NationStates Jolt Archive

I work with all Christian Republicans that are very angry about the Dems getting majority. They are actually saying things like:

There goes the military... the dems are going to disband it.

We're all goign to be taxed to the point where we will have to live on the streets.

Now we can all quit and go on welfare!!!

So much for our security, the Dems dont want to fight terrorism, they want to bend over and let the terrorists have their way with us.

blah blah blah, whine whine whine, and rant rave masturbate

What are YOUR predictions of how the the next couple years will go with Dems in control of Congress?

I think that not much will change apart from:

The US will most likely spend less money as we phase the troops out of Iraq

Taxes for the rich may increase slightly

Our relationship with the rest of the world will improve.

And most of the recommendations of the 9/11 commision will be out into effect.

Eeeep! For a second there, the title made me think they had gotten to you with them brainwashing mashines.

<.<

>.>

Eeeep! For a second there, the title made me think they had gotten to you with them brainwashing mashines.

<.<

>.>

Ditto. I was scared!

I think it will be great you had your run (republicans) now its our turn

Dont worry I haven't lost my mind


anymore than I already had

I expect not much difference, seeing as going from right to slightly less right isn't all that much of a change.

There goes the military... the dems are going to disband it.

We're all goign to be taxed to the point where we will have to live on the streets.

Now we can all quit and go on welfare!!!

So much for our security, the Dems dont want to fight terrorism, they want to bend over and let the terrorists have their way with us.

sounds heavenly:)

but I must say I have my doubts whether democrats will change anything well apart from making it harder for new laws to be passed (then again Bush did say he was above the law…)

sounds heavenly:)

but I must say I have my doubts whether democrats will change anything well apart from making it harder for new laws to be passed (then again Bush did say he was above the law…)

Lol nice. Id like to see minimum wage raised soon.

sounds heavenly:)

but I must say I have my doubts whether democrats will change anything well apart from making it harder for new laws to be passed (then again Bush did say he was above the law…)

Aren't you british? How is the joining the royal army going? Still being inflammatory towards the U.S. Marines?

Honestly, not a lot will happen. The minimum wage will be increased, and possibly some ethics reforms will be enacted. The rest of the time will be squandered on fighting over whether or not we're willing to actually pay for our own security, or continue to let the Chinese send us I.O.U.'s. Taxes are going to be a big fight over the next two years as realists and supply-siders clash, and I suspect that the supply-siders are going to pull out another victory.

Aren't you british? How is the joining the royal army going? Still being inflammatory towards the U.S. Marines?

stay on topic guy who telegrammed me a few months ago (and its going great and yes I still despise the USMC)

But yes being British does make my input in the matter somewhat pointless

Honestly, not a lot will happen. The minimum wage will be increased, and possibly some ethics reforms will be enacted. The rest of the time will be squandered on fighting over whether or not we're willing to actually pay for our own security, or continue to let the Chinese send us I.O.U.'s. Taxes are going to be a big fight over the next two years as realists and supply-siders clash, and I suspect that the supply-siders are going to pull out another victory.

I'm pretty much in agreement with you. I'd say the Dem's comeback this election cycle is great for the party, but only so-so in terms of genuine positive change for the nation.

I love it! I suppose we will all be living on the dole and enduring daily terrorist attacks. Those lousy democrats... :(

We're suppose to be the premier democracy of the world, but we really only have a two-party dominion. Nothing will change drastically, the US in the Bill Clinton Adminstration wasn't that different from either of the Bush Adminstration was it?

I'm pretty much in agreement with you. I'd say the Dem's comeback this election cycle is great for the party, but only so-so in terms of genuine positive change for the nation.

I disagree if this is how you truely feel... it could actually be bad for the democrats. The Democrats where elected only as a reaction vote against the Republicans. If they are unable to bring about meaningful change, I think you will only see more republicans regain power in 08.. being more Concervative republicans rather then neo-cons.

We're suppose to be the premier democracy of the world, but we really only have a two-party dominion. Nothing will change drastically, the US in the Bill Clinton Adminstration wasn't that different from either of the Bush Adminstration was it?

You say "only a two- party dominion" as though it were a bad thing. What do you think having more then two parties in any way would create a more effective government. If anything, (use Italy as a prime example) more parties creates more gridlock and less effective/efficent government.

I think having parties at all hurts us.

We should be voting for individuals and their ideas and individual records, not what someone else they are affiliated with did.

Besides, tHere is quite a bit of fighting within the parties as well as between them and as Congress works like two days a week, not much gets done anyway.

You say "only a two- party dominion" as though it were a bad thing. What do you think having more then two parties in any way would create a more effective government. If anything, (use Italy as a prime example) more parties creates more gridlock and less effective/efficent government.

well in the U.K we have 3 major parties and some bat shit insane ones and I never hear any complaints about effectiveness or efficiency

Then again labour has been in change for nearly 10 years now…

well in the U.K we have 3 major parties and some bat shit insane ones and I never hear any complaints about effectiveness or efficiency

Then again labour has been in change for nearly 10 years now…


I love watching your parties bash each other with witty sarcasm and smart put downs. Here we just get nasty and mean and show the anger behind it while over there it all seems to be a big joke - :p

well in the U.K we have 3 major parties and some bat shit insane ones and I never hear any complaints about effectiveness or efficiency

Then again labour has been in change for nearly 10 years now…

Truely you only have a 2 party system. 2 parties holding a majority of the seats being Conservatives and Labour. Sure there maybe other parties but are they even thought of as a possibility. The US does have the Green party, but again, they hold such little power they arn't considered in the running.

