Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleMN
Frankly I don't even know where to begin. What the Republicans don't stand for is easier to articulate: Support for a strong middle class, freedom of choice for women, protecting our fragile environment, any regulation of business, education, rejection of torture, compassion for those less fortunate in our society, increasing taxes under any circumstances, controlling the possession of guns, expecting the rich to pay their fair share, compromise and bi-partisonship, putting the peoples interest ahead of their obsession with blocking our President..gosh I could go on and on but I think you get my drift. 
Obviously, I believe the Democrats stand for the opposite and that is what I believe in. |
I am not exactly sure of what EITHER party stands for. During the primary in 2008, many expressed the same type of comments concerning the Democratic party....that is what the primary is for....a candidate is chosen BY THE PARTY...then at the convention, a PLATFORM is put together.
Even with that, to me, the President's most important role is LEADING. He/she cannot pass any laws at all. We need a leader in the White House and then begin to get rid of many long time incumbents in Congress.
The "paying their fair share" is talk that is relatively new. The Bush tax cuts were fine with both parties and the difference between the two parties is NOT class warfare as is pushed in the media and by some groups, but a discussion of what is best to promote growth and the economy. I have never heard anyone in the Republican party invoke what you say....now I have heard Democrats try to frame the issue with those words, but neither party..NEITHER party will agree to make allowances in the tax code of any substance that would accomplish what we all want.
We tend to over simplify these things and put an R or a D next to them when it is BOTH parties who hold up our growth.
We need a leader in the WH and quickly as we are sinking.