I won't vote in 2010

[Supposn]

Democrats have decided to delay the tax cuts bill vote until after the election.
I’ll refrain from voting in general elections until the tax bill reaches the floors of both Congressional houses and the bill is voted upon the House of Representatives’ floor.

I fully support Obama’s position that we cannot afford to continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest taxpayers. I’d prefer that the discounted tax rates for long term capital gains incomes be eliminated and replaced with more populist tax cuts.

Since leaving the service in 1959, I’ve voted in every general election and have missed extremely few primary elections. Finally since 2008 I’m no longer voting for the least evil and I require a candidate (at minimum) to substantially concur with my opinion upon at least one issue and methods to achieve our perceived goal. I won’t absolutely always vote for a candidate that simply meets the minimum standard.

Obama’s speaks well on the issues but lacks explicit explanation of how he prefers laws be drafted to achieve what he professes to be (and are too often less than explicit) goals.

Obama’s campaign office had written, (but I’ve never actually found a direct quote from Obama), that he was a proponent of the federal minimum wage pegged to a cost of living adjustment, (i.e. COLA). Based only upon that minimal but substantial agreement I voted for Obama. I now fear that his behavior thus far gives me good reason to fear Obama and the Democrats will acquiesce to Republicans. If Obama’s administration increases the minimum wage, Democrats will not press for it also being thereafter COLA’d.

A COLA’d minimum wage rate will not substantially improve USA’s economy but it is certainly an improvement of a non-COLA’d minimum wage. Any significant federal minimum wage is preferable to an ineffective minimum wage. I suppose it is feasible for a minimum wage rate to be excessive and detrimental to an economy. The greater harm occurs within jurisdictions adjoining others having inadequate wage scales and goods and persons have unrestricted passage over their borders. I have never encountered a historical reference to a nation’s economy being harmed by an excessive minimum wage. I don’t believe there’s ever been an excessive minimum wage within any nation.

Obama is the titular head of the Democratic Party. I appreciate the federal health act’s future benefits to our nation. Obama and the Democratic Party acted despicably to achieve an inferior bill’s passage. Democrats offered exceptions to a few states rather than negotiating and arguing for consideration to help all congressional districts with inadequate availability of health facilities. If such honorable negotiation couldn’t sway senators of less densely populated states, it would have certainly “held their feet to the fire”.

I am not angry because of what he and his party failed to achieve. I’m furious of what positions he surrendered without fully negotiating for anything better. Politics is not a dirty word and negotiation is respectable. Acquiescence and submission are despicable words and are generally cowardly and despicable acts.

It is my patriotic duty not to vote for a party that leads in the wrong direction or a second party that lacks leadership and has no definite direction. The Republicans will lead us until we recognize that it’s the wrong direction. Retaining no consistency of direction, Democrats are unable to correct our nation’s course.

I will not vote for any Democrats until Obama and his party finds and retain some courage. Thus far it appears that I will not vote for Obama in 2012.

Respectfully, Supposn

[red states rule]

Raising taxes on anyone will further damage the economy much like Ovamacare and the insane spending has

You need to expalin why raising taxes will help the economy and encourage employers to hire workers

Obama has gotten much of what he wanted and we see the results. Voters will thank him for his accomplishments on Nov 2

Other then that I am glad you will stay home. One less Dem vote is always a good thing

[Gaffer]

Turn the dogs loose boys, we're going troll huntin'.

[red states rule]

It is amazing how some feel it is fine to punish hard work and achievement in America

I started a thread about this video - but it fits here as well

Please comment Supposn

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hdkUkUQu6U" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hdkUkUQu6U" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[Sweetchuck]

I voted for Kerry during GW's second term, more specifically I voted AGAINST GW and the Republicans who betrayed the conservatives that voted them in.

[red states rule]

I voted for Kerry during GW's second term, more specifically I voted AGAINST GW and the Republicans who betrayed the conservatives that voted them in.

Why am I not surprised at that admission?

You were a pissed off "conservative" so you voted for an appeasing tax and spend liberal?

