I am caught between the Parties

[Guest]

I picked out some of the top Republican issues:
Support a robust version of federalism with greater limitations based on federal power and a larger role reserved for the states. Disagree.
Strongly believe that making law is the prerogative of the legislature and that judiciary should not legislate from the bench. Agree.
Favor lower income tax rates and believe that graduated tax rates (higher income tax rates for high income earners) unfairly target those who create jobs and wealth. Disagree.
They do agree that a 'safety net' should be provided for those who are needy and less fortunate but believe that the private sector would be more effective than the government in meeting these objective. Towards this end, they have been trying to privatize 'social security funds management'. Terrible Idea.
A 'single-payer universal health care system' as found in other developed countries labeling it as 'socialized medicine'. They favor the current personal- or employer-based insurance system complimented by the Medicare and Medicaid programs of the government. Not sure yet.
As a general rule, they oppose strict environmental regulation as they believe it hurts businesses. They have made several notable contributions to the field of environmental protection but are not taking a consistent and clear stand on this major issue. Agree.
Oppose same-sex marriage and gay rights. Agree because Gays and Lesbians have the right to form a contractual marriage agreement.
Oppose racial quotas. Agree.
Strongly favor capital punishment as a means to prevent crimes while, at the same time, strongly supporting gun ownership rights. Agree.
Advocate a strong national defense and strongly support unilateralism in matters of national security and insist on their right to take any action in their own self-interest. Agree.
Now, this is the reason I continue to say, talk to me and you may have a supporter, slam me and I will vote straight Left. Childish way to think, YES it is, but so is insulting the other party for their convictions.

For the Negative 5. NO OFFENSE y'all.

[Guest]

Well I am not going to slam you but I do not understand the need to be loyal to a party. I have always believed that it is "my" personal beliefs that take precedence and not that of a party as far as politics is concerned. I have always been registered as non-affiliated and have voted for the person who came closet to my beliefs regardless of their party affiliation. Each party has their own agenda and it appears to me that they are getting further and further away from the beliefs of main street America.

[Guest]

I also do not understand the need to evaluate anything based on one's party affiliation.
Using the old measures of right or wrong, real VS phony, needed VS wanted and many other core values it is pretty easy to determine who to vote for.

The majority of incumbents do not measure anything via core values. They only measure what is in it for them first....get re-elected being #1.
They will say or do anything that furthers their agenda....which does not include ANY of the priority needs of we the people.

Voting for the other guy/gal, who may not be qualified just because one does not like a particular candidate is stupid. Just look at what we have now as a prime example.

Forget the party....just demand doing what is right. The rest is BS.

btk

[Guest]

The only thing I'm going to say about this post, other than vote your conscience and you'll do yourself no wrong, is to remind you that as you constantly call for some kind of civility and and elusive non-confrontational discussion of your, and I mean this specifically, yours and no one else's opinions, you throw out a pejorative like "Negative Five".

Your idea of negative is extremely personal to you and your beliefs, but I almost hate to mention this, the world does not revolve around you and your ideas.

"Negative Five"????; a new way to isolate your dissenters?

I know you consider me one of these "negative" people, but that is your prejudice. I think that the majority of my posts are thought out responses to an idea or issue with my hope for the constant reader to get a positive thought out of what I say and maybe convince them of my idea or at least to consider it. Once in a while I "tweak", but only when postings go far-afield.

All I'm trying to say is re-read and consider your words. You might get a different idea on just who is being "negative"

[Guest]

Well I am not going to slam you but I do not understand the need to be loyal to a party. I have always believed that it is "my" personal beliefs that take precedence and not that of a party as far as politics is concerned. I have always been registered as non-affiliated and have voted for the person who came closet to my beliefs regardless of their party affiliation. Each party has their own agenda and it appears to me that they are getting further and further away from the beliefs of main street America.

Agree, that is why I voted for Bush then Obama.

[Guest]

The only thing I'm going to say about this post, other than vote your conscience and you'll do yourself no wrong, is to remind you that as you constantly call for some kind of civility and and elusive non-confrontational discussion of your, and I mean this specifically, yours and no one else's opinions, you throw out a pejorative like "Negative Five".

Your idea of negative is extremely personal to you and your beliefs, but I almost hate to mention this, the world does not revolve around you and your ideas.