Thats because the UK, like the US uses the first past the post system (or Majority takes all) throught the states/provinces. This system inhernetly favors 2 party structures (even though other parties may exist)

We're suppose to be the premier democracy of the world, but we really only have a two-party dominion. Nothing will change drastically, the US in the Bill Clinton Adminstration wasn't that different from either of the Bush Adminstration was it?

There is some difference. . .Clinton wasn't as big on secrecy, and definately would never have passed the MCA, although to be fair that's as much because the Republicans would never have entrusted Clinton with the powers of the MCA as Clinton himself. But that being said, I don't really see the Democrats leading a fight to repeal that abomination of an intelligence bill.

I disagree if this is how you truely feel... it could actually be bad for the democrats. The Democrats where elected only as a reaction vote against the Republicans. If they are unable to bring about meaningful change, I think you will only see more republicans regain power in 08.. being more Concervative republicans rather then neo-cons.

In the long term, yes, it may not be a good thing for the party. But right now it's galvanizing their base and giving them an opportunity to look like something other than a bunch of ineffective complainers about policy, which is great for the party right now.

you know maybe the 2 parties should try to improve relations. Im more christian republican than i am democrat and i dont hate democrats or disagree with everything they think. I'd be willing to give it a go. All these putdowns to each side. And sumamba i won't "blah blah whine whine rave rave" like you think we do.

1. i don't think you will disband the military per se. the democrats won't give it as much budget but they wont disband
2. i think that i could take more taxes IF it went to the proper cause it was ment for and not used for something else like research and development. i agree we need to get more poor off the streets AS LONG as they are willing to work and not get a free ticket everywhere.

HOWEVER. i disagree that we will improve relations. the middle east hates us. period. indonesia is somewhat seperated but china, vietnam, and korea are not on the good list. Europe is the same and hopefully you all have read about south america and specifically nicaragua recently and our relationships there. When we pull out of iraq the terrorists or iraqis or whatever will think they won and they will keep attacking. They don't want us quiet or they would have quit. they want us dead.

P.S. U.S. Marines rule

you know maybe the 2 parties should try to improve relations. Im more christian republican than i am democrat and i dont hate democrats or disagree with everything they think. I'd be willing to give it a go. All these putdowns to each side. And sumamba i won't "blah blah whine whine rave rave" like you think we do.

1. i don't think you will disband the military per se. the democrats won't give it as much budget but they wont disband
2. i think that i could take more taxes IF it went to the proper cause it was ment for and not used for something else like research and development. i agree we need to get more poor off the streets AS LONG as they are willing to work and not get a free ticket everywhere.

HOWEVER. i disagree that we will improve relations. the middle east hates us. period. indonesia is somewhat seperated but china, vietnam, and korea are not on the good list. Europe is the same and hopefully you all have read about south america and specifically nicaragua recently and our relationships there. When we pull out of iraq the terrorists or iraqis or whatever will think they won and they will keep attacking. They don't want us quiet or they would have quit. they want us dead.

P.S. U.S. Marines rule


no the blah blah whine rant was for my coworkers who were doing just that

the military shouldnt need the kind of budget it gets IMHO

I agree about taxes being spent for the right causes, though I'm sure ther ewill be a least one or two disagreements about what the right cause is. I also think that people shouldt get help unless they are willign to work for it in one way or another (unless they are too disabled)

you are right - as long as we got John BOlton and Condoleza Rice out there we probably wont have much diplomatic strength, although it has already been shown that much of the world is happy about the change in the US political structure.


and the Marines do rule in many aspects - I have two great friends who are marines and one has to go back to Iraq for a second time in January :(

I work with all Christian Republicans that are very angry about the Dems getting majority. They are actually saying things like:

There goes the military... the dems are going to disband it.


The Bill Clinton "balanced" economic years were balanced on the backs of the military. Every branch lost about 1/3rd of its assets.

And of course I love the use of christian as a pejorative it makes you sound so 14


We're all goign to be taxed to the point where we will have to live on the streets.


or back to the 70s... which is worse i think


Now we can all quit and go on welfare!!!


That sounds like a joke...but I expect they will try to peel back welfare reform which has been the only thing in the history of the country to stop the growth of welfare (and it wasn't even full welfare reform)

So much for our security, the Dems dont want to fight terrorism, they want to bend over and let the terrorists have their way with us.


When prominent democrats consider global warming of greater signifigance its not a difficult argument

blah blah blah, whine whine whine, and rant rave masturbate


minus the whining I like all those things



What are YOUR predictions of how the the next couple years will go with Dems in control of Congress?


The next couple of years

...that aint what you need to ask yourself.


I think that not much will change apart from:

The US will most likely spend less money as we phase the troops out of Iraq


Which is where the problem really is.

You see let me lay it out for you

We ran from Vietnam and hundreds of thousands died at the hands of the new communist overlords. We ran from vietnam after the enemy we faced was defeated on the battle field.
We ran from Cambodiea and millions died because we ran from vietnam.
We ran from Laos to which wasn't as bad.

We ran from a country knowing a Democide (its like a genocide only for political reasons) would occur because America didn't have the will to fight anymore.

We Were plucked from the Sky in the Desert of Iran, our soldiers died and our men were held hostage at the embassy. We were driven from Lebanon with but a single suicide bombing.

