4 years later and still clueless.........

[NickF1011]

You can't win the election without full party support and you can't get full party support if you don't embrace the religious right.

 

See, I disagree with this part. I mean if the Republicans just basically ignored Christian fanaticiscm instead of embracing it, it's not like those fundamentalists are going to go rushing to go vote Democratic. The vast majority of them are still going to line up behind the Republican candidate regardless. It's long past time to cast them away from the platform.

 

Liberals, OTOH, seem to believe that everyone who is rich is evil and they got rich by doing evil things and they should be punished.

 

Unless, of course, they are rich Democrats.

Edited September 18, 2012 by NickF1011

[Edstock]

Think of it as the GOP Theme:

 

[FordBuyer]

Even going back that far, most of the surviving structures were the "best of the best". Look at some of the subpar construction techniques used in shanty towns and early industrialized cities. None of that has survived. While a good argument could be made that yesterday's "best of the best" might be better than today's, modern building codes have brought the median quality up considerably.

 

Agree and disagree. I grew up in a working class neighborhood. My father was solid middle class with good engineering job at Ford, but for whatever reason chose this working class, largely blue collar neighborhood. Our house built in 1949 was very so so and needed lots of upgrades over the years. However, the neighborhoods adjacent were solid middle class and all brick with beautiful firelplaces, custom touches with leaded glass and the like. Even today houses like that stand out as very classy and tasteful and back then were very middle class. I dare say those houses back then would be hard to match today with the cookie cutter, cost crazy developers of today that basically assemble houses instead of actually build them with skill. I'm also not a fan of vinyl siding and cheap looking drywall with cheap looking molding that splinters if you try to drive a nail through it.

[FordBuyer]

See, I disagree with this part. I mean if the Republicans just basically ignored Christian fanaticiscm instead of embracing it, it's not like those fundamentalists are going to go rushing to go vote Democratic. The vast majority of them are still going to line up behind the Republican candidate regardless. It's long past time to cast them away from the platform.

 

 

 

Unless, of course, they are rich Democrats.

 

For whatever reason, the Republican Party is still seen as party made up of old, rich white men. And Romney and Ann with her show horses has done nothing to change that. That image was brought home starkly watching both conventions this summer on TV. As America becomes even more of a melting pot, the Republican Party looks like something out of the 50's Mad Men theme. The Republican Party wants to take us back to the 50's and that just ain't going to happen. The buttoned up society didn't work for long in the 50's as the 60's changed everything, and it won't work in 2012 either as the cat is out of the bag never to be put back in. Not overly infatuated with Democratic Party either, but dang the Republican Party is not even in the correct century.

[akirby]

See, I disagree with this part. I mean if the Republicans just basically ignored Christian fanaticiscm instead of embracing it, it's not like those fundamentalists are going to go rushing to go vote Democratic. The vast majority of them are still going to line up behind the Republican candidate regardless. It's long past time to cast them away from the platform.

 

I'm not saying that's how it should be - I'm saying that's how it is right now. The Christian fanatics have taken over the party and made things like gay marriage and abortion major topics. Do you believe the party would nominate a Republican candidate who did not cater to the Christian agenda? I don't and that's why I have a problem with it. And I don't see that changing as long as the Christians are controlling the party.

 

I agree with you that the voting public would not care and would vote for a conservative regardless of their stance on religious issues compared to a liberal, because I think the fiscal issues are a thousand times more important anyway. But if the current party won't nominate such a candidate then we won't find out.

 

This is why I support the tea party - fiscal conservatism without the Christian baggage. And I'm talking about the platform, not any specific individual who claims to be a tea party member. And I have nothing against religion - I just think it's a private issue and not something that should be part of a political campaign.

 

That's also why I liked Herman Cain. He didn't fit the stereotype that liberals like to throw darts at.

[akirby]

For whatever reason, the Republican Party is still seen as party made up of old, rich white men.

 

Don't tell Herman.

 

[NickF1011]

I'm not saying that's how it should be - I'm saying that's how it is right now. The Christian fanatics have taken over the party and made things like gay marriage and abortion major topics. Do you believe the party would nominate a Republican candidate who did not cater to the Christian agenda? I don't and that's why I have a problem with it. And I don't see that changing as long as the Christians are controlling the party.

 

In the end, that's exactly what they did. Mitt Romney is far more middle-of-the-road on social issues than most of the other leading candidates were. Sure, he played to that base to get the nomination, but his past record indicates that's not truly what he believes in heart and mind. Unfortunately, that's what he ran on and he's doing a very poor job of moving back toward the center (which is where he positioned himself so successfully in Massachusetts) since the convention so far.

[NickF1011]

Agree and disagree. I grew up in a working class neighborhood. My father was solid middle class with good engineering job at Ford, but for whatever reason chose this working class, largely blue collar neighborhood. Our house built in 1949 was very so so and needed lots of upgrades over the years. However, the neighborhoods adjacent were solid middle class and all brick with beautiful firelplaces, custom touches with leaded glass and the like. Even today houses like that stand out as very classy and tasteful and back then were very middle class. I dare say those houses back then would be hard to match today with the cookie cutter, cost crazy developers of today that basically assemble houses instead of actually build them with skill. I'm also not a fan of vinyl siding and cheap looking drywall with cheap looking molding that splinters if you try to drive a nail through it.

