that usually accompanies political debates.

I will do you one better: Stop apologizing for being a liberal. I am one, and am proud of it. Simply say:

1. I am for gun control. It just makes sense.

2. I don't want you in my bedroom. I will stay out of yours.

3. Discrimination is a fact. End it and stop making excuses for it.

4. Men can't have babies, so we won't tell woman how to do it or not to do it.

5. If poor people can't have government help, neither can large corporations.

6. Feed and clothe Americans first, then the rest of the world.

7. If you want lower taxes, close the schools and drive on dirt roads.

8. Rich people want to stay rich. Poor people don't. Think about it.

9. You can tell me what Jesus would do after school and after court.

10. Practice what you preach.

11. Anne Coulter and Satan will never be in the same room at the same time. On second thought, yes he is.

12. Michael Moore may be fat and obnoxious, but he's right.

13. Rush Limbaugh may be fat and obnoxious, but it just makes him fat and obnoxious.

14. "Values" come from conduct, not conversation.

and finally,

15. I am a Liberal. I can speak and think at the same time.

Excellent idea. Much better than the extended explanation that usually accompanies political debates.

I will do you one better: Stop apologizing for being a liberal. I am one, and am proud of it. Simply say:

1. I am for gun control. It just makes sense.

Gun control is mostly a bad idea, it undermines our stance on personal freedoms.

2. I don't want you in my bedroom. I will stay out of yours.

3. Discrimination is a fact. End it and stop making excuses for it.

4. Men can't have babies, so we won't tell woman how to do it or not to do it.

Don't distinguish men. That can drive a very large voter base away. Thats why we lost so much of the religious vote. Republicans made it seem like we were singleing them out.

5. If poor people can't have government help, neither can large corporations.

6. Feed and clothe Americans first, then the rest of the world.

7. If you want lower taxes, close the schools and drive on dirt roads.

8. Rich people want to stay rich. Poor people don't. Think about it.

9. You can tell me what Jesus would do after school and after court.

10. Practice what you preach.

These are all pretty good, but kind of sound condescending.

11. Anne Coulter and Satan will never be in the same room at the same time. On second thought, yes he is.

12. Michael Moore may be fat and obnoxious, but he's right.

13. Rush Limbaugh may be fat and obnoxious, but it just makes him fat and obnoxious.

These don't belong anywhere.

14. "Values" come from conduct, not conversation.

and finally,

15. I am a Liberal. I can speak and think at the same time.

HOORAY!!

Back off gun control. Completely. I'm serious. The Democrats are getting massacred in the upper midwest by this. Union guys who like the Democratic social/economic plan are worried about their guns, and the abortion and gay concerns tip them into the Republican side. The majority of the country supports the 2nd Amendment in its literal interpretation. Blue states are ambivalent about European-style gun-banning, but red states and border states in the upper midwest have a much greater concern (and fear) about their guns being taken away. We simply MUST drop this issue. It's the only issue where Democrats come out in favor of banning something, and it undermines our "freedom" message.

:rolleyes: Whatever. Brand Democrat is already a failure becuase it is not honest.

:rolleyes: Whatever. Brand Democrat is already a failure becuase it is not honest.

Ahhhh, Salchicho, what a well founded attack. Care to back it up?

Back off gun control. Completely. I'm serious. The Democrats are getting massacred in the upper midwest by this. Union guys who like the Democratic social/economic plan are worried about their guns, and the abortion and gay concerns tip them into the Republican side. The majority of the country supports the 2nd Amendment in its literal interpretation. Blue states are ambivalent about European-style gun-banning, but red states and border states in the upper midwest have a much greater concern (and fear) about their guns being taken away. We simply MUST drop this issue. It's the only issue where Democrats come out in favor of banning something, and it undermines our "freedom" message.

Or regulate them at a local level, not an ouright ban, or outright must-have. A gun has no place in a city, but is a necesitty in a rural area.

http://www.oliverwillis.com/images/0400e44bb925950838d4dbd9449039d4-1289.png
I really like this one alot.lol

That is awesome-and just what's needed to.