[darin]

You were a pissed off "conservative" so you voted for an appeasing tax and spend liberal?

http://www.d-mphotos.com/images/applause.gif

[red states rule]

http://www.d-mphotos.com/images/applause.gif

I wonder if Sweets was one of those pissed off "conservatives" who stayed home in 2008 and let Obama win the election?

[KarlMarx]

Republican does not equal Conservative

Democrat equals Liberal over 99.9% of the time.

True conservatives have not been in power since Ronald Reagan's administration and, even then, the Congress was controlled by Democrats. You could say that the 1994 House of Representatives were conservative, and they did good things, but Clinton was in the White House.

Now, if we could have a 1994 Congress with a Ronald Reagan president, then, I believe we would see a big difference.

I believe that, even if conservatives win the Congress, that without a veto proof majority there will be only so much that they can do. The only hope then is that what remaining incumbents will see which way the winds are blowing and vote along with them. Unfortunately, the Democrats will make every effort to start playing dirty in order to sway voters to vote for them again in 2012. Furthermore voters, frustrated by the lack of progress that the next session of Congress make may blame the Republicans for the lack of progress...

On the other hand, the economy may take off, and Obama will try to take credit for it by claiming that the stimulus finally kicked in.

What is more, I also see a danger in Obama's poll numbers being so low. He may not be able to muster the support of the Democratic Party in 2012 and Hillary Clinton will run for president. The electorate, thinking that Hillary is not Obama, may vote her in and we'll have at least 4 more years of a Democrat in the White House.

Of course, none of these worst case scenarios may play out... it could be that the next session of Congress will be able to overcome the obstruction that the Democrats will put up and do good things, after all... what is more, the electorate may see that it was the Republicans that brought good things about and vote a Republican into the White House.

[red states rule]

Well said Karl

We are going to see who wants bigger government and who wants smaller government

Who wants higher taxes and who wants lower taxes

Who wants the government supports Obamacare and who wants it repealed

Right now the Dems and the liberal media are stepping up their scorched earth campaign tactic of personal destruction since they do not want to admit what they stand for

Meanwhile we have the RINO's still being spinless in their beliefs as not to feel the wrath of the liberal media

and we have "conservatives" who bellow how both parties are the same, and will sit on the sidelines bitching and whining while doing nothing to change the situation

[Gaffer]

Both parties are only the same in terms of the elitist mentality. That is the only sameness. There are no conservatives in the democrat party. There are only somewhat socialist to full blown communists. The conservatives are all in the republican party. Not nearly enough of them, but they are there. We need lots more.

[Noir]

OP looks copypasta to me, presumably by a Republican activist, just sayin.

[Kathianne]

OP looks copypasta to me, presumably by a Republican activist, just sayin.

I found the same posted on several forums, one a pro-Obama one. All by supposn.

[Sweetchuck]

I voted against GW, not for Kerry.

I know your tiny mind won't comprehend that.

Kerry was the better option at that point. I was against the war in Iraq. I was (and am) for war at this juncture, just war against the bad guys.

I saw the disaster coming, but that's what you get when you think for yourself and don't let Rush and Beck think for you. I can remember railing against robot neocons like yourself that N. Korea and Iran were and are the bigger threat and we would lose credibility and resources in Iraq.

And I was right, as usual.

If I vote, I tend to vote for conservatism which is one of the reasons why I didn't vote for GW. I voted for McCain, by default. He wasn't the candidate that I wanted to see for the GOP, and BO never was an option.

Kerry was the only time I voted democrat, but unlike mindless apes like you, I vote for a reason.

If you don't like it, go fucking dry hump your Ann Coulter doll.

[Little-Acorn]

Democrats have decided to delay the tax cuts bill vote until after the election.
I’ll refrain from voting in general elections until the tax bill reaches the floors of both Congressional houses and the bill is voted upon the House of Representatives’ floor.

Yep, the "I'll take my ball and go home" defense is a perennial favorite among some. The team that's about to lose big (the Democrats) thank you profusely - you are doing their bidding well.

[red states rule]

I voted against GW, not for Kerry.

I know your tiny mind won't comprehend that.