"Negative Five"????; a new way to isolate your dissenters?

I know you consider me one of these "negative" people, but that is your prejudice. I think that the majority of my posts are thought out responses to an idea or issue with my hope for the constant reader to get a positive thought out of what I say and maybe convince them of my idea or at least to consider it. Once in a while I "tweak", but only when postings go far-afield.

All I'm trying to say is re-read and consider your words. You might get a different idea on just who is being "negative"

Richie, your so funny. I have a dozen paragraphs of serious matters that I openly committed myself to and you gravitate to the HUMOROUS Negative five comment to slam me with. That comment is for fun. Keep in mind that I have a brother that is even right of hard core conservatives, but I still love him. Don't let the humorous parts of my posts get you down. IF we ever have the opportunity to meet in person, I will offer you my hand in friendship and buy the first round of beers.
:wave:

[Guest]

Richie, your so funny. I have a dozen paragraphs of serious matters that I openly committed myself to and you gravitate to the HUMOROUS Negative five comment to slam me with. That comment is for fun. Keep in mind that I have a brother that is even right of hard core conservatives, but I still love him. Don't let the humorous parts of my posts get you down. IF we ever have the opportunity to meet in person, I will offer you my hand in friendship and buy the first round of beers.
:wave:

I'm not angry Lou. I just think you should know the value of the words and their effect. When you insult someone, jocular or not, you've just ruined your argument and the insulted is not going to reflect on your opinion but on your insult.

[Guest]

I'm not angry Lou. I just think you should know the value of the words and their effect. When you insult someone, jocular or not, you've just ruined your argument and the insulted is not going to reflect on your opinion but on your insult.

Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah
That is exactly what I have been saying for two months. Richie, You get it.

I could not agree more. I admit I have a short temper, and when the Negative five would insult me I would shut down and no good would come from posts from or to me. Thank you for saying it, as when I have said it so Many times over the past two months, no one seemed to get it.

If you look at this post, you will see that I totally agree with 6 of the 10 conservative issues. And one I am undecided. I don't think that is all that negative on my part. Yet because I add a one line sarcastic joke at the bottom, I am shut out and slammed. Can you see why I did it in the past the other direction. Lets agree where we can and discuss the places where we differ. Now that Someone understands where I am coming from, you will never see that Negative number comment again. Now lets move forward and forget what a jerk some folks think I am. Then you will find we do have a lot in common.

[Guest]

To quote Lucy Van Pelt "AUUGGGHHH"

[Guest]

To quote Lucy Van Pelt "AUUGGGHHH"


Good Grief RichieLion

I think were making progress.

[Guest]

I picked out some of the top Republican issues:
Support a robust version of federalism with greater limitations based on federal power and a larger role reserved for the states. Disagree.
Strongly believe that making law is the prerogative of the legislature and that judiciary should not legislate from the bench. Agree.
Favor lower income tax rates and believe that graduated tax rates (higher income tax rates for high income earners) unfairly target those who create jobs and wealth. Disagree.
They do agree that a 'safety net' should be provided for those who are needy and less fortunate but believe that the private sector would be more effective than the government in meeting these objective. Towards this end, they have been trying to privatize 'social security funds management'. Terrible Idea.
A 'single-payer universal health care system' as found in other developed countries labeling it as 'socialized medicine'. They favor the current personal- or employer-based insurance system complimented by the Medicare and Medicaid programs of the government. Not sure yet.
As a general rule, they oppose strict environmental regulation as they believe it hurts businesses. They have made several notable contributions to the field of environmental protection but are not taking a consistent and clear stand on this major issue. Agree.
Oppose same-sex marriage and gay rights. Agree because Gays and Lesbians have the right to form a contractual marriage agreement.
Oppose racial quotas. Agree.
Strongly favor capital punishment as a means to prevent crimes while, at the same time, strongly supporting gun ownership rights. Agree.
Advocate a strong national defense and strongly support unilateralism in matters of national security and insist on their right to take any action in their own self-interest. Agree.
Now, this is the reason I continue to say, talk to me and you may have a supporter, slam me and I will vote straight Left. Childish way to think, YES it is, but so is insulting the other party for their convictions.

