It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lets vote out the republicans in 06!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Mods feel free to move this thread and i apologize if this is the wrong spot
.

Well, i voted for Bush in 04 and it was a mistake im sorry i made. I've seen Bush start a war in iraq for no more reason than to control market shares of oil. I feel that in 06 we can remedy the situation by voting out as many of the neocons as some call them as we can. Hopefully that will make it more difficult for bush to get funding for any more wars. I know this is a departure from my usual stance but what good will come of us following blindly into the abyss?

[edit on 10-7-2005 by XphilesPhan]




posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   
My plan is to vote out anyone who is currently in office, under the simple ideas that the longer one has possession of power, the more likely one is to be corrupted by it, and having to find new government people to bribe will probably make corperate lobbying more difficult.


Odd

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
politics.abovetopsecret.com


i have heard enough of this crap for one decade



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I think your thread will probably get moved to the Politics@ATS forum...

But I appreciate the topic!


Neocons haven't had this much power since... well, ever. A group has rarely had such an opportunity to wield power in all three branches of government and change the face of America. And the thing is, I doubt that all 51% of voters who elected Bush and the Republicans last November voted for the Neocon Party of America. Even though neocons love to deny this, there are moderate Republicans.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   
No "maybe" to it.

Otts, what percent of neo-cons in the Republican party?
How many are conservative?
How many are moderate?
How many are warhawks?
Mind you warhawks and neo-cons are not the same.
Your talking generalizations based on the label "neo-cons."

Thankfully, Canadians do not have a vote in the US.






seekerof



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   
LOL! Funny, a myopic view is almost as dangerous as no view at all.

You want to vote out the Republicans? Well, no argument from me, but who do you plan to replace them with; the Democrats? Smart move; you just worsened the problem.

AS an American, you should want to see the country as it is supposed to be.
Try this party, it comes the closest to being IAW the Founding Fathers as I've seen.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
No "maybe" to it.

Otts, what percent of neo-cons in the Republican party?
How many are conservative?
How many are moderate?
How many are warhawks?
Mind you warhawks and neo-cons are not the same.
Your talking generalizations based on the label "neo-cons."

Thankfully, Canadians do not have a vote in the US.


I admit I have no idea what percentage neocons represent in the Republican party. However, they do represent a good-sized political weight in current American policy - especially as pertains to foreign affairs, with the presence of Dick Cheney, Condi Rice and Donald Rumsfeld in the administration. Which would reflect this definition of neocon from Wikipedia:


The neoconservatives, often dubbed the neocons by critics, are credited with (or blamed for) influencing U.S. foreign policy, especially under the administrations of Ronald Reagan (1981–1989) and George W. Bush (2001–present). Neoconservatives have often been singled out for criticism by opponents of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, many of whom see this invasion as a neoconservative initiative. Compared to other U.S. conservatives, neoconservatives may be characterized by an aggressive moralist stance on foreign policy...


en.wikipedia.org...

Interestingly, Wikipedia notes that there is a strong difference of opinion between neoconservatives and paleoconservatives on social issues:


The disputes over Israel and domestic policies have contributed to a sharp conflict over the years with "paleoconservatives," whose very name was taken as a rebuke to their "neo" brethren. There are many personal issues but effectively the paleoconservatives view the neoconservatives as interlopers who deviate from the traditional conservative agenda on issues as diverse as states' rights, free trade, immigration, isolationism, the welfare state, and even abortion and homosexuality. All of this leads to their conservative label being questioned.


Could it be the difference between Congress (paleoconservatives like Tom DeLay and Bill Frist) and the White House (neoconservatives)? In any case, both have shown a tendency to position themselves as representing the majority of America, whether it's true or not, and to use that as validation of their agenda. All I'm saying is that I have to wonder whether the majority of the Americans who voted for Bush and a Republican Congress voted for a radical-conservative agenda.

As for not voting in American elections... I have no problem with that, obviously. However, since America as a country has quite an impact in the world, it's normal that people from other countries will take an active interest in American political processes.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 07:08 PM
link   
"Radical-conservative", is that like "Radical Christian"? If you have beliefs of these natures, but do not try and act according to them, you're a good Conservative? If you pick and choose the parts of the constitution and the KJV 1611 you like, toss the rest, and allow liberals and athiests tell you how to interpret them, you're an ok conservative, a moderate?!?