Kerry was the better option at that point. I was against the war in Iraq. I was (and am) for war at this juncture, just war against the bad guys.

I saw the disaster coming, but that's what you get when you think for yourself and don't let Rush and Beck think for you. I can remember railing against robot neocons like yourself that N. Korea and Iran were and are the bigger threat and we would lose credibility and resources in Iraq.

And I was right, as usual.

If I vote, I tend to vote for conservatism which is one of the reasons why I didn't vote for GW. I voted for McCain, by default. He wasn't the candidate that I wanted to see for the GOP, and BO never was an option.

Kerry was the only time I voted democrat, but unlike mindless apes like you, I vote for a reason.

If you don't like it, go fucking dry hump your Ann Coulter doll.

I struck a nerve here

You remind me alot of a former poster Sweetness. He was a "firey democrat" who nearly always laced his posts with profanity, told us about his superior intelligence, and sexual insults toward those who had a different POV. I am sure you guys would hit it off great

You guys could hours bashing Bush, and the real conservatives that post on this board

So lets see, you were anti-war so that why you voted for Kerry. So I guess you supported his "global test" and the America having to get a permission slip from the UN before we take out our enemies

I guess you are willing to admit Bush was right about the surge. It worked and now Obama is trying to credit for it. But I doubt your

So now you sit on the sideline and toss out the insults when confronted with the facts about your "conservatism"

If it is Palin VS Obama in 2012 I am willing to bet money your "conservatism" will not allow to vote against the black man out of your guilt over America's history of slavery

[red states rule]

Yep, the "I'll take my ball and go home" defense is a perennial favorite among some. The team that's about to lose big (the Democrats) thank you profusely - you are doing their bidding well.

and Dems seem to think there is nothing wrong with going back to DC and passing a bunch of crap in a lame duck session AFTER the voters fire them for passing a bunch of crap over the last 2 years

[Kathianne]

and Dems seem to think there is nothing wrong with going back to DC and passing a bunch of crap in a lame duck session AFTER the voters fire them for passing a bunch of crap over the last 2 years

I don't think this in play this round, next? Indeed. 2012 is the election to watch, may well be a change maker regarding two parties.

[red states rule]

I don't think this in play this round, next? Indeed. 2012 is the election to watch, may well be a change maker regarding two parties.

Dems have already talked about what they will do in the lame duck session

Since they punted on tax cuts I can only assume they will try and jack up taxe3s after the voters fire alot of them in November

[Sweetchuck]

I struck a nerve here

You remind me alot of a former poster Sweetness. He was a "firey democrat" who nearly always laced his posts with profanity, told us about his superior intelligence, and sexual insults toward those who had a different POV. I am sure you guys would hit it off great

You guys could hours bashing Bush, and the real conservatives that post on this board

So lets see, you were anti-war so that why you voted for Kerry. So I guess you supported his "global test" and the America having to get a permission slip from the UN before we take out our enemies

I guess you are willing to admit Bush was right about the surge. It worked and now Obama is trying to credit for it. But I doubt your

So now you sit on the sideline and toss out the insults when confronted with the facts about your "conservatism"

If it is Palin VS Obama in 2012 I am willing to bet money your "conservatism" will not allow to vote against the black man out of your guilt over America's history of slavery

You are a fucking tool.

It's jackasses like you that give the true conservatives a bad name.

There is no doubt in my mind that idiots like you would openly cheer if another 9/11 happened if it happened on BO's watch. No fucking doubt in my mind because in your simple minded little world, it's us against them and what is best for the country, for the people is secondary.

That's the biggest difference between someone who can intelligently discuss and debate a political topic and a random forum idiot who can only spew what he hears on Beck every day.

You are a fucking robot. You are incapable of thinking for yourself. You are completely programmed, you bring no benefit to the table when it comes to discussing topics. You create thread after thread with zero objectivity or insight and you have the wit and intellect of a fucking 12yr old.

Now go take a flying fuck through a rolling donut, douchebag. I prefer getting my doses of sophomoric entertainment by watching South Park, not bantering with a simpleton.

[red states rule]

You are a fucking tool.

