is a failure based charity.

I will raise you my eye poking stick for your pot stirring stick.;)

is a failure based charity.

... is a charity based on promoting failure. [coffee]

I will raise you my eye poking stick for your pot stirring stick.;)

wow, no kidding, thats one heck of a statement....I am anxious to see how fast this one gets out of control.

:D.................. :p

is a failure based charity.


I agree but the MAJORITY of VOTERS in this country seem to love it. [verymad]

I think it was Ben Franklin who said once the populous realizes it can vote itself benefits the country and government are doomed or something to that effect. Amazing how relavent a statment from the 1700's still is.

The Democrats want to be your mommy.

The Republicans want to be your daddy.

I just want to be treated like an adult.

The Democrats want to be your mommy.

The Republicans want to be your daddy.

I just want to be treated like an adult.

WOW, that is an incredibly intelligent and well put statement.

Who wants to start making bets on how long this thread lasts? LOL.

Not as long as my suggestion that only those who have served in our military or are paying taxes earn the voter's franchise. :cool:

although i will be voting Republican in November, it's pretty amazing that after 2 terms of a Republican prez, record high fuel prices, a massive mortgage crisis, a deficit in the trillions of $$$, recession, insanely high federal gov't spending, just to name a few of our current problems, the best that we can do is sit around and bash the party that hasn't held the White House in 8 years. since it seems that most of us tend to vote towards the right, maybe we should be talking about what's wrong with our own party.

Well, thanks for showing up to the party! [laugh]

True conservatives have been bashing the Repubicans (no typo!) ever since Ronaldus Magnus left the Oval Office.

So, will your McCain chad be a referendum on his Obama-ness?

Well, thanks for showing up to the party! [laugh]



So, will your McCain chad be a referendum on his Obama-ness?

i'm not really sure what that means, but my ideal candidate hasn't run since 2000- Pat Buchanan. if we could ever get a third party going in the U.S., intelligent conservatives like Buchanan might stand a chance in a general election, but until then, every 4 years will bring up the choice between tweedle dee and tweedle dumber. JMHO

OK - that's no surprise.

I'd yank the lever for Pat just for his immigration policy (which, the last time I checked, was hovering somewhere between ZERO and treating illegal immigration like an invasion by a sovereign foreign entity! [roll])... but his isolationist tendencies lean towards the extreme - and I'm no globalist by any stretch!

We've had 3rd parties before; both of the current ones used to be just that... eventually, any 3rd party will get morphed into the power environment of politics.

I believe this country needs a fundamental shift in the representative mechanics paradigm of a democratic republic... i.e. constitutionally change the voter's franchise to match a citizen's engagement and responsibility for the country with his or her authority for same.

For example, if you wish to vote, you should have to pay for it; either through military service, with taxes on your contribution to the economy, etc. Did I mention no PACs or professional lobbyists? :)

Give a society freedom, and it will choose wisely in aggregate as well as through time.

IMO, Pat (or perhaps one of his acolytes) should have a senior cabinet position in every administration!

OK - that's no surprise.


For example, if you wish to vote, you should have to pay for it; either through military service, with taxes on your contribution to the economy, etc. Did I mention no PACs or professional lobbyists? :)
.

I agree with you in limiting the right to vote- but you imply that a person "buys" a right to vote or has to earn it. I think that misses the point.

The point is that only those who have a stake in things should get to have a voice. This is why the right to vote was originally limited to those who could own land.

Back in the day, the majority of gov't issues had to do with land-- settling disputes, regulating sale, registering title deed, etc. In the Founder's eyes, it made perfect sense that only those who owned land should have a voice in the institution that so dearly impacted their interests.

Otherwise, you'd have that very scenario playing out where people vote themselves a portion of someone else's money-- using the police power of the state.

That's why Alexander Tyler wrote in "The Fall of the Athenian Republic"
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, and from dependency back to bondage."

I agree with you in limiting the right to vote- but you imply that a person "buys" a right to vote or has to earn it. I think that misses the point.

The point is that only those who have a stake in things should get to have a voice. This is why the right to vote was originally limited to those who could own land.

Back in the day, the majority of gov't issues had to do with land-- settling disputes, regulating sale, registering title deed, etc. In the Founder's eyes, it made perfect sense that only those who owned land should have a voice in the institution that so dearly impacted their interests.

Otherwise, you'd have that very scenario playing out where people vote themselves a portion of someone else's money-- using the police power of the state.

That's why Alexander Tyler wrote in "The Fall of the Athenian Republic"Quote:
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, and from dependency back to bondage."


WOW!!! That quote is right on the mark.

The only problem with the idea of only land owners voting is that there are so many foreign owned pieces of property today.

WOW!!! That quote is right on the mark.

The only problem with the idea of only land owners voting is that there are so many foreign owned pieces of property today.

so the millions of Americans who rent apts, homes, or live in condos or co-ops that don't own any land but pay thousands in taxes like us homeowners do, don't get a say in their gov't?
BTW, one of the reasons that only land owners were allowed to vote, was to keep voters white and male. if they could've thought of a way to keep voters protestant, they might have came up with a law for that too.