For the Negative 5. NO OFFENSE y'all.

First, you misstate a number of issues, AS I UNDERSTAND THEM. Of course you must know someone since I have not heard any national Republican party platform !

Second, who cares what party......what does party have to do with it. Pick a candidate that most closely mirrors your views and vote.

I might also tell you that most posters are NOT trying to win your over as you say....."talk to me and you may have a supporter, slam me and I will vote straight Left." I dont give a hoot who you vote for. You surely are entitled to your opinion and should voice it as others do on here, BUT why you think you are so important never ceases to amaze me.

Have an opinion..voice it. Differ...voice it. But stop making it all personal and all about you !

[Guest]

:clap2:

[Guest]

:BigApplause:

[Guest]

:agree:

[Guest]

One only need to read my post, then your reply and anyone with reason will see that you are simply trying to bait me into your mud slinging discussion. If all you got out of my post was that I am ate up with myself, there is no need for me to reply to you.
I do agree with one statements. IT IS NOT ALL ABOUT ME. It is all about our country and you just can't seem to grasp that point. I love America and I think you love to argue. I am devoting my time on this site to bridge the gap between left and right. It is far to important that we begin to talk in a civil manor and stop the crazy mud slinging. Please don't widen the gap so far it becomes impossible to build a bridge over our differences. Could it be that to stop mud slinging would take away your entertainment. Give peace a Chance.

We are going broke and you think I am self absorbed.
The races are dividing and you think I feel more important than you.
Unemployment is through the roof and your main concern is how I write my Threads.

Bucco, we need to talk so please stop the personality bashing.

[Guest]

:clap2:
Hey Richie.

[Guest]

:BigApplause:
Hey.

[Guest]

:agree:
Hey Paul.

[Guest]

One only need to read my post, then your reply and anyone with reason will see that you are simply trying to bait me into your mud slinging discussion. If all you got out of my post was that I am ate up with myself, there is no need for me to reply to you.
I do agree with one statements. IT IS NOT ALL ABOUT ME. It is all about our country and you just can't seem to grasp that point. I love America and I think you love to argue. I am devoting my time on this site to bridge the gap between left and right. It is far to important that we begin to talk in a civil manor and stop the crazy mud slinging. Please don't widen the gap so far it becomes impossible to build a bridge over our differences. Could it be that to stop mud slinging would take away your entertainment. Give peace a Chance.

We are going broke and you think I am self absorbed.
The races are dividing and you think I feel more important than you.
Unemployment is through the roof and your main concern is how I write my Threads.

Bucco, we need to talk so please stop the personality bashing.

I have been ignoring your posts but could not ignore your continuing talking about yourself and others on here as if you were our saviour. I am sorry..that is how I see it.

And you NEVER EVER LECTURE me on my love of country of my involvement with this country by making comments like...."It is all about our country and you just can't seem to grasp that point. I love America and I think you love to argue." You have no idea of my background or what I have done. You may THINK you have been sent here to straighten everyone out but you have not.

As far as the board is concerned I have been posting here since the beginning without your help, and as I told you before..you may have served our country but so did I and MOST who post on here.

You take any post and make it all about you....that is my point and stop PLEASE acting as if you invented this board, invented patriotism or poltical discussion. This board was here LONG BEFORE you got here....political discussion existed before you, and I (and I can only speak for myself) do not need lectures from you on what to do.

To actually say " I am devoting my time on this site to bridge the gap between left and right." to people who have been around longer than you here and in life...who do you think you are...are you shooting for Chris Matthews to have one of those "tickle moments" because of you great work in The Villages.....were you sent here to lead us all out of the dark ?

There are MANY..MANY folks on here who support both left and right, who have spent their lives defending or otherwise helping this country, who are well educated and understand the world, who are great americans whether left or right, Democrat or Republican and frankly they dont need you to "devote your time to bridge the left and right".

You surely are welcome to post here and everyone wants other opinions, but your self absorbed, "holier than thou" attitude just wears on me. I am speaking for myself but trust me LOU....this board and The Villages is crammed full of folks who are better educated than you or I....did many more things that you or I, understand what is going on better than you or I.....I have lived here for 11 years and have met many of them. Don't lecture them ! They are on both sides of the political debate...they oppose and they support the President....they supported and opposed the last President. They present their views in a strong manner and will continue to do despite it offending you when they disagree with you. You have the right to present your views in the same manner, but make your posts about the ISSUE, and not you and how YOU are above some and give kudos to those who "get it" as you say.