We ran from Somalia when a single helicopter worth of people died. Somalia was so bad we turned tail and a blind eye to the attrocities in Rwanada, Burundi, and the Congo. Because we had ran for so long there we didn't even put feet in Kosovo only impotent bombing which our enemies avoided and committed their crimes. We let people die by the millions in Bosnia because we didn't have the guts to do the work there

We called a "time out" on Korea and Millions of people have been brutalized by the communist regime in the North.

Since WWII all our mighty army has been able to do well is beat weak and small nations (Grenada, Gulf War II, Afghanistan, Panama) and beat with a large coalition a moderate nation (Gulf war I)

We have a treaty to defend Taiwan and Japan but why should they believe us. If we withdraw from Iraq Saddam Hussein is right... our muscle is all paper. And if you think this is an Exageration Japan and other nations in Asia are saying that already.

If Israel looses its Nuclear supremecy over the middle east how can we keep Israel on the reservation when they know enough body bags will send us home? either nations will capitulate to evil or they will arm to face it in the sense of self defense because thats fight or flight.

If America Runs from Iraq why should anyone trust us to be their knight in shining armor? And thats not going to be something that happens in just a few years. The militarization of china, and their support of some powers (North Korea) to counter US influence is born from seeing the Weakness of the Soviet military machine as displayed in Iraq. If they see now that we don't have the soft power or political will to use our military they and other nations will fill the void and I guarentee you won't like what they do.

if you have a computer like mine and many others thank folks in Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and even indonesia. And if those nations face new threats because we cannot pick up the sword any more then you will not be seeing the same new generations of technology, and the new jobs it has brought to this country and the rest of the world. Dispite the poor choices its made the US order up until 1991 has brought the world much good. But from 1991 its been slouching, getting fat, and getting spineless.

This is why they fight as they do right now in Afghanistan and Iraq. Because if we run..... then the world will get a lot worse, just as our running from vietnam did. Now ... in another 20-30 years the world may right itself as it did from our cowardice in vietnam but we live in a day and age when 20-30 years is like centuries. Do you want to hold the world back centuries?


Taxes for the rich may increase slightly


Hate to tell you this but the Tax system is dishonest.

The vast majority of small buisnessmen do not incorperate they instead file sole proprietorship papers on their income taxes. That means the very small buisnesses that are the engine driving the economy are classified by our dishonest and pathetic system as "the rich"

and A teacher and a Police officer bordered what our tax system classifies as rich.

Their are better ways to do it, but lets not forget every time the government charges less taxes they collect more money. The problem is of course being government they spend even more money.


Our relationship with the rest of the world will improve.


No it won't... they will just be more polite. The rest of the world does not play the game of diplomacy the way we do. Few countries do their international affairs with the same forthright honesty as the US

so we get polite people who still stab us in the back, is that better for you? I like people to stab me in the front


And most of the recommendations of the 9/11 commision will be out into effect.

the 9-11 commission was a joke, as were its recommendations.

P.S. U.S. Marines rule

:eek: [insert my military/penis is better than yours nationalism followed by obligatory tough job/respect/there all the same]

Now as for the thread at hand wasn’t there some speculation over the voting machines:confused:

I think we'll have gridlock, with virtually all policy initiatives consisting of heavily watered-down, bipartisan "middle of the road" legislation that has marginal effects, most likely beneficial and definitely not negative. We'll have a few years of relative quiet and stagnation in the Congress.

Not that that's a bad thing; in fact, it's an excellent thing. Given our budget situation, we desparately need gridlock to help restore our government to fiscal solvency.

We should be voting for individuals and their ideas and individual records, not what someone else they are affiliated with did.
And however are they to finance their campaigns?

I notice a lot of Bushevics sound like Colbert (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI2F3iVxsUo&mode=related&search=) when he says "we are going to be having illegal aliens learning about evolution and everybody is going to be high"
I just do not understand how the Bush supporters feel that it is possible to make it worse then the Republicans already have.

The Bill Clinton "balanced" economic years were balanced on the backs of the military. Every branch lost about 1/3rd of its assets.

And of course I love the use of christian as a pejorative it makes you sound so 14



or back to the 70s... which is worse i think



That sounds like a joke...but I expect they will try to peel back welfare reform which has been the only thing in the history of the country to stop the growth of welfare (and it wasn't even full welfare reform)


When prominent democrats consider global warming of greater signifigance its not a difficult argument


minus the whining I like all those things



The next couple of years

...that aint what you need to ask yourself.



Which is where the problem really is.

You see let me lay it out for you

We ran from Vietnam and hundreds of thousands died at the hands of the new communist overlords. We ran from vietnam after the enemy we faced was defeated on the battle field.
We ran from Cambodiea and millions died because we ran from vietnam.
We ran from Laos to which wasn't as bad.

We ran from a country knowing a Democide (its like a genocide only for political reasons) would occur because America didn't have the will to fight anymore.

We Were plucked from the Sky in the Desert of Iran, our soldiers died and our men were held hostage at the embassy. We were driven from Lebanon with but a single suicide bombing.

We ran from Somalia when a single helicopter worth of people died. Somalia was so bad we turned tail and a blind eye to the attrocities in Rwanada, Burundi, and the Congo. Because we had ran for so long there we didn't even put feet in Kosovo only impotent bombing which our enemies avoided and committed their crimes. We let people die by the millions in Bosnia because we didn't have the guts to do the work there

We called a "time out" on Korea and Millions of people have been brutalized by the communist regime in the North.

