. . . did I miss the bulletin when that notified the world that the republican party has become the party of tolerance?
Actually I do not use the word tolerance, though I do maintain that many republicans are actually liberally-minded individuals who do indeed possess a virtue that I would characterize as tolerance. In that sense Mr. Bush is a tolerant man who listens to other views. But he also remains quite true to his own personal and political views and could accurately be called stubborn though some would argue that this simply demonstrates character.
--- I'll pause for a moment of silence so that the democrats can shriek, throw bottles, and urinate on a picture of Cheney (BTW I do support your "right" to burn the flag though I don't reccomend doing so if a construction worker or a US Marine is nearby) 🙄 --
And let's face it, politics and discussions political are necessarily heated things because many folks believe passionately in their party. So it's gonna get a little rough at times, just like college was at the frat house or when you're drinking with friends.
I must admit however, that republicans ( or use the word "conservative" if it keeps your nipples hard :wub: ) also possess a better sense of humor. Sure, they can also be caustic and cutting, but for the most part, they let the water roll off their backs. Democrats may hate Cheney, but give the guy his due, he knows how to fire them off ( though don't put a shot gun in his hands ). I was not a fan of President Reagan, but the guy sure had witty personality.
Democrats are more what I call "spit or swallow" divas who love to insult and misbehave on their own L-word terms, but are genuinely upset when the other side takes umbrage and fires back. Do you guys really think you can call folks names without someone calling you out on it? Most of us learn long ago that if you misbehave enough that someone is gonna smack ya.
So let's jump to the national level where Nancy and Hillary and Obamy and all of the other so-called true American "liberals" preside atop the national conscience which they insist represents the only reasonable moral and intellectual view for voters to entertain--
theirs!
These are the folks who are using terms such as " troops out now" , "failed policy", "find bin Laden", "failed presidency" , "conciliation towards Islamists" as a part of what they insist should be the national policy of these here United States of America. These democrats are the real people who are seeking to get their hands upon the levers of national power in which their words and their ideals will one day become real policy. So you can castigate B43 but those of us who look for snowballs to toss at Hillary et. al. are brazen hypocrites? :bleh:
That's why we have elections to put folks to the test. So excuse me if I scrutinize these folks, ponder their words and policy statements ( which IMO lack substance, definition and vision for anyone to arrive at an accurate interpretation ). And you know what? I'm doing my job as a citizen by questioning these folks and what they stand for.
But my views derive from how I define the word "liberal". And because of that, Garfield, my views and words do zig zag. Life is not the missionary position world of absolutes which so many democrats insist that it is. You paint your arguments in black and white terms and conditionalisms which insist that if only not for one man, one person, one thing, one happenstance, then the world would be completely different. I contend that the world and the issues in it are much more vibrant and complex -- shades of grey if you will which democrats refuse to see. In truth, all politicians cross their fingers and hope that voters are likewise colorblind to these grey nuances.
I had hoped for better when America goes into Iraq. Our policy makers fail to sense the road ahead of them ( then again, the democrats insisted that no road existed ). Our policy is executed badly, our troops remain in the line of fire, and the region shudders. But the Middle East and Islam already was what we all now realize it to be -- dysfunctional. Mr. Bush miscalculates, but the region and the people and cultures within in were dysfunctional before he acts and they remain so. Threats remain, challenges loom.
realism.
Spit or swallow: America out now. Bush is a sh!thead. Liars, monsters, criminals, abortions. Yes, the democrats do indeed bring great substance to the political table don't they.
But it's OK because democrats are the "good guys" who fly the banner of liberalism. Their view is the world's view. The republicans are the "bad guys" because they are "conservatives". Gee guys, that's a wholesome way to see the world.
The word liberal means so much more than what democrats say it means. And no, the democrats do not "own" the word liberal as their own. To be a true liberal means to possess confidence in one's views while also keeping an impartial ear open to the other guy's thoughts, feelings, and opinions. You can still be true to yourself, but one just might make the world a better place to live in if they can embrace the true meaning of the word.
Ironically neither political party concedes this truer meaing of the word and both misuse and abuse the L-word. But I do believe that the sensibilities of the mainstream republican party is better adapted to incorporate elements of this liberalism I speak of than the democrats are.
Elections are still a ways off and the rancor will unfortunately continue unabated. But the real world and the real problems within, remain.
Barry
Dems sound exactly like Bolsheviks - he who is not with us, is against.