And honestly, just ignore Big Red. He's just some partisan troll.

Or regulate them at a local level, not an ouright ban, or outright must-have. A gun has no place in a city, but is a necesitty in a rural area.l
It's the message that counts. We can't get associated with gun banning anymore. Even our "gun safety" and "sensible regulation" still comes off as big-government meddling.

Back off the regulations, back off the control. We need to concede this one. The leverage gained by this could be used to keep abortion legal and fight the dangerous regulations being used to quietly overturn Roe v. Wade, something far more important than guns.

You're right, those are hard to argue with.

They also fit well into the current 15 second attention span of modern americans.

They don't use words that the average American can't understand either, unlike poor Kerry who had to work to get his vocab down to a 10th grade level while Dumbya sailed along happily at his typical 6th grade speed. (Not my vocab analysis, but that of English teachers).

Salchicho, you may consider yourself warned for:

-Flaming.
-Flamebaiting.
-Spamming.

All of these repeatedly across a number of threads on these forums.

Should you continue in these behaviors, which are explicitly against forum rules, consequences will be levied.

Should you have questions about the matter and/or about what qualifies as spamming, flaming, or flamebaiting, all of which you have been engaging in on a rather complete scale, they can be answered.

How does gun control make sense? Only law abiding citizens would give up their guns, and all the law breakers would just get them somewhere else illegally. It disarms regular citizens and gives guns to criminals, who can then use them for whatever reason they want.

How does gun control make sense? Only law abiding citizens would give up their guns, and all the law breakers would just get them somewhere else illegally. It disarms regular citizens and gives guns to criminals, who can then use them for whatever reason they want.
Exactly. The "War on guns" fails for similar reasons the "War on Drugs" fails. In fact, both "wars" are very much connected. Legalize drugs, you take away the power of the gangs (witness the power of the mafia during prohibition). Less gun violence, there.

Here might be some enlightenment for you all (this is not meant in a distastful manner). I am somewhat conservative in my political views. - BTW I dont know how to quote so do forgive me:



------------------
1. I am for gun control. It just makes sense.
------------------
I personally dont own a gun - but support the literal interpretation of the 2nd. Studies have shown that criminals are much less likely to perform criminal acts when they know that normal citizens such as you and I may be armed. Banning guns imo is a step towards governmental takeover and depriving citizens of their rights. I am all for laws that prevent the wrong sort of people from getting guns. But as for "law-abiding" citizens... :)

--------------
2. I don't want you in my bedroom. I will stay out of yours.
--------------
Word.

--------------
3. Discrimination is a fact. End it and stop making excuses for it.
--------------
Not sure what this is supposed to refer to...

---------------
4. Men can't have babies, so we won't tell woman how to do it or not to do it.
---------------
A fair amount of Christians (I would say a majority of active church attending Christians) are against abortion because of the whole killing a baby/fetus issue with that being considered murder by their beliefs.

---------------
6. Feed and clothe Americans first, then the rest of the world.
---------------
Word. Our nation should come first IMO -not implying that we are not currently doing that.

---------------
7. If you want lower taxes, close the schools and drive on dirt roads.
---------------
Or cut a lot of imo worthless social programs and other special intrest funding. We want good education. We need good roads :)

Thats about it. Again im tryint to offer insight and be constructive not the opposite.

PS. Forgive my spelling.

How does gun control make sense? Only law abiding citizens would give up their guns, and all the law breakers would just get them somewhere else illegally. It disarms regular citizens and gives guns to criminals, who can then use them for whatever reason they want.I think "gun control" needs a name that people won't misinterpret; too often people think it means "gun banning".

Who said anything about making people give up their guns (http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnobody.html)? Controlling how many guns people can have (how many do you really think you need?) and what kind of gun (who in the sam hell needs a machine gun or any other high-power weapon?) does make sense.

I think "gun control" needs a name that people won't misinterpret; too often people think it means "gun banning".

Who said anything about making people give up their guns (http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnobody.html)? Controlling how many guns people can have (how many do you really think you need?) and what kind of gun (who in the sam hell needs a machine gun or any other high-power weapon?) does make sense.