I apologize for the rant to you and anyone else who reads this, but you come on here and tell me how you love america and I love to argue implying something that I take great offense to and you are going to "bridge the gap" .....just too much !

[Guest]

I am devoting my time on this site to bridge the gap between left and right.

Why would we want to bridge a gap between right and wrong. Liberalism must be defeated, not bridged.

[Guest]

If it is a bridge built by liberals, it would be called the bridge to nowhere.

[Guest]

The problem with those who are totally self-absorbed is that a critique on their behavior is only going to be understood by them if that person can look outside of themselves and see what others see.
Of course, the self-absorbed will not consider that this post could apply to them and will probably think that I just validated their behavior.

[Guest]

I have been ignoring your posts but could not ignore your continuing talking about yourself and others on here as if you were our saviour. I am sorry..that is how I see it.

And you NEVER EVER LECTURE me on my love of country of my involvement with this country by making comments like...."It is all about our country and you just can't seem to grasp that point. I love America and I think you love to argue." You have no idea of my background or what I have done. You may THINK you have been sent here to straighten everyone out but you have not.

As far as the board is concerned I have been posting here since the beginning without your help, and as I told you before..you may have served our country but so did I and MOST who post on here.

You take any post and make it all about you....that is my point and stop PLEASE acting as if you invented this board, invented patriotism or poltical discussion. This board was here LONG BEFORE you got here....political discussion existed before you, and I (and I can only speak for myself) do not need lectures from you on what to do.

To actually say " I am devoting my time on this site to bridge the gap between left and right." to people who have been around longer than you here and in life...who do you think you are...are you shooting for Chris Matthews to have one of those "tickle moments" because of you great work in The Villages.....were you sent here to lead us all out of the dark ?

There are MANY..MANY folks on here who support both left and right, who have spent their lives defending or otherwise helping this country, who are well educated and understand the world, who are great americans whether left or right, Democrat or Republican and frankly they dont need you to "devote your time to bridge the left and right".

You surely are welcome to post here and everyone wants other opinions, but your self absorbed, "holier than thou" attitude just wears on me. I am speaking for myself but trust me LOU....this board and The Villages is crammed full of folks who are better educated than you or I....did many more things that you or I, understand what is going on better than you or I.....I have lived here for 11 years and have met many of them. Don't lecture them ! They are on both sides of the political debate...they oppose and they support the President....they supported and opposed the last President. They present their views in a strong manner and will continue to do despite it offending you when they disagree with you. You have the right to present your views in the same manner, but make your posts about the ISSUE, and not you and how YOU are above some and give kudos to those who "get it" as you say.

I apologize for the rant to you and anyone else who reads this, but you come on here and tell me how you love america and I love to argue implying something that I take great offense to and you are going to "bridge the gap" .....just too much !

WOW. You are one scary paranoid person.

[Guest]

Why would we want to bridge a gap between right and wrong. Liberalism must be defeated, not bridged.

If you truely feel that way, you are

[Guest]

http://www.insidebayarea.com/california/ci_15995785

Are they not in tune with the will of the people?
Obviously not. They know they have gotten away with doing nothing for we the people and still get re-elected.

It just shows their stupid self centered, me first mentality when in the current environment they think all they need to do is throw money at the public, play and say nice nice.

Well I hope they spend it all and still get their hat handed to them.

Of course they have the advantage of the media, but I hope and pray the current ground swell maintains it's momentum and the voters toss 'em out and then gloat over it the next day.

I wanna see Nancy cry!!!!!!!!!!

btk

[Guest]

Why would we want to bridge a gap between right and wrong. Liberalism must be defeated, not bridged.

