Originally Posted by djplong

Donna2 - you just nailed one of my real irritations with the GOP. The GOP of 1994 that came up with the Contract For America (which I wholeheartedly supported) is NOT the GOP of today. Back then, they weren't the "Party of 'NO'!". Back then, they actually came up with suggestions as an alternative to the President's proposals.

Only liberal democrats use that expression of party of no.

No big government

No government takeovers

No political correctness


No socialism


No political supreme court nominees

No more unsecured borders

No more union thuggery.


No more bowing to foreign countries

No more apologizing for our exceptionalism.

Etc., etc.

Maybe your right. Republicans are the party of "no"

To the Dems and Libs, the Repubs will always be the party of "NO" as the Dems will not even take or talk about constructive criticism as may regard their agenda. The Dems expect America to go along with their Socialistic and Communistic agenda no matter the cost financially or ethically. And, they expect the Repubs and the public to go along like a bunch of sheep. To question their motives and their legislation is to them Treason. They can only argue by blaming previous administrations, labeling and name calling. The party of No should wear that label as a badge of courage, patriotism and standing up for America and its true greatness.
This November, lets make it No Nancy, No Harry and No Barry!!!! Throw in a few others like Chuck, Henry and Stennie.

Originally Posted by Whatever

To the Dems and Libs, the Repubs will always be the party of "NO" as the Dems will not even take or talk about constructive criticism as may regard their agenda. The Dems expect America to go along with their Socialistic and Communistic agenda no matter the cost financially or ethically. And, they expect the Repubs and the public to go along like a bunch of sheep. To question their motives and their legislation is to them Treason. They can only argue by blaming previous administrations, labeling and name calling. The party of No should wear that label as a badge of courage, patriotism and standing up for America and its true greatness.
This November, lets make it No Nancy, No Harry and No Barry!!!! Throw in a few others like Chuck, Henry and Stennie.

Barney too!!! And Dodd!!!

Whatever. I don't know you but I love you.

Wow. You just made my point.

Yeah, a whole bunch of "NO". Nothing wrong at all with that.

But what's the alternative? I mean, for crying out loud, in the UK, it took them 5 days to hammer out a compromise between the Conservatives and the LIBERAL DEMOCRATS. Each side gave some for what they believed was the good of the country.

For a year we couldn't hammer out a compromise on health care (despite the fact that most Americans wanted it - you may argue that a majority didn't want what turned out to be 'Obamacare' but when you ask them about specific parts of it it turns out they DO want most of it - but we know about as little as Congress does about what was really in the bill and that's a disgrace on Congress' part). The same is frighteningly close to being true about financial reform (it's been a couple of weeks since I heard Democrats and Republicans saying they were just a couple of days away). Now I guaran-damn-tee you we're going to get the same story when we uncover the likelihood that the government was too lax in inspecting offshore oil rigs.

Originally Posted by djplong

Wow. You just made my point.

Yeah, a whole bunch of "NO". Nothing wrong at all with that.

But what's the alternative? I mean, for crying out loud, in the UK, it took them 5 days to hammer out a compromise between the Conservatives and the LIBERAL DEMOCRATS. Each side gave some for what they believed was the good of the country.

For a year we couldn't hammer out a compromise on health care (despite the fact that most Americans wanted it - you may argue that a majority didn't want what turned out to be 'Obamacare' but when you ask them about specific parts of it it turns out they DO want most of it - but we know about as little as Congress does about what was really in the bill and that's a disgrace on Congress' part). The same is frighteningly close to being true about financial reform (it's been a couple of weeks since I heard Democrats and Republicans saying they were just a couple of days away). Now I guaran-damn-tee you we're going to get the same story when we uncover the likelihood that the government was too lax in inspecting offshore oil rigs.

You are wrong again. The majority of people were and are satisfied with their heath care. The voters from Massachusetts hated government health care enough to elect a Republican for Senator for the first time in 40 years.

SCOTT BROWN

Yes, most Americans felt that the healthcare system needed some changes, however, not the massive overhaul that we got. Republicans wanted to fix the areas that needed it. They were ignored. Democrats idea of bipartisianship is the Repubs cross the aisle to their side.

I think better than the "Party of No"; I would consider myself the "Party of HELL NO!!"

Originally Posted by Donna2

Mission Accomplished was a banner that was displayed by the Navy to congratulate the Aircraft Carrier's 10 month deployment, longest since the Vietnam War.Bush stated at the time that this was the end to major combat operations in Iraq. While this statement did coincide with an end to the conventional phase of the war, Bush's assertion — and the sign itself — became controversial after guerilla warfare in Iraq increased during the Iraqi insurgency.

Fema did the job it legally was responsible for. Time and reflection has put the slow response on the incompetence of the local government.

These are Wonderfully imaginative explanations!
But if you quote him you should give credit to your friend the Mad Hatter.

Originally Posted by ijusluvit

These are Wonderfully imaginative explanations!
But if you quote him you should give credit to your friend the Mad Hatter.

My aren't we funny tonight? NOT!!!

Try to pry yourself from your left-wing hate sites for a minute and go to Wikipedia for some refreshing facts. It will do you some good.

The legend and the misconceptions of the real truth is more important to the liberal than the actual facts and truths when it relates to their "Bush Hate Syndrome".

Originally Posted by cashman

Name one lie Bush told. Back it up.

Iraq has reconstituted its nuclear program, Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction and Iraq attempted to purchase Yellow Cake from *****. All from the State of the Union address in the run up to the war. You don't remember that?

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributor...7/22_lies.html

http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~richard/reflect/lies.html

There ya go.....

Originally Posted by cologal

Iraq has reconstituted its nuclear program, Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction and Iraq attempted to purchase Yellow Cake from *****. All from the State of the Union address in the run up to the war. You don't remember that?

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributor...7/22_lies.html

http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~richard/reflect/lies.html

There ya go.....

Whatever President Bush said, it was the truth as he knew them at that moment. Unlike Barry who lies and lies because he can't help himself.

Originally Posted by Donna2

Whatever President Bush said, it was the truth as he knew them at that moment. Unlike Barry who lies and lies because he can't help himself.

I have to disagree. Barry lies with malice. Don't be fooled.

Yoda

Originally Posted by Donna2

Whatever President Bush said, it was the truth as he knew them at that moment. Unlike Barry who lies and lies because he can't help himself.

That is simply not true....the Yellow Cake in ***** statement had been taken out of at least one earlier speech because it was false. Then they added it to the State of the Union.

He lied..these statement were false then and are false now. End of story.

Originally Posted by Donna2

You are wrong again. The majority of people were and are satisfied with their heath care. The voters from Massachusetts hated government health care enough to elect a Republican for Senator for the first time in 40 years.
SCOTT BROWN

Martha Coakley had her own problems. Believe me, I had a front row seat to the campaign every morning on the local news.

But to the other point you made - about the 'majority of Americans'.

Yes, technically that's true. But that is SO skewed.

In general, seniors on Medicare are happy.

In general, people who haven't gone through medical bankruptcy are happy.

People who weren't kicked off their plans when they got cancer or leukemia are happy.

So yes, the majority of people that the insurance companies hadn't gotten around to screwing are happy.