The number of guns you can have is completely unrelated to crime, as legal gun collectors are generally not the criminal type.

I also don't see the need for a machine gun, and don't particularly endorse their production. But there is no reason to keep a responsible individual from owning one.

Banning any type of gun is just another form of punishing all for the actions of a few, and I could never agree with that.

Gun control is mostly a bad idea, it undermines our stance on personal freedoms.
What I don't understand is why it's a personal freedom to have a gun but not a personal freedom to marry who you wish or termimate a pregnancy.

What I don't understand is why it's a personal freedom to have a gun but not a personal freedom to marry who you wish or termimate a pregnancy.

Yeah, it's that crazy conservative logic. I don't understand it, and I am glad I don't.

Excellent idea. Much better than the extended explanation that usually accompanies political debates.

I will do you one better: Stop apologizing for being a liberal. I am one, and am proud of it. Simply say:

1. I am for gun control. It just makes sense.

2. I don't want you in my bedroom. I will stay out of yours.

3. Discrimination is a fact. End it and stop making excuses for it.

4. Men can't have babies, so we won't tell woman how to do it or not to do it.

5. If poor people can't have government help, neither can large corporations.

6. Feed and clothe Americans first, then the rest of the world.

7. If you want lower taxes, close the schools and drive on dirt roads.

8. Rich people want to stay rich. Poor people don't. Think about it.

9. You can tell me what Jesus would do after school and after court.

10. Practice what you preach.

11. Anne Coulter and Satan will never be in the same room at the same time. On second thought, yes he is.

12. Michael Moore may be fat and obnoxious, but he's right.

13. Rush Limbaugh may be fat and obnoxious, but it just makes him fat and obnoxious.

14. "Values" come from conduct, not conversation.

and finally,

15. I am a Liberal. I can speak and think at the same time.
The idea of this thread is very good. It has the effectiveness of commercial advertising with a political message.

I have bones to pick with this generally good listL

1. This one is weak. Come up with something better than "it just is".

5. I didn't think the Democrats were against corporate subsidies?

12. The Democrats shouldn't start endorsing Michael Moore.

I agree that it's important to reverse the trend of "liberal=bad". Take pride in being a liberal. I do!

Back off gun control. Completely. I'm serious. The Democrats are getting massacred in the upper midwest by this. Union guys who like the Democratic social/economic plan are worried about their guns, and the abortion and gay concerns tip them into the Republican side. The majority of the country supports the 2nd Amendment in its literal interpretation. Blue states are ambivalent about European-style gun-banning, but red states and border states in the upper midwest have a much greater concern (and fear) about their guns being taken away. We simply MUST drop this issue. It's the only issue where Democrats come out in favor of banning something, and it undermines our "freedom" message.
Your oeverall message is correct. I live in a European country where guns are virtually banned. Very few people have a problem with this since you can with difficulty, acquire a gun, but very few of us want guns. However, gun ownership is a central part of American culture and law, so perhaps gun control is a losing battle.

Or, as Spiffydom suggests, forget about regulating them at the federal level.

Oliver Willis has come up with an idea that, much as it goes against my hopes that voters could be swayed by complex arguments instead of soundbites, may wind up being a terrific shot in the arm for the party.

While I would argue that you oversell the Democratic arguments as complex, I think the idea is great. If you can make the Democratic Party into an entity people can indentify with, or at least have candidate that people can identify with. Kerry- I don't think most people can identify with someone quite that wealthy. Sure, Bush is rich but (at least in persona) Bush works in the yard, he mangles his sentances, he's struggled with substance abuse...which all makes him look quite normal and human, not stupid as some contend. Most people do not spend hours and hours pouring over political material, especially those you have to prod to vote in the first place. I think the slogans are great.

Salchicho, you may consider yourself warned for:

-Flaming.
-Flamebaiting.
-Spamming.

All of these repeatedly across a number of threads on these forums.

Should you continue in these behaviors, which are explicitly against forum rules, consequences will be levied.