Since WWII all our mighty army has been able to do well is beat weak and small nations (Grenada, Gulf War II, Afghanistan, Panama) and beat with a large coalition a moderate nation (Gulf war I)

We have a treaty to defend Taiwan and Japan but why should they believe us. If we withdraw from Iraq Saddam Hussein is right... our muscle is all paper. And if you think this is an Exageration Japan and other nations in Asia are saying that already.

If Israel looses its Nuclear supremecy over the middle east how can we keep Israel on the reservation when they know enough body bags will send us home? either nations will capitulate to evil or they will arm to face it in the sense of self defense because thats fight or flight.

If America Runs from Iraq why should anyone trust us to be their knight in shining armor? And thats not going to be something that happens in just a few years. The militarization of china, and their support of some powers (North Korea) to counter US influence is born from seeing the Weakness of the Soviet military machine as displayed in Iraq. If they see now that we don't have the soft power or political will to use our military they and other nations will fill the void and I guarentee you won't like what they do.

if you have a computer like mine and many others thank folks in Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and even indonesia. And if those nations face new threats because we cannot pick up the sword any more then you will not be seeing the same new generations of technology, and the new jobs it has brought to this country and the rest of the world. Dispite the poor choices its made the US order up until 1991 has brought the world much good. But from 1991 its been slouching, getting fat, and getting spineless.

This is why they fight as they do right now in Afghanistan and Iraq. Because if we run..... then the world will get a lot worse, just as our running from vietnam did. Now ... in another 20-30 years the world may right itself as it did from our cowardice in vietnam but we live in a day and age when 20-30 years is like centuries. Do you want to hold the world back centuries?



Hate to tell you this but the Tax system is dishonest.

The vast majority of small buisnessmen do not incorperate they instead file sole proprietorship papers on their income taxes. That means the very small buisnesses that are the engine driving the economy are classified by our dishonest and pathetic system as "the rich"

and A teacher and a Police officer bordered what our tax system classifies as rich.

Their are better ways to do it, but lets not forget every time the government charges less taxes they collect more money. The problem is of course being government they spend even more money.



No it won't... they will just be more polite. The rest of the world does not play the game of diplomacy the way we do. Few countries do their international affairs with the same forthright honesty as the US

so we get polite people who still stab us in the back, is that better for you? I like people to stab me in the front



the 9-11 commission was a joke, as were its recommendations.

I was just desribing them as Christians and nothign more, what you read into it is yoru own business and reflects on you more than anyone.

I didnt ask for you to pick apart what I think the future holds... I asked you to predict what you think will happen as a result of the Dems getting majority. I want to see if your doomsday scenario plays out since, you know, the dems are so aweful at governance.

Gunna give it a shot or are you afraid you might be proven wrong?

And however are they to finance their campaigns?

I gotta go or else I would answer this because I do have an idea but it would take too long to explain right now.

I'll be back!

In the long term, yes, it may not be a good thing for the party. But right now it's galvanizing their base and giving them an opportunity to look like something other than a bunch of ineffective complainers about policy, which is great for the party right now.

Perhaps.. but judging from their history, and Nancy Pelosi's rhetoric, Im betting they will squander this opprotunity quickly. Turely, I expect the Democratic party to be largely gone within the next 10 to 20 years simply because American politics is slowly but surely shifting right and the democrats arn't producing enough ideas to inspire their base. Sooner or later liberals will begin to look to rebuild a new party.

I was just desribing them as Christians and nothign more, what you read into it is yoru own business and reflects on you more than anyone.

I didnt ask for you to pick apart what I think the future holds... I asked you to predict what you think will happen as a result of the Dems getting majority. I want to see if your doomsday scenario plays out since, you know, the dems are so aweful at governance.

Gunna give it a shot or are you afraid you might be proven wrong?

hehe your Bias and animus is rather clear

and I added the problems with your worldview as my prediction.

The nature of the beast is no matter what political ideology is in power the unintended and ignored consequence of their actions.

Perhaps.. but judging from their history, and Nancy Pelosi's rhetoric, Im betting they will squander this opprotunity quickly. Turely, I expect the Democratic party to be largely gone within the next 10 to 20 years simply because American politics is slowly but surely shifting right and the democrats arn't producing enough ideas to inspire their base. Sooner or later liberals will begin to look to rebuild a new party.

Yes, it's my expectation that the Dems will still die as a party in the long-term as well.

Yay for gridlock! I'm all for that! My hope is that as ironic as it might sound, that we get a little bit more fiscally conservative now.

Yay for gridlock! I'm all for that! My hope is that as ironic as it might sound, that we get a little bit more fiscally conservative now.

I would very much like that, being a fiscal conservative myself.

The 25-point memo describing what the Democrats plan on doing has just been leaked!

1. Mandatory homosexuality
2. Drug-filled condoms in schools
3. Introduce the new Destruction of Marriage Act
4. Border fence replaced with free shuttle buses
5. Osama Bin Laden to be Secretary of State
6. Withdraw from Iraq, apologize, reinstate Hussein
7. English language banned from all Federal buildings
8. Math classes replaced by encounter groups
9. All taxes to be tripled
10. All fortunes over $250,000 to be confiscated
11. On-demand welfare
12. Tofurkey to be named official Thanksgiving dish
13. Freeways to be removed, replaced with light rail systems
14. Pledge of Allegiance in schools replaced with morning flag-burning
15. Stem cells allowed to be harvested from any child under the age of 8
16. Comatose people to be ground up and fed to poor
17. Quarterly mandatory abortion lottery
18. God to be mocked roundly
19. Dissolve Executive Branch: reassign responsibilities to UN
20. Jane Fonda to be appointed Secretary of Appeasement
21. Outlaw all firearms: previous owners assigned to anger management therapy
22. Texas returned to Mexico
23. Ban Christmas: replace with Celebrate our Monkey Ancestors Day
24. Carter added to Mount Rushmore
25. Modify USA's motto to "Land of the French and the home of the brave

:p

Yes, it's my expectation that the Dems will still die as a party in the long-term as well.