:agree:

Yoda

[Guest]

I picked out some of the top Republican issues:
Support a robust version of federalism with greater limitations based on federal power and a larger role reserved for the states. Disagree.
Strongly believe that making law is the prerogative of the legislature and that judiciary should not legislate from the bench. Agree.
Favor lower income tax rates and believe that graduated tax rates (higher income tax rates for high income earners) unfairly target those who create jobs and wealth. Disagree.
They do agree that a 'safety net' should be provided for those who are needy and less fortunate but believe that the private sector would be more effective than the government in meeting these objective. Towards this end, they have been trying to privatize 'social security funds management'. Terrible Idea.
A 'single-payer universal health care system' as found in other developed countries labeling it as 'socialized medicine'. They favor the current personal- or employer-based insurance system complimented by the Medicare and Medicaid programs of the government. Not sure yet.
As a general rule, they oppose strict environmental regulation as they believe it hurts businesses. They have made several notable contributions to the field of environmental protection but are not taking a consistent and clear stand on this major issue. Agree.
Oppose same-sex marriage and gay rights. Agree because Gays and Lesbians have the right to form a contractual marriage agreement.
Oppose racial quotas. Agree.
Agree.
Advocate a strong national defense and strongly support unilateralism in matters of national security and insist on their right to take any action in their own self-interest. Agree.
Now, this is the reason I continue to say, talk to me and you may have a supporter, slam me and I will vote straight Left. Childish way to think, YES it is, but so is insulting the other party for their convictions.

For the Negative 5. NO OFFENSE y'all.

First, I apologize to all for the length of this post and the many grammatical and punctuation errors along with the misspellings. I caught as many as I could.

Lou, I believe the reason that no one has commented on your assertions, in depth, is they in large part lump two or more of your beliefs together and credit ‘The Republicans’ as having this confused belief.

To provide some examples:

3. Favor lower income tax rates and believe that graduated tax rates (higher income tax rates for high income earners) unfairly target those who create jobs and wealth.

This is two beliefs:
(1) Favor lower tax rates and
(2) Favor elimination of graduated tax rates. Two entirely different ideas and a person can support one and oppose the other.

4. They do agree that a 'safety net' should be provided for those who are needy and less fortunate but believe that the private sector would be more effective than the government in meeting these objective. Towards this end, they have been trying to privatize 'social security funds management'.

Three/four separate ideas.
(1/1 & 1a) They do agree that ‘a safety net’ for those who are needy (1) and less fortunate (1a).
(2) Believe the private sector could be more effective than government in meeting these objectives;
(3) Towards this end, they have been trying to privatize 'social security funds management'.
All of these are separate ideas. Terms such as needy and less fortunate need definition. Idea (3) is clearly false. A person can support (1) without supporting (2).

5. A 'single-payer universal health care system' as found in other developed countries labeling it as 'socialized medicine'. They favor the current personal- or employer-based insurance system complimented by the Medicare and Medicaid programs of the government.

You accredit three separate beliefs to Republicans:

(1) Oppose a single-payer health care system. This is certainly correct for most Republicans.
(2) Single-payer health care systems are found in other developed countries. This is a broad generalization. Certainly not true for all developed countries.
(3) Favor the current system. Most Republicans favor careful and incremental changes to the existing system rather than the massive jump called Obamacare.

6. As a general rule, they oppose strict environmental regulation as they believe it hurts businesses. They have made several notable contributions to the field of environmental protection but are not taking a consistent and clear stand on this major issue.

You have multiple purported beliefs jammed together:
(1) Republicans oppose ‘strict environmental regulations.
(2) Republicans do this because they believe it hurts business.
(3) Republicans are not taking a consistent and clear stand on this major issue.

I have no idea of what ideas you are describing in each of these beliefs. You need to clarify and provide clear examples before such assertions can be understood.

7. Oppose same-sex marriage and gay rights. Agree because Gays and Lesbians have the right to form a contractual marriage.
This paragraph is unclear. However two asserted beliefs are clear.

(1) Republicans oppose same-sex marriages.
(2) Republicans oppose gay rights.

Same-sex marriage is a clearly understood issue and is opposed by the majority of the American people as demonstrated through numerous elections. ‘Gay rights’, as you use it, is undefined. You have to clarify what you mean by this, as separate from same-sex marriage. Republicans have championed civil rights for all people through the years.

9. Strongly favor capital punishment as a means to prevent crimes while, at the same time, strongly supporting gun ownership rights.