Should you have questions about the matter and/or about what qualifies as spamming, flaming, or flamebaiting, all of which you have been engaging in on a rather complete scale, they can be answered.
That was a week example of
-Flaming.
-Flamebaiting.
-Spamming.

Perhaps a review of those might be a good idea.

While I would argue that you oversell the Democratic arguments as complex, I think the idea is great. If you can make the Democratic Party into an entity people can indentify with, or at least have candidate that people can identify with. Kerry- I don't think most people can identify with someone quite that wealthy. Sure, Bush is rich but (at least in persona) Bush works in the yard, he mangles his sentances, he's struggled with substance abuse...which all makes him look quite normal and human, not stupid as some contend. Most people do not spend hours and hours pouring over political material, especially those you have to prod to vote in the first place. I think the slogans are great.
They're complex when compared to the "Democrats=bad" positions that the Limbaughs and his spawn spew out every day. The sad thing is that when it comes to how issues affect citizens, the Democratic party is far more a friend of the middle and low economic classes than the Republican party has ever been, and yet we've been successfully cast as the party of the elite. We're the party of minorities and working class labor union types and yet we're the elite? Jeez--black really is white and up really is down in this world.

Yeah, it's that crazy conservative logic. I don't understand it, and I am glad I don't.

As long as you insist on seeing the unborn as a "thing" you will NEVER get it. The fact is, the conservative right believe that a child, once conceived, is a person that has a right to live. And preventing an abortion that is just as much about freedom as the mother wanting to abort. Why is that so hard for liberals to understand? They don't have to agree, but as long as they continue to dismiss it as "crazy", I believe they'll never be able to advance their own position.

The problem is, sort of like gun control, abortion is a tough hill to defend. As much as talking freedom sounds good, it is a freedom to kill unborn babys - And that doesn't sound so good. I've rarely seen a pro-choicer be able to defend abortion as an act, so they focus purely on the "rights" of women as their arguement.

Someone needs to come up with a new strategy to fight this battle. Although I'm conservative, I'd hate to see abortions banned. That would be an economic and social disaster for this country. And a lot of moderate Republicans realize that and would be happy to support a "middle ground" solution. Unfortunately, 99% of pro-lifers and pro-choicers both push for "all-or-nothing" agendas and refuse to compromise.

As long as you insist on seeing the unborn as a "thing" you will NEVER get it. The fact is, the conservative right believe that a child, once conceived, is a person that has a right to live. And preventing an abortion that is just as much about freedom as the mother wanting to abort. Why is that so hard for liberals to understand? They don't have to agree, but as long as they continue to dismiss it as "crazy", I believe they'll never be able to advance their own position.

The problem is, sort of like gun control, abortion is a tough hill to defend. As much as talking freedom sounds good, it is a freedom to kill unborn babys - And that doesn't sound so good. I've rarely seen a pro-choicer be able to defend abortion as an act, so they focus purely on the "rights" of women as their arguement.

Someone needs to come up with a new strategy to fight this battle. Although I'm conservative, I'd hate to see abortions banned. That would be an economic and social disaster for this country. And a lot of moderate Republicans realize that and would be happy to support a "middle ground" solution. Unfortunately, 99% of pro-lifers and pro-choicers both push for "all-or-nothing" agendas and refuse to compromise.

Say my sister gets raped. The sick bastard that did it not only didn't wear a condom and got her pregnant but gave her aids. Should a baby also be born under the circumstances? There is an example defending the act of an abortion. Some people would force her to have to deal with giving birth to this child OR using "unconventional" means to go about the abortion (such as a coat hanger, or a dumpster).

A little extreme, but these things DO happen, and if abortion became fully illegal it would happen a lot more.

Say my sister gets raped. The sick bastard that did it not only didn't wear a condom and got her pregnant but gave her aids. Should a baby also be born under the circumstances? There is an example defending the act of an abortion. Some people would force her to have to deal with giving birth to this child OR using "unconventional" means to go about the abortion (such as a coat hanger, or a dumpster).

