As someone here pointed out, he Dems strategy of ruining the company 1 small step at a time is well underway. We are very close to making laws based upon poll results and we are getting to the point where we have more voters on the dole or taking a tax-free ride that we do real taxpayers.

When we get past those tipping points we will be a democracy - and as our founding fathers knew - democracies do not last.

You must be to refer to the United States as a "company."
Just ribbin ya.

Yes "company" was a typo I obviously meant country, as in country going down the tubes which it is.

Probably I was tired after 2 hours in the early AM talking to my supplier in China. And yes, I am part of the problem.

Luv ya diva, hope to see you soon.

"I bothers me"

You bothers me too.

.

In one fashion or another, it's "us" against "them".
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

I noticed you guys haven't addressed the "Huckabee" question..... curiously.

This letter never mentions "scary" in its body does it. For some reason, the conservative editor of this conservative paper changed this title:

"Will Republicans have the courage to lead the needed revolution?"

to the "scary stuff" title, which I loathe. Why DID they do that? Who knows, but you'll have to ask Cal.

You can code pink me all day, but this letter speaks of words used at FOX news and by Republican members of the US Congress and Senate.

And, by the way, the letter isn't at all about Republicans scaring Democrats or independents. Read it again. It's about republicans not supporting the conservative, fair tax agenda in the primaries. It's about republicans sending moderates out of their party and morphing into a small group of mostly angry men with no political clout. I'm okay with that.

Lastly: Why do you guys always try to assign thoughts to someone they have not expressed? Where does this letter mention "rednecks" or "racists?" Please, man!

First off, are you really Kevin? You know the original title was changed. Big deal.

You are pandering some silly comments. JeffC has acknowledged he does the same to rile up the masses (hey Jeff, how have you been?) You are doing the same by implying conservatives are Christians and vice versa and that Huckabee was on the only supporter of a simplified tax plan. You are promoting weak analogies and are looking for an argument.

Have a good day.

Talking, or attempting to talk with local republicans is like trying to hold a kindergartner's attention.

"You know the original title was changed. Big deal."

Wake up? Why don't you cut and paste that to S. Lindsey. If you bothered to read before you typed, you would see Lindsey made a whole disjointed post about the "scary stuff" line, without bothering to notice the text of my letter said ZERO about republicans scaring anyone but themselves. So if you have issues with that, talk to Lindsey....and the hand.

"You are doing the same by implying conservatives are Christians "

It was NEVER my intent to imply that conservatives are Christians.
Thanks for letting me clarify that.

"Huckabee was on the only supporter of a simplified tax plan. "

What did former Gov. Huckabee do while he was on the only supporter of the Fair Tax? Did his wife see? Does she even know? Are there pictures?

"You are promoting weak analogies and are looking for an argument. "

No I am not.... I'm a democrat.

of anonymity.. Welcome to the world.. Ok 1st.. I did not know the title was not yours.. I thought you wrote it so.. 2nd other post of yours and this letter implied at least to me that you were once again coming down on the Conservative protest aka tea parties.. like many others on your side of the spectrum.. I just find it hilarious that protest by every fringe group out there is ok.. but let a few Conservatives do it.. and out come the fangs..
If that was not your intent my apoligies..but I did re-read the post ignoring the title and I got the same impression anyway..Yes you made valid points about the tax issue.. but many Americans I think a larger majority feel that the tax and SPEND and SPEND and SPEND goverment has gone too far..and MUST BE CURTAILED.. anyway like I said WELCOME to my world.. it is really a SCARY place

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

Where did the letter say "A" is better than "B"? I think it says B is self-destructing and didn't even support its own fair tax agenda in the primaries. So "A" is politically more effective than "B" very demonstrably. Well, come to think of it, since A and B are political parties, and right now A is better at politics than B, I guess A is better.

My guess is swine flu . She listened to VP Biden and is staying away from all other humans!

He's a laugh a minute, unless you're the one cleaning up his spoken messes.

Blah blah is Fred Garvin writing crap that he fantasies as the Democratic party line.

Blaming your own. you are eating your selfs.

Calling all Blahs and duh huhs.. Yada Yadas.. and the rest.. CAR 54 where are you????

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

A most interesting analysis.

You are someone who is smarter than the people who write on here.

That is an outright lie. But then, you are a lib and we expect nothing less.

The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a
happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the
other. -- Ronald Reagan

Is your real name "fred" like you claimed it was to make yourself sound like a brave blogger?

Talk about outright lies. The way you speak of Obama. Think about it. Start using truth Fred.

Do you really think that was Fred masquerading as Comrade Blah? I'm shocked. I thought it was Congresswoman Maxine Waters.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

your not very bright are you? You sound like Bush and you look like you need to go bathroom really bad in your stupid picture.

Well if you want to comment about avatars yours kind of suggests that the President lives an alternate life style - (I'm trying to PC). BTW, why on earth would the other side (Democrats) accuse you of being Fred?

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Look at the stupid avatar. Obama wearing a crown of thorns? That whole Obama is a messiah shtick is wingnut territory. No Democrat has ever said it. And look at the comments, each one sillier and more idiotic than the last. Outlandish characterizations of an Obama supporter, exactly what Fred has been portraying since day one. Blah is exactly what Fred wishes the Obama supporters were so that people wouldn't write him off as just another smear artist.

Blah is Fred.

Your paranoia at everything conservative is showing again Jeff.

Take a pill and lie down - you'll feel better.

The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a
happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the
other. -- Ronald Reagan

DUDE! You're up to 201 blogs for the year.

is a part of a painting called The Truth.

http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/s?f=PRN/prnpub&page=1&xtag=PRN-prnphotos-80981&redir=detail&TAG_ID=prnphotos080981

http://sev.prnewswire.com/art/20090424/NY0498524042009-1.html

Your post are the idiotic ones than you very much. You are the wingnut. and the painting is not stupid.

I don't know what you mean by, "Your post are the idiotic ones than you very much" but I do recognize stupid. Your avatar is stupid. I looked at your link to the painting. It's stupid too. In fact, it's not only stupid, it's nescient as well as being vapid.

Sorry.

On the up side though, I will admit that it is appropriate.

at least that is the best example I could come up with..

btw.. how was the ride yesterday?

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

It was a quick "out and back" down to the Spalding County line. Headwind down and tailwind back.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

do you know a good (read)CHEAP bike repair shop..