Again, two separate beliefs:
(1) Republicans favor capital punishment.
(2) Republicans support gun ownership rights.
Any person: Democrat/Liberal/Republican/Conservative may ascribe to one of these beliefs without supporting the other. In my case. I oppose capital punishment for both moral and practical reason while supporting gun rights.

[Guest]

About the "liberalism must be defeated" I have to comment - Liberalism may stand for a lot of things that I don't like - HOWEVER - "Liberalism" brought us universal suffrage, a 5-day, 8-hour-per work week, and end to child labor and a LOT of other things. Yes, I agree, it's Gone Too Far in some cases but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Now, as far as Lou's List goes, I'm going to assume that he had a source similar to mine. During an election campaign, I've been known to ask the pollsters who call me (and they call - I live in NH - they call a LOT) to send me copies of their platform (when the pollster is affiliated with a party). Usually I get something. One time (when the first George Bush was running) I got a huge manila envelope in the mail a few days later with enough material in 'position statements' to keep me reading for quite a while.

Sadly, going to the RNC website and entering "platform" into their search engine returns the following:


Your search - platform - did not match any documents

Read more: http://www.gop.com/Search/search_page.php?cx=012184668256731348851%3A29dduex eusi&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=platform#ixzz0yhKmdHCi


To be honest, I find that depressing.

Now, what the heck, I'll chime in on Lou's List.

1. It's a bit vague so I can't really comment on it. Where do you draw the 'federalism line'?

2. Yes, the legislature makes the laws. The judiciary is supposed to interpret the law and that's what they do. Now, the definition of "interpret" seems to have stretched a bit in the past few years but I think it's more because the people (read: advocates of any particular position) are trying to use the judiciary as their tool, right wrong or indifferent. Remember, a judge can't rule on something that hasn't been brought before him or her.

3. I favor a flat, fair tax with exemptions providing the "progressivity". That way the myth of rich tax-dodgers (as opposed to the *fact* that the top few percent of wage earners pay over HALF the taxes) would go away. It would stop the arguing and pitting one group against another.

4. Perhaps block grants to the states are better ways to handle this. (with fewer strings attached)

5. I favor looking at other countries as seeing WHAT WORKS. We pay the most - far more than any other country for our health care. Regardless of whether you believe we're 37th in 'results' or not, one cannot argue that we are NOT the best overall system (unless you're independantly wealthy). This does NOT automatically mean that single-payer systems like in Canada and the UK are the answer. In fact, the report that said we were 37th? It said France's public/private system got the best results overall.

6. We have to draw a line on 'environmental law' to say "this much and no more". You can't just "make s#!+ up" and claim it's real - and then find out YEARS later you were wrong (read: 1970s impending ice age).

7. I favor same-sex marriages (with all the same DISadvantages as well) because the benefits that 'they' (people like my aunt) are looking for are alredy covered under 'marriage'. Inventing another classification means that a hospital in Utah could say "we allow spouses but not civil union partners" when it comes to visiting your s/o who was just in a skiing accident. It's wrong. A federal study showed there were over 1600 benefits (granted many of them are pretty narrow) that 'married' couples may enjoy.

8. We're supposed to have 'equal protection under the law'. As such, quotas are Just Plain Wrong.

9. I favor capital punishment, though I would hold it to a different standard. Civil cases are a "preponderance of the evidence". Criminal cases are "beyond a resonable doubt". Capital punishment should be "beyond a shadow of a doubt". And I don't favor it as a deterrence. You can never prove it. What you CAN prove is that criminals who are executed have an extremely low redecivism rate! I just don't like how it seems that too many innocents (actually ONE is too many) are in this category. One story I read had a deputy sheriff chasing a suspect through a swamp yet, at the end of the chase, the guy who was arrested had pants that were bone dry (even though the deputy saw and heard splashing during the chase). That being said, I *do* believe that some crimes are *so* heinous that you forfeit your right to life.

[Guest]

About the "liberalism must be defeated" I have to comment - Liberalism may stand for a lot of things that I don't like - HOWEVER - "Liberalism" brought us universal suffrage, a 5-day, 8-hour-per work week, and end to child labor and a LOT of other things. Yes, I agree, it's Gone Too Far in some cases but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Now, as far as Lou's List goes, I'm going to assume that he had a source similar to mine. During an election campaign, I've been known to ask the pollsters who call me (and they call - I live in NH - they call a LOT) to send me copies of their platform (when the pollster is affiliated with a party). Usually I get something. One time (when the first George Bush was running) I got a huge manila envelope in the mail a few days later with enough material in 'position statements' to keep me reading for quite a while.

