What's up with all the right-wingers on this site?

I thought you guys were smart? I go into the politics thread and I see all this republican biased talk and people labeling Democrats as socialists/communists? For those of you who are more framiliar with the politcal statistics of the people on this site, could you give me an idea of the ratio of democrats, republicans, and other parties please? Also if you don't mind, tell me what party you lean towards the most (or hate the least)? I'm Democrat, and so far from what I've read it seems like this board is %80-%90 hardcore republican and the other 10-20% are moderates with only a sliver of strong democrats.

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

 

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

Whatever you say, programs that give money to people in need is not what is bankrupting our country like republicans want you to think. It's corperate scandals and giveaways to big businesses and that is continually putting the country in deeper dept. 9 trillion dollars in dept? And that's low estimates! How can we say we are the wealthiest country in the world? At least poor countries are not in dept like we are. I guess it is because we have the industrial capacity to pay it off. Everytime we have a republican in office, they blow the budget, give wealthy people enough tax breaks to the point where they are actualy making money off the system, make the working class pay more, and basically just take advantage of working class citizens to benifit the rich. And then what do they do, they blame it on democrats and wellfare programs. They're just trying to brainwash you into thinking we are not capable of doing nearly as much with our money as we truely are. Frankly, I've always found democrats to be much more intelligent on the issues and trustworhty on manging our tax dollars so that it will benift all of us in one way or another, not just the rich. Giving tax breaks to the weathest people in the country is only making our econemy weaker and eventually will turn it into a third world country, which is what they want.

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

 

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

Whatever you say, programs that give money to people in need is not what is bankrupting our country like republicans want you to think. It's corperate scandals and giveaways to big businesses and that is continually putting the country in deeper dept. 9 trillion dollars in dept? And that's low estimates! How can we say we are the wealthiest country in the world? At least poor countries are not in dept like we are. I guess it is because we have the industrial capacity to pay it off. Everytime we have a republican in office, they blow the budget, give wealthy people enough tax breaks to the point where they are actualy making money off the system, make the working class pay more, and basically just take advantage of working class citizens to benifit the rich. And then what do they do, they blame it on democrats and wellfare programs. They're just trying to brainwash you into thinking we are not capable of doing nearly as much with our money as we truely are. Frankly, I've always found democrats to be much more intelligent on the issues and trustworhty on manging our tax dollars so that it will benift all of us in one way or another, not just the rich. Giving tax breaks to the weathest people in the country is only making our econemy weaker and eventually will turn it into a third world country, which is what they want.

I will disagree with you. I truely believe in "Reaganomics", and I have the 90's as evidence that it can succeed. If you give the wealthy tax breaks and put more money in thier pockets to invest, they will grow their businesses and create more jobs. In short, the working man has a better opportunity becuase the wealthy has more money. If you attempt to punish the rich for being wealthy, like Obama wants to do, then not only will the job market decrease, but all of the products you buy will go up. The rich have to offset their loss somehow and what better way than to charge more for the product and take it out of your pocket.

I do not believe that taxes go up under Republicans, but they sure do under Democrats! Isn't it funny how you and I both live in the same country but have such different perspectives.

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

 

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

Whatever you say, programs that give money to people in need is not what is bankrupting our country like republicans want you to think. It's corperate scandals and giveaways to big businesses and that is continually putting the country in deeper dept. 9 trillion dollars in dept? And that's low estimates! How can we say we are the wealthiest country in the world? At least poor countries are not in dept like we are. I guess it is because we have the industrial capacity to pay it off. Everytime we have a republican in office, they blow the budget, give wealthy people enough tax breaks to the point where they are actualy making money off the system, make the working class pay more, and basically just take advantage of working class citizens to benifit the rich. And then what do they do, they blame it on democrats and wellfare programs. They're just trying to brainwash you into thinking we are not capable of doing nearly as much with our money as we truely are. Frankly, I've always found democrats to be much more intelligent on the issues and trustworhty on manging our tax dollars so that it will benift all of us in one way or another, not just the rich. Giving tax breaks to the weathest people in the country is only making our econemy weaker and eventually will turn it into a third world country, which is what they want.

 

I will disagree with you. I truely believe in "Reaganomics", and I have the 90's as evidence that it can succeed. If you give the wealthy tax breaks and put more money in thier pockets to invest, they will grow their businesses and create more jobs. In short, the working man has a better opportunity becuase the wealthy has more money. If you attempt to punish the rich for being wealthy, like Obama wants to do, then not only will the job market decrease, but all of the products you buy will go up. The rich have to offset their loss somehow and what better way than to charge more for the product and take it out of your pocket.

 

I do not believe that taxes go up under Republicans, but they sure do under Democrats! Isn't it funny how you and I both live in the same country but have such different perspectives.