A little extreme, but these things DO happen, and if abortion became fully illegal it would happen a lot more.
I agree … I happen to be almost dead center on the subject (maybe a LITTLE pro life) but I wholeheartedly agree … the arena changes when her choice to have sex goes away

Oliver Willis has come up with an idea that, much as it goes against my hopes that voters could be swayed by complex arguments instead of soundbites, may wind up being a terrific shot in the arm for the party. It's called Brand Democrat, and the idea is that the party can put what it stands for in simple terms that won't easily be refuted. You can see the early examples here (http://oliverwillis.com/branddemocrat/), but I'll post a couple of my favorites for your edification.

http://www.oliverwillis.com/images/5b950d2f5f135620a39e8bbe53e933f2-1291.png

Here's another one:

http://www.oliverwillis.com/images/c7e4f750d00cff7730ba7d30471ee88c-1296.png

And one last one:

http://www.oliverwillis.com/images/d9d759df11d1fc860f8bdc674780ce2e-1309.png

So what do you think? Does this have a chance of getting attention in our short attention span society?

comprahensively debating the main issues is still the best way to reach a political solution or decide on policy, and is obviously still done by government; however this is a great idea for the modern voter, but still a shame that politics has come to almost monosylabic statements with bright pretty colours.

Say my sister gets raped. The sick bastard that did it not only didn't wear a condom and got her pregnant but gave her aids. Should a baby also be born under the circumstances? There is an example defending the act of an abortion. Some people would force her to have to deal with giving birth to this child OR using "unconventional" means to go about the abortion (such as a coat hanger, or a dumpster).

A little extreme, but these things DO happen, and if abortion became fully illegal it would happen a lot more.

I think you are presenting and defending a circumstance for abortion, not so much the act of it. It's a focus on why you are doing it, not what you are doing.

Although I don't speak for the religious right, I expect many of them would ask why the unborn baby should be punished for the crimes of the father. That is the way they see it.

I think you are presenting and defending a circumstance for abortion, not so much the act of it. It's a focus on why you are doing it, not what you are doing.

Although I don't speak for the religious right, I expect many of them would ask why the unborn baby should be punished for the crimes of the father. That is the way they see it.
Wouldn't the baby be punished with AIDs if brought to term?
Wouldn't you be sparing the child a life of sickness and disease?

So its not black and white man.

Wouldn't the baby be punished with AIDs if brought to term?
Wouldn't you be sparing the child a life of sickness and disease?

So its not black and white man.

But Aids is no longer a guaranteed death sentence. And I believe that childred of HIV mothers can be disease-free. Wouldn't you be stripping that child of any chance of a good life?

You are right, it is FAR from black and white.

Of course, remember, I am actually pro-choice...

:rolleyes: Whatever. Brand Democrat is already a failure becuase it is not honest.

Well in order to be completly honest you have to explain.
The minute you try to explain anything to people who are inclined to vote Republican you've already lost them. They consider reasoned arguments to be either intelectual elitism, or now just nuance or flip-flopping.

It's pretty much the only thing that can work.
Catch their attention with sound bites. "Democrates, we're against murdering people just because you don't like them," or "we don't hate the rich, we want to help you be just like them."

Then let them come looking for the more complicated reasoned arguments "the fundamental flaw in the theory of supply-side economics lies in it's failure to address the ultimate source of wealth and focus entierly routes of circulation..." or "the failure of the so-called war on drugs is also a testament to the success of demand-side economics..."

Well in order to be completly honest you have to explain.
The minute you try to explain anything to people who are inclined to vote Republican you've already lost them. They consider reasoned arguments to be either intelectual elitism, or now just nuance or flip-flopping.

It's pretty much the only thing that can work.
Catch their attention with sound bites. "Democrates, we're against murdering people just because you don't like them," or "we don't hate the rich, we want to help you be just like them."

Then let them come looking for the more complicated reasoned arguments "the fundamental flaw in the theory of supply-side economics lies in it's failure to address the ultimate source of wealth and focus entierly routes of circulation..." or "the failure of the so-called war on drugs is also a testament to the success of demand-side economics..."