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

Do I know of a cheap bike shop; absolutely, my garage. Anyways, are you home this Saturday afternoon?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

AGAIN.. I will get up with you when I get back.. We don't have that slick super bike I saw you on, but they work for us when we go camping..

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

Why?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

"what concerns me is that your party might move to embrace views like those of your fellow blogger "Blah Blah" "

Cyclist, you speak of "mights." This letter speaks of what "IS" today's conservative movement. Your fellow right side of the debate members are already there. From blaming the flu on illegal immigration to calling the GROWING majority party all kinds of ridiculous things. Republicans are a mess. I'm just calling this like I see it.

"I wonder if this might fracture your party into different camps perhaps to the point that Republicans can make a flanking move and then you'll be wondering what the heck happened."

Cyclist, if you are hoping the other party screws it up instead of conservatives actually finding a message, ideas, and a game plan, you'll be "what-if"ing for quite a while friend. Enjoy this beautiful day!

The Republicans are in a mess just like they were in 1974 through 1977. But you know things change, and the majority party in the mid to later years of the 70's decade did loose their way and stumbled which allowed the Republicans to rise back. When you get as old as the “Cy” you see and witness the ever changing political mood of the country.

Yep I’m enjoying this day in my cube with my little bottle of “infection be gone pills”. However, this moderate would rather be at the beach.

We still missed you for coffee.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Who am I going to have to offer free canola oil massages to to get an answer to this question?

Why do conservatives host tea parties and protest when they could not nationally support the only Fair Tax candidate who also happened to be a minister? Should not the protests start at the RNC?

Logged on to answer and found my thunder stolen from those below.. Diva all that needs to be said is found here.. Conservatives are not strictly party affliated.. We vote our Morals.. yes, but also our VALUES and Patriotism and expect that in the candidates we chose..
As far as the tax question goes.. The Fairtax is not the only game in town.. there is also the Flat Tax as proposed by Steve Forbes is an answer..
The difference in a Republican and a Conservative is we believe in a ideal not ideology per se.. So that is why we can switch "party" loyalty.. WE are not loyal to a party as a rule. I for one started out in life as a bleeding heart LIBERAL just like Sniff, Main, Jeff and yourself.. Carter woke me up for various reasons, Reagan made me Republican.. and this crop of Democrat lites made me a Libertarian..
I believe what I believe.. and I stand by my Country RIGHT or WRONG.
Candidates all have various platforms some of us agree others disagree.. Because of this as a group we will sometimes lose elections.. Why.. no party deserves undying fidelity.. When the core values swing outside of the parameters you are comfortable with then you must vote your conscience.. this will lose elections..That is why McCain never garnered much support from Conservatives.. WE mostly saw him as Obama lite.
My tag line is not just for humor..I WILL NOT LOWER MY STANDARDS.. SO UP YOURS.... I really mean it.. I did not vote for McCain try as I might.. I was tired of holding my nose and casting a ballot..

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

This is what I've been trying to say, and you managed to do it without the thousand word essays I tend to write.
I can only expand on this by saying that I have personal experience dealing with the Obama love crowd. During the campaign I vehemently opposed Obama and made my opposition well known to anyone who asked how I felt. I work in an environment staffed by a majority of black men, and any time I explained that I felt that Obama was far too socialistic and inexperienced for me to ever consider him appropriate as the POTUS, I was called a racist and dismissed as a right-wing whackjob. My arguments were never challenged on the veracity of my governing ideology or debated effectively on an issue by issue basis, the race card was played and that was that. Not only that, but some of my coworkers made it a very unfriendly and hostile work environment for me because they hated me for my justifiable misgivings based on their unjustifiable characterization of me.
The liberals will never admit it, but that's their game plan for dealing with dissent; Deflect, discredit and dismiss. No real effort to address the issues is made. Name calling and accusations are good enough for them.
The problem is this: Liberals will never give an inch, they will never admit it when they are wrong, and they will never acknowledge that they are who they really are if that admission calls their credibility into question. Since the erosion of our civil rights is integral to their agenda, they cannot implement their policies with any real measure of transparency. Instead, they must always turn every criticism back on those who criticize. They must misrepresent themselves as moderates and victims of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" and attack their detractors at every opportunity.
Their delusions of omniscience define them. They are the intellectuals, the compassionate ones, the reasonable people. We don't dare question the effectiveness of their policies or their motives, because that makes us "haters", or "racists", or "partisans".
They have a plan, a long term one, and very attainable. Simply put, the plan is to model the United States after the Europeans to make us more palatable for the collectivist society that they see as inevitable. No discrimination is acceptable, and no exceptions can be tolerated. Above all, political correctness reigns supreme.
How do I know this? Because I used to be a liberal, as far to the left as you could get. I used to have the idea that no person on this earth---other than our leaders, of course, who were naturally brilliant and selfless, and undoubtedly entitled to certain allowances above and beyond those alloted to the rest of us---had the right to more wealth, a higher standard of living, prosperity or power than any other person. I was a communist, in every sense of the word.
Then I grew up, got a job and worked my bullocks off to attain just a comfortable standard of living, only to have the federal government take more and more of my hard earned money to give to worthless parasites on the public dole(and to pay for itself, of course). I learned more history than what is taught in our school systems, filled in the holes, and found that my ideology was flawed and that it had never worked as well as what our forefathers created here.
I earned my right to be a citizen of this fine country, and I will be damned if I will allow the left to turn my beautiful republic into a socialist nightmare where the bureaucracy intrudes upon my hard earned liberty. You so-called moderates are even more dangerous in my opinion, because each time you accept some liberal policies you hand the liberals a small victory and allow them to come closer to total victory by inches at a time. No one would have accepted the damage that they have done so far if they had tried to do it all at once, but the baby steps...
"It's just a penny more in tax," you say, "it's not that much."
"We need just a little more government regulation. It'll keep those rotten rich business owners honest."
"Sure, we need to defend ourselves, but is it really worth all those lives? I certainly don't want anyone to get hurt!"
"Maybe we have been torturing people." you might say. "After all, we aren't any better than anyone else when it comes to the way we treat our prisoners. I guess other countries should have a say in how we go about dealing with them."
Oops! I did it again!
"All I ask for is a little common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for."