 

Vinyl siding and drywall might be cheaper to use, but darned if they're not durable too. :shrug:

[akirby]

In the end, that's exactly what they did. Mitt Romney is far more middle-of-the-road on social issues than most of the other leading candidates were. Sure, he played to that base to get the nomination, but his past record indicates that's not truly what he believes in heart and mind. Unfortunately, that's what he ran on and he's doing a very poor job of moving back toward the center (which is where he positioned himself so successfully in Massachusetts) since the convention so far.

 

But you shouldn't have to pretend or put on airs to get a nomination. Somebody like Cain would have given the liberals far less ammunition.

[NickF1011]

But you shouldn't have to pretend or put on airs to get a nomination. Somebody like Cain would have given the liberals far less ammunition.

 

Cain shot himself in the foot with questionable character issues. That would have been more than enough ammo for the liberal crowd.

[cal50]

Cain shot himself in the foot with questionable character issues. That would have been more than enough ammo for the liberal crowd.

 

 

Yet they still hold Bill Clinton in high regard......amazing double standard.

[NickF1011]

Yet they still hold Bill Clinton in high regard......amazing double standard.

 

If it wasn't for double standards, liberals wouldn't have any standards at all.

[grbeck]

Nothing more insufferable than the self-made man who worships his creator.

 

Everyone on this board has been insufferable at one point or another, including the both of us.

Edited September 18, 2012 by grbeck

[akirby]

Yet they still hold Bill Clinton in high regard......amazing double standard.

 

EXACTLY

[FordBuyer]

Yet they still hold Bill Clinton in high regard......amazing double standard.

 

Now you aren't trying to compare Clinton and Cain as politicians are you? The Clinton speech at the Demo Convention was one of the great speeches of all time. it did make you yearn for his time in office again even with his lies and deceit. America was in a better place back then before it all got wrecked by Bush, Cheney, Woolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and the rest. Now not sure who can put all the pieces back together again.

[akirby]

Cain shot himself in the foot with questionable character issues. That would have been more than enough ammo for the liberal crowd.

 

Personally, I don't give a rat's behind who a politician has sex with or when or why - it has nothing to do with running the country IMO.

[grbeck]

Now you aren't trying to compare Clinton and Cain as politicians are you? The Clinton speech at the Demo Convention was one of the great speeches of all time. it did make you yearn for his time in office again even with his lies and deceit. America was in a better place back then before it all got wrecked by Bush, Cheney, Woolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and the rest. Now not sure who can put all the pieces back together again.

 

Some of the seeds that ultimately wrecked the economy were planted during the Clinton Adminstration. Among those were requiring financial institutions to loosen lending standards and therefore expand credit availability.

Edited September 18, 2012 by grbeck

[NickF1011]

Now you aren't trying to compare Clinton and Cain as politicians are you? The Clinton speech at the Demo Convention was one of the great speeches of all time. it did make you yearn for his time in office again even with his lies and deceit. America was in a better place back then before it all got wrecked by Bush, Cheney, Woolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and the rest. Now not sure who can put all the pieces back together again.

 

Yes, it was a pretty, candy-coated, rose-colored speech. Didn't it just give you goosebumps? Unfortunately, it did nothing to disguise the fact that Obama has accomplished nothing in his first term to begin righting the ship.

[NickF1011]

Personally, I don't give a rat's behind who a politician has sex with or when or why - it has nothing to do with running the country IMO.

 

Eh, to a point. I believe some indiscretions should be overlooked, but several could indicate a pattern of deceit, which leads to questions about being fit to lead.

[TomServo92]

 

 

Yes, it was a pretty, candy-coated, rose-colored speech. Didn't it just give you goosebumps? Unfortunately, it did nothing to disguise the fact that Obama has accomplished nothing in his first term to begin righting the ship.

 

Sometimes it almost feels like Obama is trying to run on Clinton's record instead of his own.

Edited September 18, 2012 by TomServo92

[NickF1011]

Sometimes it almost feels like Obama is trying to run on Clinton's record instead of his own.

 

Wouldn't you?

[silvrsvt]

Now you aren't trying to compare Clinton and Cain as politicians are you? The Clinton speech at the Demo Convention was one of the great speeches of all time. it did make you yearn for his time in office again even with his lies and deceit. America was in a better place back then before it all got wrecked by Bush, Cheney, Woolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and the rest. Now not sure who can put all the pieces back together again.

 

You could argue part of the reason Clinton's term was so successful was the ground work that Reagan and GWB laid down prior to him coming into office. Lets also not forget that we had a pretty decent recession back in 2000 with the dot-com crash...

[cal50]

Now you aren't trying to compare Clinton and Cain as politicians are you? The Clinton speech at the Demo Convention was one of the great speeches of all time. it did make you yearn for his time in office again even with his lies and deceit. America was in a better place back then before it all got wrecked by Bush, Cheney, Woolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and the rest. Now not sure who can put all the pieces back together again.

 

 

What credibility does a person have when found guilty of obstruction , perjury , disbarred by the supreme court and was impeached ?

(Forgot the contempt of court charges).

 

Cain hurt himself IF he had alley cat morals. Clinton clearly did / does and to get on TV and wag his finger in millions of people faces and lie about hurt himself.

 

Maybe you are moved by bullshit speeches and Clinton has proven he can lie on Que.

[akirby]

So what about JFK's infidelity? Did that make him a poor leader?

[NickF1011]

So what about JFK's infidelity? Did that make him a poor leader?

 

The infidelity itself? No. But it may have meant he had some pretty shady dishonest dealings behind closed doors in other regards too. The media tends to wear soft gloves though when it comes to analyzing the legacies of assassinated American leaders.