So your argument boils down to “republicans are idiots”
Real intelligent argument … stereotyping and insulting in the same post YAY

Lol at least no one can accuse you of intellectual elitism (even republicans would see the flaw in that …)

I agree … I happen to be almost dead center on the subject (maybe a LITTLE pro life) but I wholeheartedly agree … the arena changes when her choice to have sex goes away

So to you abortion is about the choice of having sex and not about the life of the child?

I can understand the pro life argument that the fetus is a human and all human life (no matter how primitive) is precious, but pro-life out of a need to punish irresponsible sex? I can't understand that.

Why should we even cure AIDS? It obviously is the individual's fault for not being responsible. (sarcasm)

So your argument boils down to “republicans are idiots”
Real intelligent argument … stereotyping and insulting in the same post YAY

Lol at least no one can accuse you of intellectual elitism (even republicans would see the flaw in that …)

I agree with what you are saying, but I agree with what Domici is saying. He should have rephrased it to "Most people are stupid."

I think you can watch any beer commercial, see how effective beer commercials are, and become devastatingly aware of just how stupid John Q. Public actually is.

I agree with what you are saying, but I agree with what Domici is saying. He should have rephrased it to "Most people are stupid."

I think you can watch any beer commercial, see how effective beer commercials are, and become devastatingly aware of just how stupid John Q. Public actually is.
Agreed … people don’t listen to the long drawn out reasons unless they are looking for justification … they want a summery to compare to

In some ways I guess that is not all bad … boil it down so you can compare it to another point of view

Excellent idea. Much better than the extended explanation that usually accompanies political debates.

I will do you one better: Stop apologizing for being a liberal. I am one, and am proud of it. Simply say:

1. I am for gun control. It just makes sense.

2. I don't want you in my bedroom. I will stay out of yours.

3. Discrimination is a fact. End it and stop making excuses for it.

4. Men can't have babies, so we won't tell woman how to do it or not to do it.

5. If poor people can't have government help, neither can large corporations.

6. Feed and clothe Americans first, then the rest of the world.

7. If you want lower taxes, close the schools and drive on dirt roads.

8. Rich people want to stay rich. Poor people don't. Think about it.

9. You can tell me what Jesus would do after school and after court.

10. Practice what you preach.

11. Anne Coulter and Satan will never be in the same room at the same time. On second thought, yes he is.

12. Michael Moore may be fat and obnoxious, but he's right.

13. Rush Limbaugh may be fat and obnoxious, but it just makes him fat and obnoxious.

14. "Values" come from conduct, not conversation.

and finally,

15. I am a Liberal. I can speak and think at the same time.

1. Gun control means hitting your target. It's that simple. If anything else makes sense to you, you better be prepared to shoot me.

2. But I also insist that you do not drag me into yours. And yes, I refer to "pride parades" etc.

3. Yeah, end the "affirmative action" (the only legalized form of dicrimination in the US).

4. Babies deserve full protection of the law.

5. Agreed.

6. Too vague and unclear.

7. How about a compromise - let's just close schools. You want to educate your children - pay for it yourself and do NOT confiscate MY money (unless you can prove my paternity :-).

8. So?

9. The US is the ONLY Christian country left in the world. So either show proper respect or get out and move to Canada or Europe. But your intolerance here will NOT be tolerated.

10. Same goes for you.

11. I thought you did not believe in Satan.

12. Anyone who thinks that Michael Moore is right is totally incapable of rational and logical thinking and should not be allowed to vote on the ground of mental incompetence.

13. Rush is right.

14. "Values" come from God.

15. No, you are not a liberal. The word "liberal" means "someone who strongly believes in freedom". You definitely do not believe in freedom and in fact strongly believe that human beings should never be free (but rather be slaves of the government). By the way, that's the biggest difference between Left and Right - the Right is for freedom and the Left is against Freedom.

What I don't understand is why it's a personal freedom to have a gun but not a personal freedom to marry who you wish or termimate a pregnancy.

Because Republicans think a person's right to life, liberty, and happiness end at birth :rolleyes:

So to you abortion is about the choice of having sex and not about the life of the child?

I can understand the pro life argument that the fetus is a human and all human life (no matter how primitive) is precious, but pro-life out of a need to punish irresponsible sex? I can't understand that.