I think we may be seeing the end of it. Most of the new democrats elected were of a rather conservative sort. Low-taxes, pro-gun, crime-tough, etc. Of course, it strikes me that the Republican party has a need of the Democrats if they want to continue to exist.

If the new-breed Democratic party is moderate and puts sense before dogma, it may spell death for the republicans as well.

I think we may be seeing the end of it. Most of the new democrats elected were of a rather conservative sort. Low-taxes, pro-gun, crime-tough, etc. Of course, it strikes me that the Republican party has a need of the Democrats if they want to continue to exist.

If the new-breed Democratic party is moderate and puts sense before dogma, it may spell death for the republicans as well.

In the long term, party names mean nothing to me. But it's hard not to look at this midterm election and fail to see that conservatism still largely won. If the democrats get more conservative, I welcome that change. I'm not holding my breath though. I've seen too many democrats run as conservatives and turn back into what they really were after the election was over. But I would really like to be surprised here.

I work with all Christian Republicans that are very angry about the Dems getting majority. They are actually saying things like:

There goes the military... the dems are going to disband it.

We're all goign to be taxed to the point where we will have to live on the streets.

Now we can all quit and go on welfare!!!

So much for our security, the Dems dont want to fight terrorism, they want to bend over and let the terrorists have their way with us.

I really and truly believe all of the above: the Dems WILL get rid of the military (or at least TRY), jack up taxes on everybody, raise the min. wage to the point where NO company can afford manufacturing ops in the US, bend over backwards to help the terrorists attack us some more ("Here's our nuclear bombs, Mr. bin Laden! Feel free to shoot them at us and Israel to your heart's content!"), and fix it so we all have to go on welfare to survive.

Kudo Slava;11926234']Lol nice. Id like to see minimum wage raised soon.

Yeah you'd like to see more of our jobs go overseas: the reason they're going overseas is because WAGES ARE LOWER OVERSEAS. The LAST thing we need, if we're going to keep any jobs at all, is to raise the minimum wage.

I really and truly believe all of the above: the Dems WILL get rid of the military (or at least TRY), jack up taxes on everybody, raise the min. wage to the point where NO company can afford manufacturing ops in the US, bend over backwards to help the terrorists attack us some more ("Here's our nuclear bombs, Mr. bin Laden! Feel free to shoot them at us and Israel to your heart's content!"), and fix it so we all have to go on welfare to survive.

Agreed.

Yeah you'd like to see more of our jobs go overseas: the reason they're going overseas is because WAGES ARE LOWER OVERSEAS. The LAST thing we need, if we're going to keep any jobs at all, is to raise the minimum wage.

Yeah, we should drop them that way our workers can start stealing jobs from those high rolling factory workers in southeast asia, of course they won't be able to afford anything they produce, or food for that matter, but thats their own fault for not be a corporat execs:rolleyes:

Of all the kneejerk reactions Republicans are having as a result of these elections, I think the idea that the Democrats are going to "disband" the military is about the funniest (and stupidest) thing I have ever heard.

With all the MONEY involved in the defense industry, from jobs to exports, such a course would be utter political suicide, not to mention economically idiotic.

That doesn't mean that the Dems won't try to streamline the military in terms of the budget, but that in turn does not mean a less effective fighting force. The Cold War has been over for a long time, and fighting terrorism requires a smarter, more efficient, and technologically advanced fighting force.

The last time I checked, the terrorists don't have any MIGs, so why are we pouring BILLIONS into the F-22 and the JSF?

The last time I checked, the terroists don't have a navy, so why are we pouring BILLIONS into new naval projects?

We need to focus on UAVs, improved armor for vehicles and infantry, and retrofitting of existing equipment...not these Cold War pipedreams the Republicans have been throwing money at for the last six years.

This is something I believe the Democrats have the political will to do.

Bah I just hope the election will convince my fellow republicans to throw those rascals the neo-conservatives and christian fundamentalits out so we can have a actual small government party again. Here's to hoping!

You know, maybe if we bent over and let the terrorists have their way with us, they'd exhaust themselves to the point where they won't be able to blow us up anymore. :)

You say "only a two- party dominion" as though it were a bad thing. What do you think having more then two parties in any way would create a more effective government. If anything, (use Italy as a prime example) more parties creates more gridlock and less effective/efficent government.

Germany currently has two mjor parties and 4 or 5 smaller ones.
The huge advantage of the system is that your rarely if ever have one party with an absolute majority, thereby forcing them to form coalitions for an effective government. The system is way more flexible and represents the people much better than any two parties ever could.

You know, maybe if we bent over and let the terrorists have their way with us, they'd exhaust themselves to the point where they won't be able to blow us up anymore. :)

Ah, the joys of a good blow job...

Oh, wait, that wasn't what you meant, was it?

Ah, the joys of a good blow job...

Oh, wait, that wasn't what you meant, was it?

Whatever makes everyone happy. :)

I work with all Christian Republicans that are very angry about the Dems getting majority. They are actually saying things like:

There goes the military... the dems are going to disband it.