Right, and comparing America's econemy during the Clinton Administration to the Bush administration, your theory proves me wrong? I don't think you'll find wealthy people adjust prices according to taxes. Most wealthy people are stuck up assholes who couldn't care less about us. Money corrupts, the more you have, the greedier you get. We need the government to put a leash on these people so we can keep things in order from escalating out of control to a third world country like what has proven to happen all over the world and through history. If you compare government or union to non-union jobs, you will find the union ones have better pay, better rights for their workers, and better quality work to non-union industries in most cases. Then perhaps we wouldn't mind paying higher prices if it means we have higher salaries and the workers are happier because they have more rights, better pay, and the product is better quality. You don't realize how sick people are. We would still probably be having people work for slave labor if it wasn't for unions. The governemnt system (run under democrats) is looking out for people more then private businesses.

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

Janskeet said:

ferris209 said:

I would not call us "hardcore republican", I myself am an independent conservative, as I would tend to think about 75% of us here are. I would like to believe (and do assume) that the reason conservatives here are the majority is becuase of the demographics of the typical Star Wars fan. Most Star Wars fans are white, middle class, working, males in their late 20's and 30's. I assume that since this is the case, we have lived long enough to realize that welfare programs do not work, large government is never a good thing, taxes suck, and American defense is priority. The idealistic socialist ideas are usually that of college kids who don't know how this world even works. I, personally, do not like paying execessive taxes just to see my tax dollars spent on feeding and giving healthcare to some crackhead. Of course, this is just my assumption.

Well, I will agree with you that I don't like paying taxes to our current government. How can you just absolutely say that welfare programs do not work? There's always going to be people who take advantage of a system that gives out money to people. There's no way to get around it. Usually the number of people who take advantage of it is much smaller than the people who are using it responsebly. But you should've by now learned that you have to weigh out the bad with the good and realize that it is still helping out a lot of people in need who deserve it. I liked Bill Clinton's welfare program where he had people who were working and making under a certain wage get it and not just let unemployed bums get it. I found part of life is helping out people. I think our world is sick enough as it is without having to escalade it by refusing people services that we can easily supply if we're just willing to give a little. I think we are a sick society to think everyone should defend themselves. How do you tell that to a child who is born with difficienties in an unsupportive famiy?

 

I truely don't have a problem hepling folks out when they need, but don't fool yourself, our system is more often than not, abused. I am a Police Officer and I will tell you that most of the people I deal not only think "Disability" is a profession, but they feel they are entitled to it for some reason, most of them can get around just as good as the next person. Disability is highly abused and there needs to be some serious reform in that area. They sap the welfare system constantly. Here's what I'd do with the welfare system. Allow noone more than two years worth of any welfare or assitance program within any five year term, i.e. if Mary utilized welfare for a year then gets off of it for one year and uses it another year, she would have to wait two more years before she could utilize it again. Also, I would make it MANDATORY that EVERYONE who uses any welfare assiatance program (including W.I.C., Disability, and section 8 housing) should submit to a drug test at least quarterly, or more often if necessary. If they fail the test, then they get no assistance. I just think we need to wrangle the system a lot more than we currently do. Although I do agree that we shouldn't have a total "don't help noone" policy, but on the same token we need to tightly secure any welfare program and make sure it is not abused or overused.

Whatever you say, programs that give money to people in need is not what is bankrupting our country like republicans want you to think. It's corperate scandals and giveaways to big businesses and that is continually putting the country in deeper dept. 9 trillion dollars in dept? And that's low estimates! How can we say we are the wealthiest country in the world? At least poor countries are not in dept like we are. I guess it is because we have the industrial capacity to pay it off. Everytime we have a republican in office, they blow the budget, give wealthy people enough tax breaks to the point where they are actualy making money off the system, make the working class pay more, and basically just take advantage of working class citizens to benifit the rich. And then what do they do, they blame it on democrats and wellfare programs. They're just trying to brainwash you into thinking we are not capable of doing nearly as much with our money as we truely are. Frankly, I've always found democrats to be much more intelligent on the issues and trustworhty on manging our tax dollars so that it will benift all of us in one way or another, not just the rich. Giving tax breaks to the weathest people in the country is only making our econemy weaker and eventually will turn it into a third world country, which is what they want.

 

I will disagree with you. I truely believe in "Reaganomics", and I have the 90's as evidence that it can succeed. If you give the wealthy tax breaks and put more money in thier pockets to invest, they will grow their businesses and create more jobs. In short, the working man has a better opportunity becuase the wealthy has more money. If you attempt to punish the rich for being wealthy, like Obama wants to do, then not only will the job market decrease, but all of the products you buy will go up. The rich have to offset their loss somehow and what better way than to charge more for the product and take it out of your pocket.

 

I do not believe that taxes go up under Republicans, but they sure do under Democrats! Isn't it funny how you and I both live in the same country but have such different perspectives.