Why should we even cure AIDS? It obviously is the individual's fault for not being responsible. (sarcasm)

How can anyone who is paying attention NOT realize that the stance is largely about punishing women who have sex outside of financially secure marriages. They are promoting abstinence-only education, pushing for pharmacists to be able to refuse birth control to women on moral grounds (this is a fucking huge statement considering their pro-business stance. no other type of employee is allowed to go against company policy and not get fired for "moral" reasons), allowing insurance companies to refuse to cover birth control for "moral" reasons.... if they are so damned worried about stopping abortion because it is murder then why the hell are they so adamant about finding every way possible to promote unplanned pregnancies? If they really gave a damn about LIFE then why they hell do they not care if a child starves or doesn't recieve proper healthcare after it is born?

Healthcare, Shelter, and Nutrition for All Children - Real Pro-Life

They're complex when compared to the "Democrats=bad" positions that the Limbaughs and his spawn spew out every day. The sad thing is that when it comes to how issues affect citizens, the Democratic party is far more a friend of the middle and low economic classes than the Republican party has ever been, and yet we've been successfully cast as the party of the elite. We're the party of minorities and working class labor union types and yet we're the elite? Jeez--black really is white and up really is down in this world.

Heh, if we could find ways to put Democrat policies into logically fallacious sentence structures like black = white or X is not equal to X then they really would be playing the neo-con's game.

*sigh*

Who ever thought it would come to advocating dumbing down politcal debate and murdering the English language just in order to try to preserve any semblance of decency in this nation.

I'm sorry, what did you say again?

Seriously, though, I do think that those images would be much more effective in getting votes than trying to explain your complex arguments. Complexity tends to make you look like a flip-flopper. ;)

They are probably trying to bring it down to your level!

Pictures! :p

the Right is for freedom and the Left is against Freedom.
Which is why the Right bans just about everything.

1. Gun control means hitting your target. It's that simple. If anything else makes sense to you, you better be prepared to shoot me.

2. But I also insist that you do not drag me into yours. And yes, I refer to "pride parades" etc.

3. Yeah, end the "affirmative action" (the only legalized form of dicrimination in the US).

4. Babies deserve full protection of the law.

5. Agreed.

6. Too vague and unclear.

7. How about a compromise - let's just close schools. You want to educate your children - pay for it yourself and do NOT confiscate MY money (unless you can prove my paternity :-).

8. So?

9. The US is the ONLY Christian country left in the world. So either show proper respect or get out and move to Canada or Europe. But your intolerance here will NOT be tolerated.

10. Same goes for you.

11. I thought you did not believe in Satan.

12. Anyone who thinks that Michael Moore is right is totally incapable of rational and logical thinking and should not be allowed to vote on the ground of mental incompetence.

13. Rush is right.

14. "Values" come from God.

15. No, you are not a liberal. The word "liberal" means "someone who strongly believes in freedom". You definitely do not believe in freedom and in fact strongly believe that human beings should never be free (but rather be slaves of the government). By the way, that's the biggest difference between Left and Right - the Right is for freedom and the Left is against Freedom.

1. Gun control is making sure that you aren't the target.

2. You are not required to participate in "Pride Parades" you are not required to marry someone of your own sex. If it disgusts you, look away.

3. I agree, there are better ways to handle the situation.

4. A fetus isn't a baby. It looks like one, but try taking it and putting it in a stroller.

5. Agreed

6. Agreed, and I don't think that either party disagrees.

7. Publicly funded education is the backbone to the "Land of Opportunity," as it is the only way to guarantee that everyone receives a chance to succeed.

8. That was pointless rhetoric.

9. The US is NOT a christian country. God is never mentioned in the constitution. God was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the forties. A great deal of our founding fathers were not christian. The country was based on secularism. Now if you can't handle that, maybe you should leave.

10, 11, 12, 13. BLAH BLAH BLAH

14. Not in this country, see No. 9

15. I know I hate freedom, I'm pretty sure that Jefferson, Roosevelt and Kennedy hated freedom, too.