Can you change?

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Good post 12th.

I'm like you, except on the other side of things (I'll always remember that thread with the chart that plotted where each person was on the political spectrum), that was a good thread.

I grew up just outside DC in the People's Republic of Montgomery County (Kensington), although it was probably at least 10 years earlier than when you grew up. My folks were registered Ds, but voted R from Reagan on. I'd say they were Kennedy Ds. I remember reading the Washington Post, but mostly checking the baseball box scores, reading Skins stuff, and checking the Weekend section for the movie times, not realizing the Washington Post was left of Pravda. I was worried about Reagan "putting us into a nuclear war" before he got elected in 1980, but was in his corner as I got into HS. When I went into the USAF I was sent to Japan and exposed to the real world, my views were solidly formed and have stayed consistent since, but more fiscally conservative as I get older.

Could I vote for a Democrat, certainly. But you can't find a fiscal conservative, limited gov't Dem to save your soul. And I agree, I haven't been inspired by the Rs in quite sometime. To me they're just the lesser of two evils. Problem is both parties are controlled at the top by special interests and solid, middle of the road, common sense candidates can't get out of primaries because the big party money stomps them almost every time. We just had a primary here in VB and the big party guy won even though he wasn't the best choice. He'll be another don't tax but keep spending RINO. He'll say the scripted things, but will be a tool for the RNC, just like Thelma Drake was.

I would trade in Obama for either Clinton, especially Bill, in a heartbeat. I was no fan of his, but he did know how to track to the center when necessary. That being said, while Clinton technically passed a surplus to Bush 2, he also passed on a recession. His housing policies were also a contributor to the current recession (but to his credit, he saw the pending problems and sounded the warning bells on this, the current crop of Ds didn't heed the warnings).

While Bush was certainly no fiscal conservative, the Bush tax cuts did limit the impact of the 2001 recession and minimized the impact of Sept. 11th on the economy. Most of Bush's spending increases were related to Sept. 11th (DHS, etc.) and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, with bi-partisan Congressional support.

I don't think changing is really the issue, the folks here that meaningfully contribute to the political discussions have different views but normally are in agreement or could come to a satisfactory agreement on 80% of the issues. The vast majority of the country is influenced heavily by soundbites and talking heads without doing any research or investigation into the issues. You could find out what the 3rd WR on the Texans did in the Week 5 fantasy league or what American Idol/Bachelor/DWTS gossip is going on before most folks could name the VP or their own congressman/ senators.

And that's how exactly how Bush, Cheney, and Rove duped Congress into so much spending. They spun everything as a national security issue, turning it into a political issue not a policy issue, thereby questioning the patriotism of members based on their vote. Both wars were largely done by supplements and some fancy borrowing from the Chinese. And no one wants to talk about Medicare Part D, passed and unfunded by George W. Bush, adding to the mounting deficit.

I guess there's a debate to be had about Obama v. Clinton. But remember Clinton wanted a more costly and expansive healthcare bill than Obama just passed. In fact, it never saw a floor vote. And Clinton didn't inherit the worst recession in decades and two costly wars.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

And no one wants to talk about Medicare Part D, passed and unfunded by George W. Bush, adding to the mounting deficit.

I'll talk about it. It should've never been done and was Bush and the Rs pandering to the the aging demographic for votes.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I'll talk about it. It should've never been done and was Bush and the Rs pandering to the the aging demographic for votes.

Thought I never say this, but I'm voting for Slingin Sam. When you running, bro? I got some peeps in Mo.County that could get you going

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I'll talk about it. It should've never been done and was Bush and the Rs pandering to the the aging demographic for votes.

Dido's on that. It was also around that point the Rep. party forgot their conservative base and forgot about small government. I say that was the beginning of what we now know is the tea party. They got fed up with Bush over the next 6 yrs. then Obama took office and his spending along with what Bush did pushed people over the limit.