It's jackasses like you that give the true conservatives a bad name.

There is no doubt in my mind that idiots like you would openly cheer if another 9/11 happened if it happened on BO's watch. No fucking doubt in my mind because in your simple minded little world, it's us against them and what is best for the country, for the people is secondary.

That's the biggest difference between someone who can intelligently discuss and debate a political topic and a random forum idiot who can only spew what he hears on Beck every day.

You are a fucking robot. You are incapable of thinking for yourself. You are completely programmed, you bring no benefit to the table when it comes to discussing topics. You create thread after thread with zero objectivity or insight and you have the wit and intellect of a fucking 12yr old.

Now go take a flying fuck through a rolling donut, douchebag. I prefer getting my doses of sophomoric entertainment by watching South Park, not bantering with a simpleton.

Yes folks we now have the jr version of Virgil.

When confronted with facts, and peppered with direct questions he goes into attack mode

I knew Obama would fail because his polices have never worked where they have been tried. I do not hide my bias son. I do not support liberals, and I have no desire to work with them. I want them defeated

Unlike RINOS like you who cave and give them the opening they need to ipose their liberalism on the rest of us

and Sweetness if you do not like my threads ignore them

If you do not like the people here - leave

Since you love Ann this is for you with my regards

http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/167843.jpg

[DragonStryk72]

Republican does not equal Conservative

Democrat equals Liberal over 99.9% of the time.

True conservatives have not been in power since Ronald Reagan's administration and, even then, the Congress was controlled by Democrats. You could say that the 1994 House of Representatives were conservative, and they did good things, but Clinton was in the White House.

Now, if we could have a 1994 Congress with a Ronald Reagan president, then, I believe we would see a big difference.

I believe that, even if conservatives win the Congress, that without a veto proof majority there will be only so much that they can do. The only hope then is that what remaining incumbents will see which way the winds are blowing and vote along with them. Unfortunately, the Democrats will make every effort to start playing dirty in order to sway voters to vote for them again in 2012. Furthermore voters, frustrated by the lack of progress that the next session of Congress make may blame the Republicans for the lack of progress...

On the other hand, the economy may take off, and Obama will try to take credit for it by claiming that the stimulus finally kicked in.

What is more, I also see a danger in Obama's poll numbers being so low. He may not be able to muster the support of the Democratic Party in 2012 and Hillary Clinton will run for president. The electorate, thinking that Hillary is not Obama, may vote her in and we'll have at least 4 more years of a Democrat in the White House.

Of course, none of these worst case scenarios may play out... it could be that the next session of Congress will be able to overcome the obstruction that the Democrats will put up and do good things, after all... what is more, the electorate may see that it was the Republicans that brought good things about and vote a Republican into the White House.

Actually, Bill Clinton really wasn't so bad as far as Dems go. He let the Republicans have some victory points, while getting them to concede him some points. He was fantastic at finding middle grounds, something you have to admit both sides have had trouble with the past decade.

Overall, we need to change who we vote into the White House in '12. Of the Republicans, I'd be very much in favor of Ron Paul. We have to get a candidate who is actually going to essentially take a sledgehammer to the size of the federal government.

[red states rule]

Actually, Bill Clinton really wasn't so bad as far as Dems go. He let the Republicans have some victory points, while getting them to concede him some points. He was fantastic at finding middle grounds, something you have to admit both sides have had trouble with the past decade.

Overall, we need to change who we vote into the White House in '12. Of the Republicans, I'd be very much in favor of Ron Paul. We have to get a candidate who is actually going to essentially take a sledgehammer to the size of the federal government.

I would much rather have a chain saw then a sledgehammer

Conservatives could start by closing down the Dept of Energy and Education for starters

[Sweetchuck]

Yes folks we now have the jr version of Virgil.

When confronted with facts, and peppered with direct questions he goes into attack mode

I knew Obama would fail because his polices have never worked where they have been tried. I do not hide my bias son. I do not support liberals, and I have no desire to work with them. I want them defeated

Unlike RINOS like you who cave and give them the opening they need to ipose their liberalism on the rest of us

and Sweetness if you do not like my threads ignore them

If you do not like the people here - leave

Since you love Ann this is for you with my regards

http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/167843.jpg

Nah, I'd rather call you out as the dumbass you are.