We're all goign to be taxed to the point where we will have to live on the streets.

Now we can all quit and go on welfare!!!

So much for our security, the Dems dont want to fight terrorism, they want to bend over and let the terrorists have their way with us.

blah blah blah, whine whine whine, and rant rave masturbate

I would warn your Christian Republican coworkers to put down the torch and step away from the crack pipe.

I'm really anxious for a conservative to come and try and pick apart my last post.

*waits patiently*

I really and truly believe all of the above: the Dems WILL get rid of the military (or at least TRY), jack up taxes on everybody, raise the min. wage to the point where NO company can afford manufacturing ops in the US, bend over backwards to help the terrorists attack us some more ("Here's our nuclear bombs, Mr. bin Laden! Feel free to shoot them at us and Israel to your heart's content!"), and fix it so we all have to go on welfare to survive.If all of this was really true, why didn't they do it when they were in power before. Sure, the terrorist threats weren't as apparent, but we had an economy back then as we do today, and we still have a military.

You know, maybe if we bent over and let the terrorists have their way with us, they'd exhaust themselves to the point where they won't be able to blow us up anymore. :)

:eek: It's genius!

I am not hoping for miracles out of them, they are going to pander to the public like all politicians have to and in the end that will stop them from actually pushing new improvements through.

All I am hoping for is that they act as a balance to that assclown of a president we have.

I work with all Christian Republicans that are very angry about the Dems getting majority. They are actually saying things like:

There goes the military... the dems are going to disband it.

We're all goign to be taxed to the point where we will have to live on the streets.

Now we can all quit and go on welfare!!!

So much for our security, the Dems dont want to fight terrorism, they want to bend over and let the terrorists have their way with us.

blah blah blah, whine whine whine, and rant rave masturbate

What are YOUR predictions of how the the next couple years will go with Dems in control of Congress?

I think that not much will change apart from:

The US will most likely spend less money as we phase the troops out of Iraq

Taxes for the rich may increase slightly

Our relationship with the rest of the world will improve.

And most of the recommendations of the 9/11 commision will be out into effect.

Sounds like a tough place to work. Dont let them get you down. Think of them as nothing more than zoo monkeys, slinging their shit.

It is a new day for America! Along with your predictions, we have a chance of raising minimum wage, a better health care package for America. More lobbying to fight global warming, the rising national debt and and lost liberties.

And as things get a little better over the next 2 years we have a very good chance of the Democrats winning the presidency in 2K8!

It is a new day for America! Along with your predictions, we have a chance of raising minimum wage, a better health care package for America. More lobbying to fight global warming, the rising national debt and and lost liberties.

And as things get a little better over the next 2 years we have a very good chance of the Democrats winning the presidency in 2K8!


LMFAO! a new day... how sweet.

I think they will manage to raise minimum wage because there has been pressure to do so in some of the major metropolitan areas that are collpsing into poverty (Detroit, Cleveland etc) already. This way, when the Min wage is raised and unemployment rises it will actually help those cities that already have high unemployment. I do not, however, believe that Ms. Pelosi's dream of $7 plus in one fell swoop is practical or attainable. They may produce a phase-in over a five year period to reduce the shock to the already suffering manufacuring sector.

The health care issue won't move at all. It is a huge, expensive reform that has yet to get a true champion with good ideas. It may become an election issue in 08, if terrorism lessens rather than increases the way it has in the UK.
If it couldn't get reformed with the Clinton's at the helm, it won't get reformed with a gridlocked congress at the helm. I hope they are bright enough not to spend my tax dollars on yet another investigative committee until after the 08 election.

I hate all lobby groups. That includes the NRA, Sierra Club, NOW, "PharmaCom" and anything else that started with good intention and ended by stealing my voice in my own government. Global warming is going to happen. Instead of crying about it we aught to be planning for the natural shifts in climate that will inevitably occur.

I don't think the National Debt is all that important. But I also don't think for a second that a Gridlocked congress can do anything to fix it. The trade deficit is important. Democrats have a recent track record of making it worse. That's not entirely their fault. They had some ideas. It just didn't work. On the bright side. Gridlock is great news for the domestic economy and always brings a rise in the stock market. It may even be enough to counter the min wage increase if it's managed properly.

I think our lost liberties are the most important issue facing this country. I also think the Dems are just as bad as the Repubs in this area and I hold no hope for regaining what was lost. I also suspect that my personal behavior will be further legislated, removing yet more of my liberties. Blech.
Conservatives legislate morality. Liberals legislate personal health/behavior.

I'm a registered Libertarian, so with regards to those speculating that there will be new parties emerging, I do hope we Libertarians are one of the new parties.

OK. Now it's your turn to call me names or whatever it is you do over here in joltland.

So far, I havent heard any "plan" to correct anything. I'll wait and watch. I dont pretend there is any issue that can be dealt with easily.

I expect not as much will get done as will get Un-done. There is a real mean spirited group out there that is looking more to shame Bush and his policies than to set things straight.
I expect many different investigations on all levels that bear no fruit and when nothing is accomplished, it will be blamed on President Bush and his cabinet.

And how the democrats handle the next year will pretty much decide who takes over in the White House in 08.
I'm optimistic it will be a Republican.