Since the erosion of our civil rights is integral to their agenda, they cannot implement their policies with any real measure of transparency. Instead, they must always turn every criticism back on those who criticize. They must misrepresent themselves as moderates and victims of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" and attack their detractors at every opportunity.

. . .and the beat goes on. The 'vast right wing conspiracy' is dwindling down to nothing; let's hope that we have all learned from the mistakes made by 'leaders' of the past AND our silence, as debt grew and worldwide respect for the US was eroded by a marked departure from American principles. I think Diva said it all regarding speaking to 'Republicans'. Having discussions with citizens of the United States who are concerned about our future is enlightening. The value of the internet is that one can travel all over this wonderful country via the web. There is a distinct difference among southern concerned citizens and concerned citizens in other parts of the country. It has nothing to do with 'racism' or 'conservatism'. It’s interesting that here in the most beautiful part of our great country (the south); those who feel that their concepts/beliefs are challenged “must always turn every criticism back on those who criticize”.

It’s interesting listening to Megan McCain and Sara Palin’s daughter. They are able to express their ideas without denigrating others. . . and many are listening. Transparency is here – and the view is not flattering to anyone. Our hope is in the younger generation.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Conservatism is not "dwindling down to nothing", it's just disorganized and unfocused right now.
Once again, I am forced to ask; "Respect", or "popularity"? Which do you think is more important?
What departure from American principles do you refer to? If you are speaking of the increasing government spending, interference in our financial and personal affairs, our punitive and confiscatory taxation, our government's disregard for the 1st and 5th amendments to the Bill of Rights or Obama's recent "Apologize and Appease" tour to Europe, then I agree wholeheartedly!
"Conspiracy" has two meanings:
"1 a: to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreement b: scheme
2: to act in harmony toward a common end "
There is no conspiracy fitting def.1 on either the left or the right. However, definition 2 fits the bill for both.
There was a funny quote, I can't recall who originally said it, but I'll paraphrase it;
"Liberals have a much more effective plan, and are much more organized, because they all think with the same brain."
I think it was Rush, no shocker there. The point is, liberals are much more organized and they are winning for several reasons:
1) liberals are liberals first and they rarely let small differences in opinion get in the way of the cooperative effort. Couple this with liberal candidates' tendency to shift focus from one platform to another based on political sentiment(I would call this a lack of conviction and direction, but in this case it is a strength rather than a weakness), and you have a political victory on election day.
2) The liberal message feels good, and I believe liberals are less concerned with their basic human rights than they are about maintaining a certain lifestyle or, even more importantly, maintaining a safety net. Nobody wants to consider the consequences of personal failure without having something to fall back on. Once again, liberal politicians can capitalize on this fear by promising the world, then blaming others if they can't follow through. It's really easy to promise to pay the bill if you can write a check drawn from an account belonging to someone else.
3) Liberals are more concerned with popularity and acceptance than conservatives are. Truly effective leaders often are as reviled as much as they are respected, but few are very popular. It turns out that this is a plus for liberals on election day, though, because those who prefer doing the right thing even if you are hated for it are in the minority.
4) Liberals get to malleable young minds earlier and indoctrinate them throughout their developmental years. The "marketing campaign" for liberalism blows away anything that the conservatives have for winning the hearts and minds of our kids. Liberals teach that there is no right or wrong, no personal responsibility and the government is always there in case you screw up. Conservatives tend to teach their children that they must work hard in order to succeed, and what child--or young adult, for that matter--wants to hear that?
6) When a liberal politician or bureaucrat does something stupid, illegal, or both, his/her colleges tend to rally around him/her. After all, there is a pretty low standard for personal behavior and a high acceptance threshold for shenanigans among liberals. Of course, that doesn't stop them from harshly criticizing conservatives for the same thing if the opportunity presents itself. I suspect that's because they know that conservatives have little tolerance for that type of behavior and will gladly turn on their own to maintain a sense of propriety. I always said that conservatives do half of the liberals work for them, then take it on the chin on election day.
Look, I can't continue. Volumes could be written on this subject, And these comment of mine just get longer and longer. Maybe I'll write a book. I bet you just can't wait not to read it!

"All I ask for is a little common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for."

It is hard to understand how disagreeing with the agenda of a president can make you a racist.

Many people disagreed with W, but nobody ever called those people racist. Many people disagreed with Nixon, Carter, Ford, and Reagan, yet they were never called racist.

Fast forward to today. Some people disagree with and object to a large debt that our grandkids will all pay for, and we are called "racist".

The "Affirmative Action President"

Barack Waffles

More Barack waffles

Obama monkey

Barack the magic negro.

Other than that, Sky, I'm not sure where this racism angle is coming from. More unfair persecution of conservatives, I guess.

of the links you posted has any value at all, and the rest are shameful, ignorant and don't represent any great number of people's thinking.
The one that has merit is the first one, and I think it's DEAD ON if you read the original commentary by Joseph Farah. It is much more interesting and reasonable than the page you referenced.
"The affirmative-action president"
You may not like what I think about this subject, but that doesn't make me a racist or a bigot. Obama isn't right for the job because he is a socialist and an arrogant amateur, not because of his skin color. If the Democrats weren't so hung up on race, no one would have paid any attention to Obama. Conversely, if Obama were a white man with his policies and his negatives, their electorate would have sent him packing like they did to the other far-far-left candidates.

"All I ask for is a little common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for."

I am completely confident that with members like yourself, conservatism won't be out of the O.R. for years. Hope you've got good medical insurance.

I'll just address this gem from you before leaving you in your conservative corner to sulk:

"Obama isn't right for the job because he is a socialist and an arrogant amateur, not because of his skin color."

Very comical irony that you single-handedly judge our President to not be right for the job, but HE is the arrogant one??? Ummm.... okay. Someone should send him an email on his crackberry so he can get the family packed up and moved out.

If the Democrats weren't so hung up on race, no one would have paid any attention to Obama.

Let's see: The majority of whites voted for him. The majority of independents voted for him. Come to think of it, the majority of Americans voted for him. Even Scott McClellan. Bush people hung up on race too? Could it be, ionized, that Barack won, not because of race, but because Sarah Palin was completely out of her league and "I'm suspending my campaign" McCain couldn't keep a coherent message? I don't know, you could be RIGHT. But I might also grow a third leg tonight. Each occurrence has equal odds by my estimation.

