The irony I have observed in Democrats

[Froderik]

Democrats are the first ones to say that automobiles are killing the environment. Automobiles do cause pollution, so why don't Democrats quit buying cars? Why is it that I often see expensive cars and low fuel effiency SUVs with bumper stickers for Democrat politicians? Why is it that I also see old beat-up cars burning oil and blowing clouds of grey smoke also bearing bumper for Democrat politicians? If these people REALLY subscribe to the Democrats' playbook, then they better repair their cars or ideally just quit driving. Ah ha! You say that Republicians are guilty of these same things, therefore I shouldn't be talking. Well, sure, but you don't hear us bitching about SUVs and all that. No one likes pollution, and we should to enforce the anti-pollution laws we have before enacting more.

On a similar subject, it is also very ironic that Democrats drive expensive cars and live in expensive homes. Isn't the Democratic party the party of the poor person? Why don't these people sell their expensive belongings and give the money to the government so that it can be used for social programs? If they don't want to do that, they can walk into any place of worship and make a donation that will be used much more efficiently to help people in need than any government program.

Have you ever noticed that Democrats claim to be the party of the "Working man"? They imply that wealthy people don't work. They imply they wealthy people somehow got their wealth through some illegal means. Did it ever occur to a Democrat that a person may have become rich by working very, very hard? I guess they didn't consider this option. Did it also occur to Democrats that there are just about as many wealthy Democrats as Republicians? I guess the Dems don't like to make it known to the populace that some of Dems have tons of money. The reason for all of this is that Democrat politicians believe that the common man should be enriched through government handouts, but not by actually working hard and getting ahead. This gives the Democrat policians control over the populace. Sounds like a Socialist government to me.

(No, I didn't author this..FR13)

[Antigen]

On 2003-11-27 20:22:00, Froderik13 wrote:

"Democrats are the first ones to say that automobiles are killing the environment. Automobiles do cause pollution, so why don't Democrats quit buying cars?

Cause cars were invented and roads laid before the socialists took over so much of our industry. So cars exist and have really not changed all that much in the past 50 years or so. If we had a truely free market in automobile manufacture and not a nationalized monopoly, someone would probably have come out with a more efficient or alternative fuel vehicle way back in the `70's when ppl started really getting concerned about air polution and geopolitical oil wars. If it were available at a reasonable price, I'd buy one.

But Democrats don't think that way. Instead, they want to pass laws to take our money and spend it according to some plan they think might eventually result in a more efficient car. But, since the funding goes through political agencies, those decisions are all political and hardly ever make any sense at the other end.

Our Constitution is in actual operation; everything appears to promise that it will last; but in this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0300001479/circlofmiamithem' target='_new'> Ben Franklin Letter to M. Leroy, 1789.

[kaydeejaded]

Poor people and rich people are the mostly likely to vote Republican

Middle class are the mostly likely to vote for Democrats

I would love to vote for Nadar and ride a horse
fertilzer fun good for the environment and exersise.  :tup:



and I am on my knees praying to God that you are not a Republican Alex.   :sad:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach him to use the Net and he won't bother you for weeks.
--Anonymous

[Froderik]

and I am on my knees praying to God that you are not a Republican Alex

No. Up until now, and perhaps until my dying day, I've been a strict non-voter.  :smokin:

[Antigen]

Voting for Nadar is like saying "Hey! Can you super size that government for me, please?"

I think the best answer to our current debacle is to take Moe's frequently offered avice and S P R E A D  O U T!!

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
"Isn't your pants' zipper supposed to be in the front?"
--Hobbs to Calvin

[Froderik]

That would be Moe of the 3 Stooges?

[Antigen]

Yes

Until you've lost your reputation,you never realize what a burden it was or what freedom really is.

 


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/068483068X/circlofmiamithem' target='_new'>MARGARET MITCHELL

[kaydeejaded]

that is why I did vote for Gore lotta Good that it did *sigh*

super size that government for me lol!
good one

The disrespect for the possession laws fosters a disrespect for laws and the system in general... On top of this is the distinct impression among the youth that some police may use the marihuana laws to arrest people they don't like for other reasons, whether it be their politics, their hair style or their ethnic background.
                                                                     
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm' target='_new'>Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding

[Antigen]

Yeah, before the 00 election, Republicans warned us that if we voted for Gore, we'd see a massive expansion of government powers, the surplus turned into a huge debt, tax increases and growing trade deposits. Well, we did and that's just what happened. Thanks for the heads up!

Actually, I've been voting Libertarian since I started voting. I know they're not going to sweep the presidency. But they don't ever offer "None of the above" as an option on the ballot.

People who are willing to give up freedom for the sake of short term security, deserve neither freedom nor security.

--Benjamin Franklin