I was raised a Democrat by Democrat-leaning parents. Two years in college left me with the "Blame America First" mentality. Luckily,many years ago I adopted a right leaning independent philosophy. I too wish a third party would emerge I could be proud of. However,I will be voting for Sen. McCain this fall. Sen."O" has gotten this far based largely on liberal white guilt. If only Colin Powell could have been talked into running. He knew better,as it is a thankless job. God Bless America.

I agree but the MAJORITY of VOTERS in this country seem to love it. [verymad]
That's because Americans...No people as a whole are SHEEP!!! They navigate to who ever is willing to give em a free meal!!!
They don't realize that the wolfs (Democrats) are hiding under the sheep skin!!


I think it was Ben Franklin who said once the populous realizes it can vote itself benefits the country and government are doomed or something to that effect. Amazing how relavent a statment from the 1700's still is.
Yep unfortunately a democracy cannot succeed the long term, UNLESS enough of us can educate those acustom to a free ride that they can have so much more if they'll just break loose from that govt. crutch and make their own way!!

I am listed as undecided, that way I can vote for the candidate I feel is best suited for the position. As far as I am concerned any potential candidate for the presidency that turns there back to the flag and does not partake in the singing of our national anthem, or at the very least hold their hand over their heart, is unfit to lead this nation. One could only imagine what would happen to this country if someone like that got into office.


Tim

I am listed as undecided, that way I can vote for the candidate I feel is best suited for the position. As far as I am concerned any potential candidate for the presidency that turns there back to the flag and does not partake in the pledge of allegiance is unfit to lead this nation. One could only imagine what would happen to this country if someone like that got into office.


Tim
are you referring to the video of Obama not placing his hand on his heart during the singing of the National Anthem?

are you referring to the video of Obama not placing his hand on his heart during the singing of the National Anthem?


Your correct. My bad, I will edit accordingly.



Signed,

DeeDeeDee

What I think...

I'm a Registered Republician, but I don't care who you are as long as you make sense...

I think that if America as a whole would get off their dead rear and DEMAND from our leaders what they wanted, things would change. I often feel like in in a herd of cattle heading for slaughter.

Great quote up there, btw...

Your correct. My bad, I will edit accordingly.



Signed,

DeeDeeDee

Obama claims that his grandfather taught him that you put your hand on your heart during the Pledge of Allegiance and stand at attention during the National Anthem, but his grandfather was incorrect. it seems all the other candidates in the video knew the proper protocol for the Anthem, and had their hands on their heart.
might have been an honest mistake, but you'd think a man running for the nation's highest office would know better.

although i will be voting Republican in November, it's pretty amazing that after 2 terms of a Republican prez, record high fuel prices, a massive mortgage crisis, a deficit in the trillions of $$$, recession, insanely high federal gov't spending, just to name a few of our current problems, the best that we can do is sit around and bash the party that hasn't held the White House in 8 years. since it seems that most of us tend to vote towards the right, maybe we should be talking about what's wrong with our own party.


Well said Chpmonk!

It just amazes me how the Republicans can be so adamant about the failures of the Democrats and, all the while, sit and watch our wonderful country be destroyed from within by the current occupant of the White House.

If the best we can do is throw insults at each other, things will not improve. We can complain all we want, but the people in office represent the majority of the voters. This is a democracy. So I have to conclude that most voters are happy with the situation. Especially if their best argument is to be mad and throw insults at a group that is not in power. Sad.

Meanwhile we have astronomical debt, veterans and troops being used as political pawns and thousands more dead, an economy dependant in the good will of the Chinese and health care if you can afford it.

Isn't it time we sat down and figured out what our real needs and priorities are? Decide to work on what counts instead of blaming the boogyman for every problem?

[QUOTE=Hvytrkmech;2172572]I am listed as undecided, that way I can vote for the candidate I feel is best suited for the position. As far as I am concerned any potential candidate for the presidency that turns there back to the flag and does not partake in the singing of our national anthem, or at the very least hold their hand over their heart, is unfit to lead this nation. One could only imagine what would happen to this country if someone like that got into office.


Yes, so true. One can only imagine.

I've never seen Bush without his lapel pin flag. And I've never seen him make a symbolic mistake by looking in the wrong direction during the national anthem. Unfortunately, his mistakes are not symbolic, they're real and very damaging. But fortunately, his lapel pin was in the right place.

Sometimes real deeds are more important than symbols. But, then again, all the people that love Bush and voted for him seem to feel it's so important to find some other place to point their anger. Or maybe, just maybe, all you guys that are staunch Republicans are perfectly happy with the way things are going in this beautiful country. I'm not. I love this place and I'm worried. Can't we do better?

HOHN,

As soon as you decide to limit the vote to a chosen few, you have to decide who that group will be and who it won't be. Who will be enforcing it and that the present rules no longer apply. It's chaos and the the end of the country as we know it. It's a coup.