"Very comical irony that you single-handedly judge our President to not be right for the job, Ummm.... okay. Someone should send him an email on his crackberry so he can get the family packed up and moved out."
You see, left-wingers, this is a textbook example of the tactics you must use in any debate. If a criticism is made about your Messiah that you have no answer for, make sure you follow the above poster's example.
Be sure not to make any effort to address the particulars of the criticism, as this requires actual thought and careful consideration of the consequences of your Messiah's actions in the long term. Your Messiah can do no wrong, and you must never doubt the inviolability of your Messiah's character, intelligence, motives or experience. Instead, try to attack your messiah's detractors on a personal level. Make sure you accuse him/her of the same or worse similar behavior, i.e the following--"but HE is the arrogant one???". Use negative buzzwords like "crying", or "sulk", or "judge" when you are attempting to deflect criticism by discrediting the opposition. It gives the impression that the opposition is guilty of character flaws that disqualify them from having any valid negative opinions of the Messiah. Use plenty of sarcasm. It doesn't require much effort and although most intelligent and insightful people dismiss it as the lowest form of humor, many persons who are impaired of intellect may actually think your argument has some substance. Also, reference people who you imagine your opponent supports and attack them too. Make sure you claim support of a majority of people even if it's not completely true, and don't forget to include prominent individuals who used to work for the leaders you think your opponent supports. These things will demoralize your opponent because no person can exist separate from the herd. Remember, majority opinion can never be wrong because the Messiah always will be in agreement with the majority.
Okay, it's sarcasm, but I couldn't resist.
Oh, and Diva? Don't worry yourself about my medical insurance. It's comprehensive, convenient and I somehow manage to pay for it all by myself.
"All I ask for is a little common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for."

Well didn't you just yelp up a diatribe. Now you're going to whine and say I called you a dog I imagine.

1. The "Messiah" line has never worked for you guys (you guys being the not so vast, yet marginally significant group of people who feel 2008 was about race as opposed to change from and rejection of republican leadership).

2.Your argument is incredibly flawed mate:

"Also, reference people who you imagine your opponent supports and attack them too."

I realize you have hyper sensitivity. No doubt, with your insurance, you can medicate for that, but pointing out that republicans like Scott McClellan voted for and supported President Obama is not exactly "attack[ing] them too." Why'd you make that illogical leap?
What pointing out that republicans also supported President Obama does is show that your "Barack is President because the left focused on race" argument is born and raised in your mind.

"Make sure you claim support of a majority of people even if it's not completely true, and don't forget to include prominent individuals who used to work for the leaders you think your opponent supports. These things will demoralize your opponent because no person can exist separate from the herd."

So, are you NOW saying the President won a minority of the popular vote? I trust you will enlighten me, as my grasp of facts differs from yours.

I just checked. I didn't grow that third leg. I'm going with the Palin not ready for prime time and grandpa too grumpy angle on the 2008 election. I say this realizing that many people will go to their grave having never owned their failures. In stead they will avoid introspection preferring to create racial angles and false messiah analogies. Suits me.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Conservatism is not "dwindling down to nothing", it's just disorganized and unfocused right now.

My statement referred to the ‘right wing conspiracy’ – not conservatism. It is interesting that SOME southerners feel the two are the same. THEY ARE NOT! Respect has always been more important to me than popularity. Your point?

What departure from American principles do you refer to?

•Acceptance of ‘torture’ of any human being.

•Using religious belief /gender/race as a ‘litmus’ test for citizenship, leadership., or civil rights.

•Calling potential leaders ‘socialists’ when the current acts of this administration do NOT pass for socialism.

David Clark is a member of Democratic Socialists of America. He is an attorney. This is what he says of Obama's 'socialist' administration.

The DSA want immediate withdrawal of the US from NAFTA. Obama: No

DSA wants community ownership and control of corporations within the framework of a decentralized and democratically determined economic plan. Obama: No (with possible exception of GM)

DSA wants a full employment policy and a livable guaranteed annual income. Obama: No

DSA wants a $15 hour minimum wage. Obama: No (Fed is $7.25; Georgia - $5.15)

Label Obama for what he is - a centrist Democrat.

As to your lengthy, but interesting definition of ‘liberalism’ – let’s just say we disagree. That’s the beauty of America. . . thinking people can disagree. Regarding ‘conspiracy’ – those who had conflicting ideas, but tried sincerely to ‘act’ in harmony toward a common end describe our founding fathers. There were ‘wrong’ decisions – but those decisions appeared ‘right’ for the era. Holding on to the strategies that were ‘right’ 20 years ago, and has allowed for unbridled spending and fraud had to be stopped. Giving a group of leaders less than 100 days to effect change after allowing outdated/ineffective strategies to continue is not wisdom or fair. Attempted change is here /was voted for– and hopefully we don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. It is OUR responsibility to monitor this administration and speak up with concrete strategies when we see that something is not working. To block all and any change is obstructionist. I’m old enough to remember when there were ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’ in both parties – as well as in some of the ‘third parties’ in our country. Today ‘moderates’ are those who have some liberal and some conservative leanings. They appear to follow their principles and morals rather than the ‘talking points’ of a ‘party’. I don’t think that ‘common sense’ is too much to ask for. I just don’t believe that ‘conservatives’ are the only ones with common sense.