The health care issue won't move at all. It is a huge, expensive reform that has yet to get a true champion with good ideas. It may become an election issue in 08, if terrorism lessens rather than increases the way it has in the UK.
If it couldn't get reformed with the Clinton's at the helm, it won't get reformed with a gridlocked congress at the helm.
It can get as far as a president's signature (then can be tabled until 2K8)

Global warming is going to happen. Instead of crying about it we aught to be planning for the natural shifts in climate that will inevitably occur.
The effects of global warming ARE happening. Yes! we should be making preperations NOW! Bush chose not to do so at the G8 summit. Now a Democratic congress can put pressure on him to do so in the future.

I don't think the National Debt is all that important.
Then Look again! (http://zfacts.com/p/480.html) Fixing that ain't gonna be no walk in the park. But the Democrats will do it as they have, time and time again.

Then Look again! Fixing that ain't gonna be no walk in the park. But the Democrats will do it as they have, time and time again.
Since 1950, the Democrats have never actually decreased the debt, only Eisenhower during 55-56 and 59-60 has.

I disagree with you on every point you ^^ made. But that's to be expected.
*shrugs*

Since 1950, the Democrats have never actually decreased the debt, only Eisenhower during 55-56 and 59-60 has.

Link (http://zfacts.com/p/318.html)
Have they now?

My point is that while the national debt goes up and down, depending on the policies and circumstance of both the previous and current administrations, it does not have a consistently negative or positive effect (affect?... I always forget which is the noun). A big National Debt looks bad on paper, but what more is it than that? Balanced budgets are a myth of paperwork when looked at in the scale of governments.

The trade deficit, however has consistently been a negative thing as it increases. In fact, I believe that fixing the trade deficit would indirectly ease national debt.

Link (http://zfacts.com/p/318.html)
Have they now?

No. That measures Debt vs GDP... not debt, although maybe the site's intense spin made you dizzy enough to miss that.

National Debt over the last 56 years (http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm)

Although if you adjust for inflation the total value of the debt has gone down during some periods, actual dollar numbers haven't.

No. That measures Debt vs GDP... not debt, although maybe the site's intense spin made you dizzy enough to miss that.

National Debt over the last 56 years (http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm)

Although if you adjust for inflation the total value of the debt has gone down during some periods, actual dollar numbers haven't.

That link is mis-leading as is does not reflect population groth, the value of the dollar, etc... link (http://zfacts.com/p/55/html)

That link is mis-leading as is does not reflect population groth, the value of the dollar, etc... link (http://zfacts.com/p/55/html)

As far as I know all I originally said was that Democrats (Presidents) have never decreased the debt. Which they haven't. I wasn't interested in debt in relation to GDP. They've sat around keeping the budget balanced while the economy grows and inflation rises, but I don't think that was what you were trying to say when you posted

Then Look again! Fixing that ain't gonna be no walk in the park. But the Democrats will do it as they have, time and time again.

It came across to me like you meant the Democrats were actually going to do something about the debt, not just keep it where it is.

I disagree with you on every point you ^^ made. But that's to be expected.
*shrugs*

I assume that was meant for me.
Quickly, w/o hijacking this thread. Do you disagree that the effects of global warming are happening right? The hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 and the crazy weather patters that we had this year (Oklahoma super cells in the Tennessee Valley, tropical type flooding in New England, record heat waves all over the place, China getting hammered with all those massive typhoons 98% of the worlds mountian glaciers melting after remaining frozen for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years)

As far as I know all I originally said was that Democrats (Presidents) have never decreased the debt. Which they haven't. I wasn't interested in debt in relation to GDP.

But thats what it boils down to. Dosn't it? Getting the job done. (Democrats) Don't get the job done, because they don't recognize the problem or they simply don't care. (Republicans)

But thats what it boils down to. Dosn't it? Getting the job done. (Democrats) Don't get the job done, because they don't recognize the problem or they simply don't care. (Republicans)

I guess we'll have to disagree on what "getting the job done" is. I'll agree that Republican presidents, in recent history, have a significantly worse track record than Democratic ones, but not that Democrats are, by any means, good at handling debt.

You know, maybe if we bent over and let the terrorists have their way with us, they'd exhaust themselves to the point where they won't be able to blow us up anymore. :)

Don't count on it.

The 25-point memo describing what the Democrats plan on doing has just been leaked!

1. Mandatory homosexuality
2. Drug-filled condoms in schools
3. Introduce the new Destruction of Marriage Act
4. Border fence replaced with free shuttle buses
5. Osama Bin Laden to be Secretary of State
6. Withdraw from Iraq, apologize, reinstate Hussein
7. English language banned from all Federal buildings
8. Math classes replaced by encounter groups
9. All taxes to be tripled
10. All fortunes over $250,000 to be confiscated
11. On-demand welfare
12. Tofurkey to be named official Thanksgiving dish
13. Freeways to be removed, replaced with light rail systems
14. Pledge of Allegiance in schools replaced with morning flag-burning
15. Stem cells allowed to be harvested from any child under the age of 8
16. Comatose people to be ground up and fed to poor
17. Quarterly mandatory abortion lottery
18. God to be mocked roundly
19. Dissolve Executive Branch: reassign responsibilities to UN
20. Jane Fonda to be appointed Secretary of Appeasement
21. Outlaw all firearms: previous owners assigned to anger management therapy
22. Texas returned to Mexico
23. Ban Christmas: replace with Celebrate our Monkey Ancestors Day
24. Carter added to Mount Rushmore
25. Modify USA's motto to "Land of the French and the home of the brave
:p

I believe that's JUST EXACTLY what they intend to do, or get voted out for trying. Really. I truly believe that. No sarcasm here. I really think those are their goals.