You and agna have one thing in common - both of you post to antagonize, not to discuss. That's how simple minds work.

RINO, huh? Yeah, I think I heard Beck talking about that on the radio the other day. Makes sense that you're using the term.

Fucking clone.

[Sweetchuck]

Besides, Coulter probably has a cock bigger than you could ever wish to have.

[red states rule]

Actually, Bill Clinton really wasn't so bad as far as Dems go. He let the Republicans have some victory points, while getting them to concede him some points. He was fantastic at finding middle grounds, something you have to admit both sides have had trouble with the past decade.

Overall, we need to change who we vote into the White House in '12. Of the Republicans, I'd be very much in favor of Ron Paul. We have to get a candidate who is actually going to essentially take a sledgehammer to the size of the federal government.

I was a fan of Ron Paul until he said America brought 9/11 on herself in a Republican debate

R of D you say something that stupid I am done with you

[red states rule]

Nah, I'd rather call you out as the dumbass you are.

You and agna have one thing in common - both of you post to antagonize, not to discuss. That's how simple minds work.

RINO, huh? Yeah, I think I heard Beck talking about that on the radio the other day. Makes sense that you're using the term.

Fucking clone.

I am here to a civil back and forth with those who have a differnt POV. You on the other hand are not here for that.

You have stated you do not "have to justify your conservatism". So it is rather difficult to have such a conversation with you

You are thinskinned when people call you on what you post, that also makes a debate with you nearly impossible

[red states rule]

Besides, Coulter probably has a cock bigger than you could ever wish to have.

As I said, you remind me of a fromer poster here. His debate style is alot like yours

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?7743-Terrorists-Endorse-Hillary/page3&highlight=piss%20on%20your%20grave

[Sweetchuck]

I am here to a civil back and forth with those who have a differnt POV. You on the other hand are not here for that.

You have stated you do not "have to justify your conservatism". So it is rather difficult to have such a conversation with you

You are thinskinned when people call you on what you post, that also makes a debate with you nearly impossible

I'm stooping to your level, rationalizing didn't work with you.

You dropped the gloves first, douchebag. I'm guessing it's insecurity - the fact that you can't rationalize with a point of view that's different from how Rush and Beck have programmed you to think.

http://dimes2vines.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/bucket-carrier-2.jpg

Keep on lugging those buckets, gomer.

[red states rule]

I'm stooping to your level, rationalizing didn't work with you.

You dropped the gloves first, douchebag. I'm guessing it's insecurity - the fact that you can't rationalize with a point of view that's different from how Rush and Beck have programmed you to think.

http://dimes2vines.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/bucket-carrier-2.jpg

Keep on lugging those buckets, gomer.

It is clear you are upset I called you on your "conservative" beliefs.

Your reaction is typical of RINO

Besides you told us all we needed to know about you when you posted you voted for Kerry

[Agnapostate]

We are going to see who wants bigger government and who wants smaller government

U.S. consensus politics involves demand for bigger government in one form or another. Your ilk would never dream of a serious challenge to state power, because you have your own moral agenda that you want to see enforced through that mechanism.

[PostmodernProphet]

OP looks copypasta to me, presumably by a Republican activist, just sayin.
???...obviously you didn't read the post.....there is no way the author has voted for a Republican......

[red states rule]

???...obviously you didn't read the post.....there is no way the author has voted for a Republican......

Unless he thinks of himself as an open minded "independent"

[PostmodernProphet]

all I know is, if he's inclined to vote liberal, I'm glad he's sworn off voting.....I hope all liberals do.....

[Sweetchuck]

It is clear you are upset I called you on your "conservative" beliefs.

Your reaction is typical of RINO

Besides you told us all we needed to know about you when you posted you voted for Kerry

The fact that you try to label me a liberal shows how indoctrinated you are.

Why so defensive?