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 08:22 PM
link   
I'm hoping Tony Blair will be voted out at our next election all he does is follow Bush in his policies but watered down for British consumption.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Uh, how is that? What American policies are coopted by Tony?

Are you referring to only the WoT? If that is so, then that is easily explained: allies work together. That is how you win wars.

Is Tony making your borders as porous as a sieve?

Has picked up the horrible habit of saying "nukular"?

What are they, please? How do they fit in your country, and do the work any better?



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Thankfully, Canadians do not have a vote in the US.




Hey, not all Canadian's are liberal..

What were you saying about generalizations?



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
"Radical-conservative", is that like "Radical Christian"? If you have beliefs of these natures, but do not try and act according to them, you're a good Conservative? If you pick and choose the parts of the constitution and the KJV 1611 you like, toss the rest, and allow liberals and athiests tell you how to interpret them, you're an ok conservative, a moderate?!?


TC - that's saying that there is one true "nucleus" of conservative beliefs, and that people who don't buy into that are "watered-down conservatives". That would be the case of moderate Republicans, I guess... does that mean that moderate Republicans are pushovers who have turned back on the core values of the party, or just people who have a different set of beliefs? And what about those who voted for those moderate Republicans?



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Vote the republicans out??? Never, you will never take me alive!!!


Unless the democrats or some other party comes up with a really really good front man I doubt I will suddenly switch parties. Bush may not be there brightest bulb in the box but I have not seen much better from the democrat side yet. There will have to be some major platform changes to switch my mind.




posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 10:33 PM
link   
I plan to vote the Republican ticket in 2006, hopefully we'll boot Hillary out of her NY Senate seat...



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I'm with Thomas. I would vote out the Republicans in a minute. Shoot, I would help force their resignation if it was possible, but who would you replace them with?

The major difference with the Dems, is that they will do one thing, spend more money digging us into a whole that we can't get out of (see SS, Welfare, etc) a little bit faster than the GOP is.

Not a lot, but some. Neither wants to look at the border, neither wants to really help America, and neither wants free trade.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
"Replace them with what, Deomocrats?"

Yes, having extremely low standards is a mistake of character that everyone is guilty of at some time or the other. You're forgiven, they're in office, now don't make the same mistake again.

"You're making generalizations in saying all Republicans are Neo-Cons"?

What exactly is a moderate or progressive Republican if they refuse to vote their moral viewpoint and knuckle under to the minority Neo-cons? They're part of the Super Majority within the Republican party called Neo-cons. There has NEVER been any point in US history where the party is manned by only sheep & radicals; there's still more testicular fortitude in Lincoln's decomposed pants than there is in ALLLLLLL of Washingtons Republicans.

"Bush may not be there brightest bulb in the box but I have not seen much better from the democrat side yet."

That's because your eyes - ears - nose are closed, else, you never would have voted for the spoiled child of priveledge whose had the world handed to him repeatedly & has clusterf***ed it at every turn - business - Texas - America, you name it.

"he major difference with the Dems, is that they will do one thing, spend more money digging us into a whole that we can't get out of (see SS, Welfare, etc) a little bit faster than the GOP is."

Ignorance of your surroundings is as deadly as a pork cop suit in a lions den. Your membership date proves you've been alive for the last 5 years when our national debt has gone up in both volume & historic peak Faster than the previous decade. You've seen our trade imbalance go so off kilter that it's a Sumo on the seesaw with your 7 yr old. You've seen the wages of American workers, in historic dollars, go up near nil, while executives pay ( THANKS!) has gone thru the roof. You've seen the oil multi-nationals reap near 50% increases in profits while two former oil men run the country and while Americans go without - rely on assistance - and overall get raped over pumps & furnaces. Rampant unemployment is , in my mind, 2nd to widespread underemployment - that sucks out a persons soul to bust their butts to get degrees, military service, certifications......to then work at Walmart because my corp counterparts are padding "productivity numbers" ( fire 1/2 the group , don't hire any new help to get to proper staff level, and keep the poor saps too scared about losing their jobs working twice as hard for less net pay) & won't hire, so the bonuses are bigger.
.......AND the mendacity flows that Democrats are a fiscal worry for the well being of the country!?!