"My statement referred to the ‘right wing conspiracy’ – not conservatism. It is interesting that SOME southerners feel the two are the same. THEY ARE NOT!"
You and I both know that there is a sentiment among liberals that there is a nebulous "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"(Notice the Capitalization?). I was poking fun at that, then you stepped in and said that something that didn't exist in the first place was "dwindling down to nothing." I decided to play along. Left wing and even more moderate people certainly don't make any distinction between the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" and conservatives in general, so why should I make that effort? I'm just bearing in mind the mentality of the person I'm speaking to.
"Respect has always been more important to me than popularity. Your point?"
You are deficient in reading comprehension? "Liberals are more concerned with popularity and acceptance than conservatives are. Truly effective leaders often are as reviled as much as they are respected, but few are very popular. It turns out that this is a plus for liberals on election day, though, because those who prefer doing the right thing even if you are hated for it are in the minority." I view this as a serious flaw, because the liberals will sell us out to gain those things. We need leadership, not appeasement. Obama's policies tend to favor the latter... fat lot of good it did him during the European visit, during which just about every world leader he approached looking for concessions or favors told him to go pound sand.
BWAA-HAAA-HAA-HAAAAA!!! Obama the statesman, indeed!
"•Acceptance of ‘torture’ of any human being."
I never have said that I support torture.. but I may not agree with your definition of it, either. I also don't agree that these techniques were sanctioned by the former administration. I think that if the law was broken, the lawbreakers must be prosecuted. I just don't buy into the liberal establishment's well-known tactic of making an unfounded and false accusation repeatedly for the express purpose of destroying the public's perception of a member of the opposition. You know the saying, "If you throw enough mud at someone, eventually something will stick."
"•Using religious belief /gender/race as a ‘litmus’ test for citizenship, leadership., or civil rights."
I also believe this, and I believe that an overwhelming majority of conservatives believe it as well. Liberals, however, don't feel any particular need to be non-discriminatory. If you are a White man, the liberals treat you like scum. All Evangelical Christians are lumped together and regarded with derision and suspicion. Anyone who doesn't tow the liberal party line on social issues, in fact, are labeled as "right wing extremists" or worse. Every time a conservative nominee for the courts or other high office has to face the legislature, they get raked over those same coals. Did you have a problem with the treatment of justices Roberts and Alito during their confirmation hearings? How many strict constructionist justices didn't make it because they were too pro life or too friendly toward the right wing on other faith based initiatives? I'm not saying that the bad behavior of some less savory persons who claim to be conservatives is in any way justified by the equally bad behavior of the many more on the liberal side who do it and don't see anything wrong with it, but let's not be hypocritical.
"•Calling potential leaders ‘socialists’ when the current acts of this administration do NOT pass for socialism."
Just because Obama told the DSA to get lost doesn't mean he's not a socialist. It just means that he's a smart socialist who wants to stay in the good graces of not only the moderates, but also the left-of-center members of the party. Let's make some things perfectly clear:
Universal health care is a socialist program. They have been very careful to steer the language away from the term, "socialized medicine," but that is what Obama and the Democrat leadership wants for America.
Governmental control over privately owned businesses and banks is socialism.
Heavy, progressive taxation with large segments of the population on the lower side of the income scale bearing little or no tax liability while the higher income wage earners pay confiscatory percentages of their annual incomes is socialism.
Governmental control over programming on the radio(A.K.A. The Fairness Doctrine) is socialism.
Social engineering through discouraging or punitive taxes is a tool of socialists.
Yup, Obama is indeed a socialist.
"Giving a group of leaders less than 100 days to effect change after allowing outdated/ineffective strategies to continue is not wisdom or fair. Attempted change is here /was voted for– and hopefully we don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater."
Every bit of legislation, every increase in spending, every decision made by Obama and the Reid/Pelosi dynamic duo is wrong. I don't need more than a hundred Days to figure that out. I also want change, I want an elected official in office who doesn't hate his country so much that he feels that the only option is to change it to suit the wishes of the rest of the envious, petty little world. I want lower taxes, not higher. I want less government programs and more personal responsibility. I wouldn't need a damned safety net if the government would get off my back and get out of my way. I want the elected officials to stop telling me it's my patriotic duty to suck it up and pay more in taxes while they increase spending!
If you think all this amounts to "common sense", there really is something wrong with you.
And I don't adhere to any party line. I actually hold and defend my own views and I don't appreciate the inference that I am some sort of partisan zombie whose behavior is dictated by some official in Washington.
That would make me... a liberal.

"All I ask for is a little common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for."

"Truly effective leaders often are as reviled as much as they are respected, but few are very popular. It turns out that this is a plus for liberals on election day, though, because those who prefer doing the right thing even if you are hated for it are in the minority."

Doesn't "truly effective leadership" demand RESULTS from that leadership? So, Ionized, what were the results of the previous administrations' "effective leadership?" Economic results? Domestic policy results? Foreign relations results? Are we on the same planet Earth?

"I view this as a serious flaw, because the liberals will sell us out to gain those things. We need leadership, not appeasement. Obama's policies tend to favor the latter... fat lot of good it did him during the European visit, during which just about every world leader he approached looking for concessions or favors told him to go pound sand.
BWAA-HAAA-HAA-HAAAAA!!! Obama the statesman, indeed!"

Ionized, I have to ask, again: What planet are you blogging from? Do you get out of the country much? Do you get out of the south much? I am blogging from many many frequent flier miles away from Georgia, and the security, safety, and good will I feel as an American on foreign soil is unmatched in my memory...Oh, let me correct that. I haven't felt this since Bill Clinton was President.

It seems you're trying to make a thesis of "Why the captain of the Exxon Valdez was a great captain."

I don't think your body of work will receive raving reviews.

I will try your brand of "common sense" out though; like a little experiment:

"Just because Obama told the DSA to get lost doesn't mean he's not a socialist. It just means that he's a smart socialist who wants to stay in the good graces of not only the moderates, but also the left-of-center members of the party."

Just because someone doesn't smoke dope does not mean they are not a dope smoker. They are just smart enough to avoid getting caught by not smoking dope.

Medicaid and medicare and social security are socialistic programs. Ronald Reagan supported these programs. Ronald Reagan, rest his soul, was an ionized socialist.

Sarah Palin taxes oil company profits and distributes these funds to citizens. This is socialistic. Sarah Palin is an ionized socialist.

Wow. Amazing how one can manipulate situations to make their own reality.