I'm a registered republican but I don't support the republican party, mostly because they don't support me or the voters. I'm not a mindless sheep like you that puts all of my stock in what I hear on conservative radio. I did have one of those shows on the other day when I was driving around and heard (I think it was Beck) them talking about RINO's, so I guess it makes sense that you're mimicking them.

That's all you can do. 30k posts, many of them unanswered, all someone elses ideology.

It's people like you who are to blame for the condition of our political system because you are naive and easily manipulated.

Ideal voting base, you can't think on your own.

Baaaaahh, sheep.

http://www.crealy.co.uk/assets/images/sheep1%5B1%5D.jpg

[SassyLady]

We've been talking on this forum about RINO's long before Beck.

Hey, Sweet, why stay registered with a party you no longer support?

[red states rule]

The fact that you try to label me a liberal shows how indoctrinated you are.

Why so defensive?

I'm a registered republican but I don't support the republican party, mostly because they don't support me or the voters. I'm not a mindless sheep like you that puts all of my stock in what I hear on conservative radio. I did have one of those shows on the other day when I was driving around and heard (I think it was Beck) them talking about RINO's, so I guess it makes sense that you're mimicking them.

That's all you can do. 30k posts, many of them unanswered, all someone elses ideology.

It's people like you who are to blame for the condition of our political system because you are naive and easily manipulated.

Ideal voting base, you can't think on your own.

Baaaaahh, sheep.

http://www.crealy.co.uk/assets/images/sheep1%5B1%5D.jpg

You admitted you voted for Kerry because owere pissed off at Bush. That makes zero sense. Why would you vote for a tax and spend liberal who wanted to appease terrorism, and obtain a permission slip from the UN before America defended itself if you are a conservative?

O am not defensive Sweets. I have said many times I am a Reagan conservative and a Republican second. The GOP left me years ago, and I was very disappointed in Bush's second term.

You on the other, attack those who support what you claim to stand for (Beck for one) out of your anger and thinskinned demeanor

Finally, you have all the liberal attack talking points down pat. I am basing my opinions on you based on what you have posted - nothing more

[Sweetchuck]

You admitted you voted for Kerry because owere pissed off at Bush. That makes zero sense. Why would you vote for a tax and spend liberal who wanted to appease terrorism, and obtain a permission slip from the UN before America defended itself if you are a conservative?

O am not defensive Sweets. I have said many times I am a Reagan conservative and a Republican second. The GOP left me years ago, and I was very disappointed in Bush's second term.

You on the other, attack those who support what you claim to stand for (Beck for one) out of your anger and thinskinned demeanor

Finally, you have all the liberal attack talking points down pat. I am basing my opinions on you based on what you have posted - nothing more

Not true, you are not a Reagan conservative. You don't have sufficient mental capacity to understand the term.

You are a typical armchair conservative. All you are capable of doing is repeating what you hear on conservative radio and read on Faux News. You completely substitute rational thought and comprehension with what the conservative media want you to think and believe. Complete indoctrination.

And yes you are defensive, which is why you continuously attack my conservative values. You fear independent thought because you are programmed to do so and because you aren't smart enough to rationalize and debate, you attack and smear.

And sadly, your kind is far too common - which is how we get phonies like BO elected - because people are willing to listen to the hype, drink the koolaid and disregard the facts and substance.

Rushbots like you are a dime a dozen. It's rare to find anyone with a sense of objectivity on political forums, which is why I get so bored with them. You will never understand my point because you don't want to exercise and are incapable of independent thought.

Keep on lugging those buckets, sheep.

http://www.ownerslocker.com/blog/VFPV%20Broom%20with%20bucketsblog.JPG

[red states rule]

Not true, you are not a Reagan conservative. You don't have sufficient mental capacity to understand the term.

You are a typical armchair conservative. All you are capable of doing is repeating what you hear on conservative radio and read on Faux News. You completely substitute rational thought and comprehension with what the conservative media want you to think and believe. Complete indoctrination.

And yes you are defensive, which is why you continuously attack my conservative values. You fear independent thought because you are programmed to do so and because you aren't smart enough to rationalize and debate, you attack and smear.