Right, and comparing America's econemy during the Clinton Administration to the Bush administration, your theory proves me wrong? If you compare government or union to non-union jobs, you will find the union ones have better pay, better rights for their workers, and better quality work to non-union industries in most cases. You don't realize how sick people are. We would still probably be having people work for slave labor if it wasn't for unions. The governemnt system (run under democrats) is looking out for people more then private businesses.

A trained monkey could have stood in for Clinton. The reason he looked so good is because he happened to be President during the "Technological Revolution" and he was President when the "Reaganomics" theory was in full swing. All of the money Reagan put back into the pockets of entrepreneurs in the 80's was paying off all through the 90's.  

As far as unions, they drive prices of the final product WAY UP. Because of them you pay about 30% more for anything you buy than you would otherwise. While they do some good, I think they are disastrous to our system overall. Let the market determine benefits and pay, not a mob run institution that strong arms the heads of businesses.  

edited: Right, and comparing America's econemy during the Clinton Administration to the Bush administration, your theory proves me wrong? I don't think you'll find wealthy people adjust prices according to taxes. Most wealthy people are stuck up assholes who couldn't care less about us. Money corrupts, the more you have, the greedier you get. We need the government to put a leash on these people so we can keep things in order from escalating out of control to a third world country like what has proven to happen all over the world and through history. If you compare government or union to non-union jobs, you will find the union ones have better pay, better rights for their workers, and better quality work to non-union industries in most cases. Then perhaps we wouldn't mind paying higher prices if it means we have higher salaries and the workers are happier because they have more rights, better pay, and the product is better quality. You don't realize how sick people are. We would still probably be having people work for slave labor if it wasn't for unions. The governemnt system (run under democrats) is looking out for people more then private businesses.

You said you're a cop right? You salary is paid for by the government right? While there might be some truth to what you said, I don't think so.

Well we all know Wall-Mart is a real good example to your "Reaganomics" theory, ferris209. They treat their employees like shit and it is one of the wealthiest corperations in the world! Without the government involved, you think they would give their employees anything? I read Wall-Mart was giving people applications to fill out for wellfare even though the company could easily give their employees more money. See they're taking advantage of the system too. Sure, Wall-
Mart prices might be low but that's only because they are trying to drive everyone else out of business so they can charge whatever they want.

originally poisted by ferris209: A trained monkey could have stood in for Clinton. The reason he looked so good is because he happened to be President during the "Technological Revolution" and he was President when the "Reaganomics" theory was in full swing. All of the money Reagan put back into the pockets of entrepreneurs in the 80's was paying off all through the 90's.

How dare you compare Clinton to a trained monkey. I haven't resorted to childish insults and I get labled as the self-righteous person. I don't label people as "liberal" or "conservative" because I don't think that accurately portrays who they are. Democrats are the ones who are more conservative with our budget. They're usually so busy trying to pay off all the money the republicans blew they don't even get a chance to show how much more responsibly they would spend it.

Well, I was generalizing, I'm not in a very good mood right now. The thing that I don't like is, the difference between Democrats and Republicans is not night and day like it seems our people like to catagorize them as. But I just feel Democrats take this country in a better direction in an inadeqate world. I find most wealthy democrats share the same views as the common man and earned their money more civilized than a lot or reps. Hilary made a lot of her money writing books and smart investing. Most republicans seem to be wealthy because they inherited it. Of course, I'm just generalizing, there's good people in both parties.

I consider myself to be a libertarian-minded Democrat, if that makes sense, but I'm not affiliated with any party.  That's as much as I feel like getting into my political beliefs here (no offense, I've just gotten into heated arguments over smaller things here and I don't want have to deal with this one).

Janskeet said:

originally poisted by ferris209: A trained monkey could have stood in for Clinton. The reason he looked so good is because he happened to be President during the "Technological Revolution" and he was President when the "Reaganomics" theory was in full swing. All of the money Reagan put back into the pockets of entrepreneurs in the 80's was paying off all through the 90's.

How dare you compare Clinton to a trained monkey. I haven't resorted to childish insults and I get labled as the self-righteous person. I don't label people as "liberal" or "conservative" because I don't think that accurately portrays who they are. Democrats are the ones who are more conservative with our budget. They're usually so busy trying to pay off all the money the republicans blew they don't even get a chance to show how much more responsibly they would spend it.

Dude, I said "a trained monkey could have" not Clinton is a trained monkey because of x, x, and x. It is a form of speech and used to create a point of reference.

GhostAlpha26 said:

Janskeet said:  I haven't resorted to childish insults 

Janskeet said: I thought you guys were smart?

 

Why bother with this one

heh, heh, good point.

I honestly think politics ought not to be discussed on a board like this....A lot of boards limit discussion of politics, even in off-topic sections.