"Doesn't "truly effective leadership" demand RESULTS from that leadership? So, Ionized, what were the results of the previous administrations' "effective leadership?" Economic results? Domestic policy results? Foreign relations results? Are we on the same planet Earth?"
I refuse to get into a partisan argument because I didn't support much of the previous administration's agenda either. I will say, however, that the previous administration resulted in the six years of low unemployment, healthy growth of the economy, and an expansion of the tax base brought on by the hated "Bush tax cuts for the rich", which netted my lower-middle-class-income family about $2000 in tax savings per year from 2003-2006. Interestingly, the economic good times seemed to be numbered when the left seized control of the legislature in 2006. Hmmm...
What we also got was a very unhealthy increase in the size of the government, the amount of government spending, the number of illegal immigrants and the nasty little economic time bomb that went off last year. I actually (mostly) blame that one on the Democrats in charge of the administration and regulation of Fannie and Freddie, and on the politicians responsible for pandering to groups like Acorn who pressured the government to force mortgage companies to make loans to irresponsible people who would not ordinarily have qualified for them. Still, Bush supported the notion that everyone, including those who have shown themselves to be unable or unwilling to be fiscally responsible in the past, has a right to own their own home.
"Ionized, I have to ask, ... I am blogging from many many frequent flier miles away from Georgia, and the security, safety, and good will I feel as an American on foreign soil is unmatched in my memory..."
The former administration's actions also resulted in the hanging death of one of the most brutal and murderous thugs ever to lead a country. I know you are itching to remind us all about the backstory on how he got into power, as if it somehow makes me wrong that we helped rectify a mistake of the past, but you can save it. I just feel pretty good that fifty million people who did not have a choice in their government now enjoy some of the same rights that we have. That feeling is, to me at least, much more substantive than your "Everyone in the world loves us because our president is just like them" feeling you have. I don't need acceptance from the world, I feel like we did the right thing. The rest of the envious, greedy masses can hate me all they want to. I still have a better life than most of them, so I win!
"Just because someone doesn't smoke dope does not mean they are not a dope smoker. They are just smart enough to avoid getting caught by not smoking dope."
Is this a typo? If you don't smoke dope, you aren't a dope smoker...the end! What does this nonsense have to do with my assertion that Obama is a socialist?
Look, Reagan was forced to support Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security because to not do so is political suicide. I can say that I want to abolish these programs, but I don't have to be elected. Too many people think these programs actually benefit them. Reagan wasn't perfect, and I didn't agree with him 100% of the time, but his administration was mostly conservative.
Guess what? I don't support income taxation at all. You are darned tootin' that I don't agree with the Sarah Palin thing... but she has governed mostly as a conservative, she's done right by her constituents, and she had more experience as an executive than all the other candidates combined.
Now that we've cleared that up, can we get back to the subject, or do you want to discuss my feelings about Bugs Bunny? How about Marvin the Martian?
Obama hasn't done or even suggested doing anything that doesn't come solidly from the extreme left. Everything he has done so far exacerbates earlier mistakes by multiple factors. His speeches and comments during interviews don't lead me to believe that he will ever support any initiatives that don't come at best from left of center.

"All I ask for is a little common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for."

After reading the above, your opinion embodies the thinking we, as a nation, rejected last November. You sound so party line tone death that our conversation is futile. The economy is "mostly" the democrats' fault starting in 2006? Problem is, ionized, you won't be able to point out one single Bush economic policy that the mini majority changed in 2006. Not one. So again, you are making excuses up as you go, and voters have already weighed and measured the merits of that argument.

"Obama hasn't done or even suggested doing anything that doesn't come solidly from the extreme left. Everything he has done so far exacerbates earlier mistakes by multiple factors."

Yes, ionized, supporting 2nd amendment rights in D.C. and refusing to prosecute previous administration officials on torture are "from the extreme left." Mandating federal budget cuts came from the "extreme left."

Hmmmm... Why did Americans choose to go democratic in 2006 and even more so in 2008? Probably got tired of the "its not our fault" crowd that was driving the nation for the last 8 years.

David's mom said: I’m old enough to remember when there were ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’ in both parties – as well as in some of the ‘third parties’ in our country. Today ‘moderates’ are those who have some liberal and some conservative leanings. They appear to follow their principles and morals rather than the ‘talking points’ of a ‘party’.

Ionizd said: And I don't adhere to any party line. I actually hold and defend my own views and I don't appreciate the inference that I am some sort of partisan zombie whose behavior is dictated by some official in Washington.

Maybe there is hope to a return to common sense if citizens continue to think on their own - and not keep regurgitating 'party lines'.

"Maybe there is hope to a return to common sense if citizens continue to think on their own - and not keep regurgitating 'party lines'."

This might be true, but only if they comform to your PARTIES BELIEFS..
You guys do not suffer dissent very well.. ask JOE LIBERMAN..
SO as long as we toe the party line.. you will accept others.. but step out of line.. and out you go..

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

I want the elected officials to stop telling me it's my patriotic duty to suck it up and pay more in taxes while they increase spending!

Congratulations! You're one of the 'fat cats' who won't get a tax cut! The rest of us are getting a stipend to hold on to while we weather this economic travesty. Even the 'southern' states are taking recovery funds to help get this economy back on track. Stop the hypocrisy!! Partisanship is put aside in order to get food on the table - and a job for money in the pocket!

WOW, Great Job, Way to Go... Blah Blah... whoops didn't mean that one..
I was going to answer Davids Mom with many of the same points you made here.. However, waste of time.. there are certain party loyalist that will easly trade their morality for ideology.. They don't get us and never will.. They can not begin to understand that we serve an ideal not a PARTY.. That we are loyal to our Country.. not a PARTY.. That we put our Country and Family first.. not a PARTY.. That we would rather vote our conscience then hold our nose and vote.. for a PARTY and that we are not one issue oriented and many potential candidates represent our views and no one candidate may or will get our entire support just because he belongs.. to a PARTY.. ie.. (Divas Huckabee question..) We represent many diverging points of view and we are not stuck on a particular ideology.. We have pro-choicers, pro-lifers, Fair-taxers, Flat taxers, No taxers, but we all almost to a man believe in self-governance, personal responcibility, States Rights and the Constitution. The Liberals can not or will not understand that.. Why? Who knows..

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

You stated, ".. there are certain party loyalist that will easly trade their morality for ideology."

Would this accurately describe people who claim to have Christian morals as they try and explain how waterboarding, sleep deprivation, use of attack dogs on leashes, etc are suddenly, contrary to U.S. and international law, not considered torture or unethical?

Interesting point you make.

Can I respond to this since I'm not a Christian, oh Grand Pooh-Bah of National Conscience? I'm going to anyway.
"Would this accurately describe people who claim to have Christian morals as they try and explain how waterboarding, sleep deprivation, use of attack dogs on leashes, etc are suddenly, contrary to U.S. and international law, not considered torture or unethical?"
Personally, I don't think of these things as torture. As far as waterboarding and sleep deprivation are concerned, the military uses both to train soldiers and pilots. The dogs...
Well, it's really only torture in my estimation if the attack dogs are off the leashes. Then again, I'm not a liberal pansy, so I may not be the right guy to ask.
"All I ask for is a little common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for."

"Well, it's really only torture in my estimation if the attack dogs are off the leashes. Then again, I'm not a liberal pansy, so I may not be the right guy to ask."