And sadly, your kind is far too common - which is how we get phonies like BO elected - because people are willing to listen to the hype, drink the koolaid and disregard the facts and substance.

Rushbots like you are a dime a dozen. It's rare to find anyone with a sense of objectivity on political forums, which is why I get so bored with them. You will never understand my point because you don't want to exercise and are incapable of independent thought.

Keep on lugging those buckets, sheep.

http://www.ownerslocker.com/blog/VFPV%20Broom%20with%20bucketsblog.JPG

Your "conservatives" values thus far as posted by you

You voted for Kerry

Anyone who disagrees with you is carrying the water for Rush and Beck and part of the sheep mentality

Faux News

The rich do not pay a majority of the taxes collected

You call people stupid who have a different POV

You have made your ideology crystal clear Sweets

[Supposn]

To promote my own political beliefs I write in forums found across the entire political spectrum.

Within another forum, (http://www.politicsforum.com/general-political-discussion/4750-i-wont-vote-2010-a-post121133.html)

I wrote “Old School, although I’m opposed to almost everything that the Tea Party advocates, I’m sincerely happy for you”.
In response to Old School’s lamenting “Why are you happy for me, we lost yesterday?” I replied:

Old School, to the extent that Tea Party candidates can attract voters of the Republican Party, they’re a threat to whomever wins that primary and they succeed to send a message to all candidates for the office in the upcoming general election.
They are particularly more effective if as they choose, (as I choose) to abstain from voting if there’s no acceptable candidate running in the general election.

Republican candidates correctly conclude that Tea Party candidates that will not vote for unacceptable candidates in a general election do weaken the Republican Party; but by that same lack of active support they certainly demand consideration for Tea Party positions on political issues.

To the extent that they voted in the primaries and abstain from voting in the elections, That send a message ro both major parties regardless of who wins the election. If they are perceived a significant cause of a Republican defeat in an election, they become much more influential in all major parties but particularly in the Republican Party.

To the extent that a losing candidate in a Republican primary election attracted vote in that election, they defeated candidate certainly has promoted Tea Party policies and weakened Tea Party opponents in both major parties.

Whatever your political beliefs, that’s the exactly what we should demand of the candidates we support.

Respectfully Supposn

[NightTrain]

I assume someone took a couple of minutes to compare Virgil's IP with Sweets?

Looks very familiar.

[Supposn]

I’ve just received the official sample ballot for my U.S. Congressional District.

A candidate was nominated by petition and was provided a web page by the Green Party. Both the Green Party’s and the candidate’s web pages lack explicit proposals for the accomplishment of their platforms but there’s no reason in principal that I could not vote for this candidate.

Green Party candidates have never been elected. It’s when we actually have to negotiate with others that things become messier. For too many years our congresses and presidents have been unable to work and negotiate in a meaningful manner.

[Negotiations are more often than not difficult. Each proposal should be judged upon its own merits. There is no “good” in compromise simply for the sake of compromise itself. Too often a compromise is less rather than more nationally beneficial than the other opposing concepts and methods. The “middle ways” or mid-points are not intrinsically sacred or magical].

I’m pleased that there's an alternative that permits me to demonstrate my dissatisfaction with Democrats that will not scheme and fight and negotiate for our nation's best interests. Obama and his followers talk pretty but they acquiesce and surrender too much without good reason.

There is a congressional candidate I can vote for.

Respectfully, Supposn

[Noir]

???...obviously you didn't read the post.....there is no way the author has voted for a Republican......

Or I read it with a skeptical mind.
Is it possible that they're a republican, in democrat clothing, trying to convince other democrats not to vote for them until the dems fulfil a more progressive agenda?
I mean, plenty of dems would never be convinced to vote Repub, especially if they have a tea party candidate running in their constituency, so if you cant convice them to vote for you, atleast try and convince them not to vote against you. Seem reasonable?

[Insein]

I voted for Kerry during GW's second term, more specifically I voted AGAINST GW and the Republicans who betrayed the conservatives that voted them in.

Why not vote Libertarian then? Voting for Kerry is the complete opposite of what you believe in instead of only slightly off like Bush was.