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I'll repeat myself. Vote them all out!

Look, it's not really about what good we can get the government to do. It is too big and bogged down in it's own pomp and excrement to do anything constructive. Anything good it does try to do gets corrupted almost immediately by those sick with the lust for more wealth and power. Judging from myriads of postings, its accually more about what harm we can keep the government from doing.

To this end, we absolutely must do away with the power dynasties within the system. In the legislative branch, power is mostly granted according to how long you have been there, who's ass you have been able to kiss, how many skeletons you know the locations of.

Democrat or Republican doesn't matter. If they are in office, do not vote for them. Vote for someone different until there are no more that have been there for decades. No one should sit in Congress for an entire generation.

[edit on 14-7-2005 by Ambient Sound]



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 05:00 PM
link   
So you want a ban on guns, mass wellfare and poverty over a war which has ousted a deposit who used oil funds to pay terrorist and pay off UN officials to keep quiet?



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 02:20 AM
link   
You want Bush out. I'm assuming from your post, it's because of Bush policies. Those policies don't need to happen, but thankfully for people on my side of the political circle, you just bitch and complain on a website, and don't DO anything about it.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bout Time
You've seen the wages of American workers, in historic dollars, go up near nil, while executives pay ( THANKS!) has gone thru the roof. You've seen the oil multi-nationals reap near 50% increases in profits while two former oil men run the country and while Americans go without - rely on assistance - and overall get raped over pumps & furnaces. Rampant unemployment is , in my mind, 2nd to widespread underemployment - that sucks out a persons soul to bust their butts to get degrees, military service, certifications......to then work at Walmart because my corp counterparts are padding "productivity numbers" ( fire 1/2 the group , don't hire any new help to get to proper staff level, and keep the poor saps too scared about losing their jobs working twice as hard for less net pay) & won't hire, so the bonuses are bigger.
.......AND the mendacity flows that Democrats are a fiscal worry for the well being of the country!?!


the american system of free enterprise works for the people because they have a profit motive, and a desire to personally promote whatever they like based on free excerice of each individual initiative. No other system has ever inspired personal iniative on such a high scale... The one outstanding quality that tipifies the american citizen is his right to excericie her or his personal iniative through any form of co coperation he chooses.

most people work because they have a monetary motive. some people will work for praise and admiration, or respect. but most people have a monetary motive. This shouldn't be blamed on the us government or republicans.

I know welfare mom's that turned millionaires by their burning desire to free themselves from poverty, and so she made that choice.

life is a series of choices. you can either choose to be poor or you can choose to be rich. and the only difference between a rich person and poor person is how they spend their time and money.

even a poor person could have his/her money work for them if they opened their eyes to opportunities around them.

and re: your comment on min wage. Those are jobs set up for teenagers to put money in their pocket. It's again, their choice to do what they want with it.

Min wage isn't and shouldn't be a glamorous job, if anything it should be a wake up call to make people realise they should probably get a better job, to make their lives better, to self educate always, to gain a skill, to learn the basics of investment so they learn what to do with their money.

The people that stay in min wage jobs aren't using the power of their minds, and when you don't use the power of your mind, you lose it.

And so I don't feel for them, because they made that choice

And while American's maybe getting 'raped' at the pumps, they could also take the personal iniative to purchase a car that doesn't use 'gas'... there are all kind of things people can do if they don't want to stay 'victimized' as you call it.

The one thing I can't stand about a liberal is their desire to babysit everybody who is getting treated unfairly. Those people who get treated unfairly or at least viewed by the liberals that they are getting treated unfairly can make the choice to do something about it, not wait for a lib to come and rescue them.

That is very dangerous... That's like a father giving money to his son all the while he was growing up... He missed out on the opportunity to learn what it's like to earn a dollar, he missed out on the hard work and choices that are involved. All vital lessons... missed.

A liberal takes that away from the people... They take away choice, because they want to make it for them. And their choices aren't always the best or wise ones. And not every person is the same but they like to treat everyone the same.





[edit on 18-7-2005 by TrueLies]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join