No, you are not. You appear to be the garden variety panzy. liberal panzies win elections.

Just remember, if you keep saying we didn't torture (just like your overuse of the "messiah" line), eventually it will become true.

Well, it's really only torture in my estimation if the attack dogs are off the leashes.

The Freedom Riders and students who 'sat in' during the 60's don't agree. Where are these miscreant 'Americans' coming from? It's OK to allow dogs to mall a human being if the dog is on a leash? Bull Conner reincarnated! Michael Vic went to jail for allowing dogs to mall each other! What should happen to this sad excuse for a human being who says its OK for dogs to mall a human - as long as the dog is on a leash!

I don't believe there's any evidence that the dogs ever actually touched any of the prisoners. They were used only as a scare tactic.

YOU are the one S. Lindsey suggested chose politics over morality. In light of the "it ain't torture if the dogs are leashed" argument, is that not the funniest damned thing you have ever heard?

Happy Mother's Day!

Thanks! This discussion series has been enlightening - and sometimes downright hilarious until the 'dogs on a leash' statement. As I said before - mission accomplished. These guys/girls don't want to discuss issues - just denigrate others. I'm grateful that we both know individuals who have different opinions regarding politics - but they certainly aren't racist! It does bother me sometimes that those you are apparently close to refuse to see your point of view on some 'race' issues. There is not a right or wrong many times - just a different perspective - and they can't seem to accept yours. My kids and grands will be with me today - and I'm blessed to still have my mom. Have a great day!!

But only if we agree with you right?

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

You and I both know that there is a sentiment among liberals that there is a nebulous "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"(Notice the Capitalization?).

That was a ‘Clintonian’ concept. Most people don’t credit Rushonian concepts to all conservatives.

"Liberals are more concerned with popularity and acceptance than conservatives are. Truly effective leaders often are as reviled as much as they are respected, but few are very popular. It turns out that this is a plus for liberals on election day, though, because those who prefer doing the right thing even if you are hated for it are in the minority."

Your research is based on what? Is this the reason Reagan won? He was certainly popular. Oops – I’ll have to do some research – in some circles, Ann Coulter is popular – and hated. Truman, who had to follow FDR, was not popular, but he was elected. Lincoln was not ‘popular’ – but he won his election. Come to think of it – Obama not only was not popular – most people didn’t even know who he was! I think your theory is a little too simplistic. . . but then my ‘reading’ comprehension needs work.

"If you throw enough mud at someone, eventually something will stick."

Interesting that the Obama supporters said this about the McCain supporters. There certainly was/is a lot of mud being thrown at Obama daily – and it just doesn’t stick! Must be very frustrating to the mudslingers.

Liberals, however, don't feel any particular need to be non-discriminatory. If you are a White man, the liberals treat you like scum. All Evangelical Christians are lumped together and regarded with derision and suspicion.

I find this attitude more prevalent in the south than in the rest of the country. I’m still researching this – since I know many ‘liberal’ white men who don’t feel this way at all. How many ‘liberals’ have you interviewed for you to reach the conclusion that they don’t feel any particular need to be non-discriminatory? Interesting concept.

It is interesting that you acknowledge that there are some areas where you appear to agree with the liberal ‘take’ on an issue. . . and disagree with the ‘conservative’ or ‘right’ take on an issue.

Thank you for discussing this with me. Your opinion has been most enlightening. We will not change each other’s opinions – but I hope that somewhere someone sees the commonality of two people who claim to have divergent views on a topic MAY be able to agree about something. Have a pleasant weekend.

has flowed some of the best thought out, reasonable ideas. I am enjoying the points you make and the demeanor you exude. Kind of makes up for my knuckle dragging, but hey! I'm a knuckle dragger.

You can judge the effectiveness of your arguments on how and by whom you are addressed. I'd say you're doing pretty darned good!

It's amazing that no matter how amicable you are, you're still receiving the "partisan hack" stuff; still being accused of surrendering your morals (an unsubstantiated and desperate claim).

Thanks for carrying your weight, and keeping a smile on your face all the while! Your ideas are appreciated by many.

Cheers

Back at ya! God bless the knuckle draggers! My great aunt said it takes several approaches to get a message over. They're hearing it - they just don't want to admit that times have changed since 1865! I realize that many sincerely and with logical thought don't agree with my opinion - and I can respect that. It's those who keep 'biting' and expressing their limited knowledge that need to be exposed. They exist all over our great country - and that is the beauty of America. They are not locked up or persecuted for having divergent views. Most 'real' people that I know in Fayette County are embarrassed at the way they express themselves when they are frustrated. I just read and watch - but sometimes the 'other' side needs to be addressed. My family is cracking up over the Birkenstock comment!!

Yeah, what diva said.

It's not easy being the carbonunit

You write great stuff! Goes without saying. And you do it in such a way that even the heartless cannot attack you . Must be the bear. Ring my phone early next week. We gotta get together!

point made..need I say more...

DM said "Obama not only was not popular – most people didn’t even know who he was! I think your theory is a little too simplistic."

He was made into a ROCK star.. The reason no one knew him.. was because he had done absolutley NOTHING to be known for.. except "Community Organizing"??? AGAIN PARTY OVER SUBSTANCE.. If McCain had affliations with known Terrorist he would never have made it thru the first primary, but not only did Obama associate with a Terrorist, He had a pastor for 20 years that is a RACIST, a friend who is an avowed Communist and got favors from Risco who now resides not in the mansion next to Obama but in prison..
Like I said PARTY comes first with them..

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

You keep saying the above over and over and over again - and the mud just doesn't stick! 60+% of the American people have hope after years of disappointment, war, corruption, etc., etc., etc. that under Obama's leadership, America will once again be a respected global leader for more than it's military power. Lindsey - at least Ionizd 'thinks' for himself and forms his own opinions. I bet it really galls you when the rest of the world sees Obama as a 'leader' as compared to our last president. Reagan, Carter, and Clinton all have status as world leaders - as does Obama.

I am going to enjoy watching you turn from party hack to a realist over the next 3 years 6 months 13 days 12 hours 53 sec.. no wait 52 oh crap you get the idea...
But for you I doubt the realization will ever come.. You will always be a party hack.. You will never see the truck until it flattens you.. then you will look around and ask "Did anyone get the number of that truck"? Your fellow Libs will simply say.."What Truck??"