Sadly, going to the RNC website and entering "platform" into their search engine returns the following:



To be honest, I find that depressing.

Now, what the heck, I'll chime in on Lou's List.

1. It's a bit vague so I can't really comment on it. Where do you draw the 'federalism line'?

2. Yes, the legislature makes the laws. The judiciary is supposed to interpret the law and that's what they do. Now, the definition of "interpret" seems to have stretched a bit in the past few years but I think it's more because the people (read: advocates of any particular position) are trying to use the judiciary as their tool, right wrong or indifferent. Remember, a judge can't rule on something that hasn't been brought before him or her.

3. I favor a flat, fair tax with exemptions providing the "progressivity". That way the myth of rich tax-dodgers (as opposed to the *fact* that the top few percent of wage earners pay over HALF the taxes) would go away. It would stop the arguing and pitting one group against another.

4. Perhaps block grants to the states are better ways to handle this. (with fewer strings attached)

5. I favor looking at other countries as seeing WHAT WORKS. We pay the most - far more than any other country for our health care. Regardless of whether you believe we're 37th in 'results' or not, one cannot argue that we are NOT the best overall system (unless you're independantly wealthy). This does NOT automatically mean that single-payer systems like in Canada and the UK are the answer. In fact, the report that said we were 37th? It said France's public/private system got the best results overall.

6. We have to draw a line on 'environmental law' to say "this much and no more". You can't just "make s#!+ up" and claim it's real - and then find out YEARS later you were wrong (read: 1970s impending ice age).

7. I favor same-sex marriages (with all the same DISadvantages as well) because the benefits that 'they' (people like my aunt) are looking for are alredy covered under 'marriage'. Inventing another classification means that a hospital in Utah could say "we allow spouses but not civil union partners" when it comes to visiting your s/o who was just in a skiing accident. It's wrong. A federal study showed there were over 1600 benefits (granted many of them are pretty narrow) that 'married' couples may enjoy.

8. We're supposed to have 'equal protection under the law'. As such, quotas are Just Plain Wrong.

9. I favor capital punishment, though I would hold it to a different standard. Civil cases are a "preponderance of the evidence". Criminal cases are "beyond a resonable doubt". Capital punishment should be "beyond a shadow of a doubt". And I don't favor it as a deterrence. You can never prove it. What you CAN prove is that criminals who are executed have an extremely low redecivism rate! I just don't like how it seems that too many innocents (actually ONE is too many) are in this category. One story I read had a deputy sheriff chasing a suspect through a swamp yet, at the end of the chase, the guy who was arrested had pants that were bone dry (even though the deputy saw and heard splashing during the chase). That being said, I *do* believe that some crimes are *so* heinous that you forfeit your right to life.

Since you found your visit to the GOP site so "sad", just for the record...

The Democratic party site has no search engine at all..this is the site...http://www.democrats.org/ ! However it does give you the ability to click on a number of tabs to see positions.

Now this will really make you happy since you were so "sad"....if you click on the tab titled ISSUES at the GOP site...guess what....stands on issues EXACTLY THE SAME WAY AS PRESENTED ON THE DEM SITE.

Hope this cheers you up....http://www.gop.com/

[Guest]

a 5-day, 8-hour-per work week

LOL, I wish.

[Guest]

LOL, I wish.

Really, that isn't and hasn't been reality in the corporate world in the US for a long time. If you have a job where you fdo get paid overtime, a lot of people are not getting this amount of hours. For those who do not get paid by the hour, they most often work many more hours than this.

[Guest]

" I am devoting my time on this site to bridge the gap between left and right."[/B] to people who have been around longer than you here and in life...who do you think you are...are you shooting for Chris Matthews to have one of those "tickle moments" because of you great work in The Villages.....were you sent here to lead us all out of the dark?!

Apparently that is Lou's mission .. To light up our lives.