[SpidermanTUba]

Raising taxes on anyone will further damage the economy much like Ovamacare and the insane spending has

Prove it.


You need to expalin why raising taxes will help the economy and encourage employers to hire workers

Raising taxes on the rich will take some of their money and it will get spent into our economy by the government. If we let them keep the money instead, they'll stuff it in foreign bank accounts where it does our economy no good.

Next question?

[PostmodernProphet]

Or I read it with a skeptical mind.
Is it possible that they're a republican, in democrat clothing, trying to convince other democrats not to vote for them until the dems fulfil a more progressive agenda?
I mean, plenty of dems would never be convinced to vote Repub, especially if they have a tea party candidate running in their constituency, so if you cant convice them to vote for you, atleast try and convince them not to vote against you. Seem reasonable?

no.....

[Pagan]

Prove it.

Raising taxes on the rich will take some of their money and it will get spent into our economy by the government. If we let them keep the money instead, they'll stuff it in foreign bank accounts where it does our economy no good.

Next question?

Oh you mean how the bail out money to the banks was used for outsouceing and investment overseas? Or do you also mean the the additional tax money being spent on foriegn aid, black ops, etc.? You mean like that?

you just don't get it, the problem is GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!!!!!!!!

Sor your solutions if you were a drug counseler is to give the junking more drugs :lame2:

[Mr. P]

Prove it.

Raising taxes on the rich will take some of their money and it will get spent into our economy by the government. If we let them keep the money instead, they'll stuff it in foreign bank accounts where it does our economy no good.

Next question?
Yer right in there with Karl Marx, kid.

[BoogyMan]

Or I read it with a skeptical mind.
Is it possible that they're a republican, in democrat clothing, trying to convince other democrats not to vote for them until the dems fulfil a more progressive agenda?
I mean, plenty of dems would never be convinced to vote Repub, especially if they have a tea party candidate running in their constituency, so if you cant convice them to vote for you, atleast try and convince them not to vote against you. Seem reasonable?

Reasonable? No. Delusional? Definately.

[MtnBiker]

Raising taxes on the rich will take some of their money and it will get spent into our economy by the government. If we let them keep the money instead, they'll stuff it in foreign bank accounts where it does our economy no good.

Next question?

Conjecture.

Try again.

[Noir]

no.....


Reasonable? No. Delusional? Definately.

Politics is a durty game. The OP is a copy&paste spam post, that much is clear.
Is it totally impossible that a republican supporter is spamming political message boards with anti-democrat posts? I don't think so.
It's just doesnt sit well with me, but if you guys wana take it at face value so be it.

[REDWHITEBLUE2]

You are a fucking tool.

It's jackasses like you that give the true conservatives a bad name.

There is no doubt in my mind that idiots like you would openly cheer if another 9/11 happened if it happened on BO's watch. No fucking doubt in my mind because in your simple minded little world, it's us against them and what is best for the country, for the people is secondary.

That's the biggest difference between someone who can intelligently discuss and debate a political topic and a random forum idiot who can only spew what he hears on Beck every day.

You are a fucking robot. You are incapable of thinking for yourself. You are completely programmed, you bring no benefit to the table when it comes to discussing topics. You create thread after thread with zero objectivity or insight and you have the wit and intellect of a fucking 12yr old.

Now go take a flying fuck through a rolling donut, douchebag. I prefer getting my doses of sophomoric entertainment by watching South Park, not bantering with a simpleton.

Hey SLAP NUTS You are no Conservative maybe a Liberaltarian but no way in hell Are you a conservative.Personally I Think you're a Flaming Liberal trying to fool the masses but when we read between the lines it's simple You are no conservative

[fj1200]

Prove it.

It's already been proven, this "recovery" has already been shown to be flat and lifeless compared to most recessions where taxes are NOT raised.

We can also compare the performance to what BO's economists expected.


Raising taxes on the rich will take some of their money and it will get spent into our economy by the government. If we let them keep the money instead, they'll stuff it in foreign bank accounts where it does our economy no good.

Prove it.