I would warn your Christian Republican coworkers to put down the torch and step away from the crack pipe.

It's not a crack pipe; it's the Bible.

If all of this was really true, why didn't they do it when they were in power before. Sure, the terrorist threats weren't as apparent, but we had an economy back then as we do today, and we still have a military.

Yes, we STILL have an economy, despite all efforts by the Democrats to destroy it through tax increases, min. wage hikes and tighter business regulations.:D

I believe that's JUST EXACTLY what they intend to do, or get voted out for trying. Really. I truly believe that. No sarcasm here. I really think those are their goals.

Really? Either you are joking, or you are reality-challenged.

I really and truly believe all of the above: the Dems WILL get rid of the military (or at least TRY), jack up taxes on everybody, raise the min. wage to the point where NO company can afford manufacturing ops in the US, bend over backwards to help the terrorists attack us some more ("Here's our nuclear bombs, Mr. bin Laden! Feel free to shoot them at us and Israel to your heart's content!"), and fix it so we all have to go on welfare to survive.

I can't tell if you're being satirical of paranoid partisans, or are just a paranoid partisan yourself.

Did you know that discussing politics actually engages the part of the brain used while worshipping?

Which is, I might add, different than the "logic" part of the brain.




This thread makes me slightly ill.

I expect not much difference, seeing as going from right to slightly less right isn't all that much of a change.

Ditto. There's really not much of an actual policy difference between them. They preach totally different, but when it comes time to try to keep votes- they all run to the center.

It's not a crack pipe; it's the Bible.
Po-TAY-to, po-TAH-to.

I assume that was meant for me.
Quickly, w/o hijacking this thread. Do you disagree that the effects of global warming are happening right? The hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 and the crazy weather patters that we had this year (Oklahoma super cells in the Tennessee Valley, tropical type flooding in New England, record heat waves all over the place, China getting hammered with all those massive typhoons 98% of the worlds mountian glaciers melting after remaining frozen for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years)

I don't disagree that the effects of global warming are happening, but you can't just make a blanket statement about what they are. We don't have enough data to just start cherry picking which weather events are due to climate change. Correlation != causation.

Just to address the hurricanes -- From Science Magazine (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/308/5729/1753) [Trenberth 308 (5729): 1753]
Thus, although variability is large, trends associated with human influences are evident in the environment in which hurricanes form, and our physical understanding suggests that the intensity of and rainfalls from hurricanes are probably increasing (8), even if this increase cannot yet be proven with a formal statistical test. Model results (14) suggest a shift in hurricane intensities toward extreme hurricanes.

The fact that the numbers of hurricanes have increased in the Atlantic is no guarantee that this trend will continue, owing to the need for favorable conditions to allow a vortex to form while limiting stabilization of the atmosphere by convection. The ability to predict these aspects requires improved understanding and projections of regional climate change. In particular, the tropical ocean basins appear to compete to be most favorable for hurricanes to develop; more activity in the Pacific associated with El Niño is a recipe for less activity in the Atlantic. Moreover, the thermohaline circulation and other climate factors will continue to vary naturally.

Trends in human-influenced environmental changes are now evident in hurricane regions. These changes are expected to affect hurricane intensity and rainfall, but the effect on hurricane numbers remains unclear. The key scientific question is not whether there is a trend in hurricane numbers and tracks, but rather how hurricanes are changing.


Earlier in the article it states that yes, warmer water tends to produce more hurricanes, but you can also get shifting wind patterns that will tend to kill the hurricanes before or just after they form. If the Democrats took corrective action toward global warming without a full understanding of what those effects would be, then the results could be just as bad as the Republicans taking NO action in the face of increasing evidence. Either way, future generations are sorta screwed.

Don't count on it.



I believe that's JUST EXACTLY what they intend to do, or get voted out for trying. Really. I truly believe that. No sarcasm here. I really think those are their goals.
http://forum.gamestar.de/gspinboard/images/smilies/atomrofl.gif



It's not a crack pipe; it's the Bible.
A crack pipe would be more fun and less preachy.



Yes, we STILL have an economy, despite all efforts by the Democrats to destroy it through tax increases, min. wage hikes and tighter business regulations.:D

Sounds good to me. Huzzah destruction of economy.

Sounds good to me. Huzzah destruction of economy.

At this point, sounds good to me. :) Maybe we'll go back to the barter system.
IC: Please suh, I notice you have a six pack of Dr. Pepper. I'll barter you... my son... he can't walk yet, but he'd make a fine workhorse someday.
:D

I don't disagree that the effects of global warming are happening, but you can't just make a blanket statement about what they are. We don't have enough data to just start cherry picking which weather events are due to climate change. Correlation != causation.

Just to address the hurricanes -- From Science Magazine (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/308/5729/1753) [Trenberth 308 (5729): 1753]


Earlier in the article it states that yes, warmer water tends to produce more hurricanes, but you can also get shifting wind patterns that will tend to kill the hurricanes before or just after they form. If the Democrats took corrective action toward global warming without a full understanding of what those effects would be, then the results could be just as bad as the Republicans taking NO action in the face of increasing evidence. Either way, future generations are sorta screwed.

Notice that your link is dated in the summer of 2005 (before Katrina and Wilma) Here is a link (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/16/60minutes/main1323169_page3.shtml) to a more recent study.
The oceans of the Northern Hemisphere are the warmest they've been on record. When they get up to that temperature, they spin off hurricaines.