[Guest]

Well well well.. This is rather confusing. Do a search on the GOP site for the WORD "platform" and you get nothing. However, under "Issues" there IS a link to "Platform" which leads here:

http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/2008platform.pdf

I think they really should do something about that search engine - doesn't seem to find something only 3-layers deep!

At least it IS there.

[Guest]

Well well well.. This is rather confusing. Do a search on the GOP site for the WORD "platform" and you get nothing. However, under "Issues" there IS a link to "Platform" which leads here:

http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/2008platform.pdf

I think they really should do something about that search engine - doesn't seem to find something only 3-layers deep!

At least it IS there.

Well, at least you are not so "sad" any longer

[Guest]

Well, at least you are not so "sad" any longer

Never said I was. I said it was sad, using the word in adverb form "sadly", to describe my discovery that searching on the word "platform" doesn't get even a BAD link at the GOP site.

I also stated I found it "depressing" - not that I was in a state of depression.

Is there a particular reason you are reading more into my words? You said "since you are so sad". What gave you that idea? I was certainly disappointed first at not finding a link when searched for and then the fact that the platform WAS available but their own search engine wouldn't find it. It's certainly not going to ruin MY day.

[Guest]

ow, this is the reason I continue to say, talk to me and you may have a supporter, slam me and I will vote straight Left. Childish way to think, YES it is, but so is insulting the other party for their convictions.[/COLOR]

For the Negative 5. NO OFFENSE y'all.

Lou,
I didn't realize you had an "enemies" list!!! Guess I don't post often enough here to be included in your "top 5"? Nevertheless I'll make sure I never "slip" and post my address!!!

Seriously though, it seems to me this site is not about trying to "win" others over to one's own political persuasion. Most who post here have strong political opinions ranging anywhere from "far left" to "far right" and this forum provides the opportunity (for those who are civil) to express their opinions. Just don't expect everyone to agree with you and don't feel hurt if they don't.

Wish I had more time to visit this site, so I could read all the posts as well as the interesting links provided within some posts. Nevertheless, I do appreciate those who post links to other sites regardless of whether I have time to read those articles or not.

Annabelle

[Guest]

Never said I was. I said it was sad, using the word in adverb form "sadly", to describe my discovery that searching on the word "platform" doesn't get even a BAD link at the GOP site.

I also stated I found it "depressing" - not that I was in a state of depression.

Is there a particular reason you are reading more into my words? You said "since you are so sad". What gave you that idea? I was certainly disappointed first at not finding a link when searched for and then the fact that the platform WAS available but their own search engine wouldn't find it. It's certainly not going to ruin MY day.


Actually will apologize to you for my sarcasm and that is what is was...sarcasm. I guess DJPLONG, I took it as sort of a backhand shot at the Republican party as I found your noting of that UNECESSARY unless you visited and noted the differences between the two sites. Just could find no reason for the comment since the information was there IF you wanted to find it...not hidden..not secret...all there. Actually in bascially the same way as on the Democratic site...not much difference if any !

Just couldnt figure out why you made the comment...thats it.

I do apologize for the sarcasm....I think that those of you who profess center ground but can not find it in your heart to actually oppose what this administration is doing a bit frustrating, but for sure that is MY problem and not yours. Just difficult for ME to understand a middle ground with what is going on !

Again, sorry...I was being sarcastic and am sorry

[Guest]

Bucco: It was a chain of events - and apology accepted. Believe me, I certainly understand about getting emotional here in this forum and having things get a little incivil.

I made the comment because the OP made a lot of comments about what appeared to be various planks of the GOP platform. I made a quick search to see if I could get anything like the policy statements that I'd gotten before and failed. *My* mistake was depending on the 'search' function at the GOP website. I made too much of an assumption. I didn't look at the democrat site because they weren't the subject of the discussion.

Now, having FOUND the actual platform, I do have some issues with parts of it where my *opinion* is that there are internal inconsistencies but that's another debate.

[Guest]

be very careful what you say on this website, the politically correct are ready to pounce on you, e.g. the eyes and ears, they will call you to task, when they do they will call you all kinds of names and your response will be Sorry Daddy, I wont do it again private messages...............cross my heart and hope to die

Daddy is probably going to try and scold me on this message............ but I wont bite
I am known as demeaing and distasteful, of which I am proud, wonder what he is to call me next,still wont bite.