Bush was bad for this Country.. Obama is worse.. You guys chose Color and party over substance.. and our kids are going to suffer for it.. and yes "I BLAME YOU"...YOU AND THE "MODERATES" and the "BIRKENSTOCK" crowd... I BLAME YOU You can not say all the SPENDING is good for AMERICA.. They are selling our and our CHILDRENS future.. and you LIBERALS who claim to be so compassionate and always for the CHILDREN.. don't seem to give a damn now about our CHILDREN..as long
as it furthers your PARTY.. and I do not CARE how you SPIN IT.. IT IS WRONG.. and YOU ARE TO BLAME!!!!!!

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

Thank you for your impassioned input. See ya in four! Birkenstocks! LOL!

going to have to wait for now.. gotta go.. play in my garden, but be sure to see the response tomorrow..
Obama is not a Socialist.. hmmm

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..

GUN CONTROL Link

Direct your comments to the DSA. Have fun in your garden!

If your intent is to assign the diatribe you posted above as somehow sanctioned, endorsed or approved by an entire group (i.e.conservatives) then you sir are indeed guilty of labeling an entire group of people unfairly and with great prejudice.

To which I would phonetically say to anyone that feels that way about me: po-po na-um kundingy, kay-sekia!

Many of the statements and ideas I posted were born at, distributed at, and welcomed at GOP conventions and McCain rallies. Rush, your leader, used a few of them. Being that you feel your party needs to move "further right," I'm going to stick with my judgment on this one. Martinez, if you are the last Republican left, would you get the lights on your way out?

Gees, how many times does it have to be said? Yes, the Republican Party is fractured. So continue your gloating. Now with that said, how long will it take your side to move further to the left before it too is faced with the same circumstances?

BTW, please leave the oily stuff at home.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

You asked: Why do conservatives host tea parties and protest when they could not nationally support the only Fair Tax candidate who also happened to be a minister? Should not the protests start at the RNC?

First of all, I (along with many other conservatives) feel completely DISGUSTED with the RNC and had you actually attended one of these tea parties you would have known that MANY others are too. We still see them the lesser of two evils however.

Secondly, there was (and is) more than one Republican candidate who supports the Fair Tax but you must recognize the 'Fair Tax' is only ONE option to attempt to repeal the massive money grab that our federal government is using to supply an ever increasing appetite for control and power. Not all Republicans see this one option as the most essential issue. (As for the minister comment - you lost me - I don't think they voted for the good Rev. Jesse when he ran and he is a minister too isn't he?)

And finally, Republicans split their votes among conservative candidates in such a way as to leave the 'moderate' John McCain (who many of us would have seen as Obama light) as the party nominee.

On the bad scale (1 being a little bad and 10 being as bad as it gets) Bush was a six and McCain a seven. Many of us see Obama's policies and actions in the 9 to 10 range.

We are still looking for a candidate who can stop government growth and this outrageous spending that exploded in the final days of Bush and the democratic congress, peaked for him with TARP, and has now exponentially increased under Obama.

Smaller government, less intervention, lower taxes, and a government based on the US constitution is what the tea parties were all about.

Sooner or later you will get the message. You may even find yourself at a tea party in the future. I recall democrats taking quite a while to realize how pitifully mistaken they were with Jimmy Carter and once again it will take a while for you to all realize that you do indeed still need to work and pay bills and that Obama's big government power grab doesn't bode well for you or your children ... but you will eventually. We, as conservatives, just hope it isn't too late once you do.

Now, you democrats have completely controlled congress for over two years. Now you control the Whitehouse, congress and have a super majority. Point being - there is NO ONE left to blame but democrats for what is happening and what is coming. I guess that means your complaining about our complaining is all you have left to complain about.

I am not in to canola oil massages, I would like to donate it to the homeless.

I hope to see you July 4.

Smaller government, less intervention, lower taxes, and a government based on the US constitution is what the tea parties were all about.

And that is going to take the collaborative effort of all thinking Americans. For 8 years - we experienced leaders who did not exactly lead us to smaller government, etc. Even when Bush tried, his own Congress said 'no'. The country has said that those who were in control previously did not deliver. There is no 'gloating' here. There is 'hoping' that with all of us looking beyond 'labels' and identifying policies that WORK, we can climb out of this mess. To continue to argue and be obstructionists will not/ is not helping the Republican Party. Republicans in other parts of the country are beginning to see this reality - and working on policies that will rebuild this country. Doing more of the same that got us in this mess is not a realistic or believable approach. You talk about 'blame' as now in the Democrats court - but some of this (Democrat) approach is working. If we can only learn from our mistakes in the past (going back 60 years!) we won't repeat them once we have climbed out of this sorry economy - and we will climb out!

... and the creation of 66,000 new government jobs last month along with the loss of over 550,000 'civilian' jobs is NOT change we can believe in ... it is more spending and a bigger government neither of which are moving us in the proper direction .... in my opinion ....so as for me ... consider me an obstructionist to the current administration and the direction they are taking the United States.

Many 'liberals' read 'conservative sites. I seldom 'read' your opinion in this discussion. I'll ask another question. What is the proper direction that you refer to? What can we do differently to assist those who are losing their jobs, homes, etc. - have lost their savings, etc.? I understand that the Fayette County Board of Education is now going to accept some stimulus/recovery money - and teachers may not lose their jobs. What would you do differently to secure the jobs of our teachers, law enforcement, and fire fighters?

. . and what would you do differently?

A civil conversation between you and I started by a canola oil massage offer.

With the whole "minister" thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are not many a conservative saying we need to strengthen our national morals and return to a foundation in Christ? That is why they tried to paint our President as a Muslim. So, if faith is important, why, as a party, did Republicans not support their man of God.

What is the alternative to Fair Tax you refer to? That is a new one for me. I've missed those blogs.

I'm not complaining about your complaining. I'm telling you that republicans are barking up the wrong tree. If you want Fair Taxation and a stronger moral compass, your party is going to have to elect a candidate who embodies and supports those precepts. Otherwise, we're all just wondering why the outrage?

As for the age of Obama, my kids will appreciate never having to torture another human being as part of their job description. They will enjoy not having to play a part in wars because we wanted to; not because we needed to. and they will enjoy being smiled at and getting thumbs up from people as they travel in foreign countries that respect us once more.

I appreciate your points though, and I'll keep a bottle of wesson close in case you change your mind; a tea and oil party as it were.