Fortunately, to advocate a coup in this country is still legal. But unwise and unproductive.

Better might be to demand openess and responsibility from a secretive administration. To look beyond the boogeyman mentality. Stop screaming names at each other.

Somehow we do have to get beyond the complacency and stand up for our faultering country. But we have to do it together, united. Further division just weakens us further.

It's nice that we can be so comfortable here that we no longer have to care, but I'm afraid that time is comming to an end. We have to care and standup for what we believe. We have to live together or we'll fail together.

We all want things to be better. We all have similar needs. But we can't exclude a certain group, especially one that was previously included, and make things better. If you look below the surface you might find that differing views are really trying to achieve the same things by different means.

I agree with you in limiting the right to vote- but you imply that a person "buys" a right to vote or has to earn it. I think that misses the point.

The point is that only those who have a stake in things should get to have a voice.


The point is that those who freely engage in activities which benefit our country such as military service or gainful employment have earned "a stake in things"... responsibility & authority are best suited in equal proportions. Too much of one usually frustrates the other.




As far as Obama's candidacy, I yield the floor to the words of Abraham Lincoln, who encapsulated B. Hussein accurately - if not prophetically - thus: "He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know."



That's all for now - I'm off to check my tire pressure.....

XLR8R,

I noticed you used the name "B Hussein" in your comments. Are you implying that Obama is somehow similar to Saddam? If so please fill me in!! I must have missed something.

It reminds me of an interview I heard the other day with a "man on the street". After some conversation, the interviewer asked him if he was implying that Obama was similar Osama Bin Laden. Obama-Osama. The guy said, "Well, it's only one letter off".

Just astounding.

The point is that those who freely engage in activities which benefit our country such as military service or gainful employment have earned "a stake in things"... responsibility & authority are best suited in equal proportions. Too much of one usually frustrates the other.




As far as Obama's candidacy, I yield the floor to the words of Abraham Lincoln, who encapsulated B. Hussein accurately - if not prophetically - thus: "He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know."



That's all for now - I'm off to check my tire pressure.....


Speaking as an outsider, I've got some questions on your ideas. What constitutes gainful employment? Does any tax contribution count? Does employment, without tax contribution count? How long do you need to be employed? How old? How much?

I don't know what the state of agriculture is in in the US, but in Canada, farmers generally post a loss in income, so they are basically income neutral, are eligible for subsidies, etc. So if farmers don't contribute taxes to the economy, do they qualify to vote?

How about people working minimum wage jobs. In Alberta, if you make less than a certain amount of money (I believe its around $300 in two weeks), you do not have to pay income tax. Does that qualify as gainful employment? To make less than $300 in two weeks, at $8/hr, thats a little less than 40 hours two weeks. So if they are full time students in college or university working 8 hours a day on weekends, they would not meet said criteria.

What about age? If taxes or military service is the requirement, would I (if I was a US resident) have been able to vote when I was 15? I was gainfully employed, working 35 hours/week when I was in high school in a grovery store. If a 15 year old is ineligible to vote due to age, should the 25 (or 35) year old co-worker, doing the same job, for the same money, be eligible? Arguably, the 15 year old would be more educated on the issues thanks to social events being discussed in social class.


Something that should be implemented is mandatory voting. Voting is not a right, its a responsibility, and it should be maintained. Make voting a tax deduction (as incentive), and some sort of profeciency on the issues at hand. I'd rather someone educated that doesn't have an opinion one way or another vote, than someone who feels strongly on a subject because thats what they were told.

I'd rather someone educated that doesn't have an opinion one way or another vote, than someone who feels strongly on a subject because thats what they were told.

What a great view! People voting that have not bought into the official "talking points" of their party. People that are not influenced by the scare tactics of those in power. Wow, people not just throwing ridiculous insults while acting like they really belive them.

The importance of education cannot be overstated! But it's a low priority for so many. Too many times the uneducated ones are the ones that think they know more than the educated.

Education is like a journey. You can never look forward to a journey and know what it will bring. But you can look back afterward and marvel at all you've seen. Then go forward with a greater understanding. No one can really understand how important it is till they've been there.

How do we achieve a well informed populace ready to deal with reality?

Yes, so true. One can only imagine.

I've never seen Bush without his lapel pin flag. And I've never seen him make a symbolic mistake by looking in the wrong direction during the national anthem. Unfortunately, his mistakes are not symbolic, they're real and very damaging. But fortunately, his lapel pin was in the right place.

Sometimes real deeds are more important than symbols. But, then again, all the people that love Bush and voted for him seem to feel it's so important to find some other place to point their anger. Or maybe, just maybe, all you guys that are staunch Republicans are perfectly happy with the way things are going in this beautiful country. I'm not. I love this place and I'm worried. Can't we do better?[/quote]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are an eloquent poster, and obviously passionate for your beliefs, I applaud and respect that. Although I agree with a fair portion of what you state, I must tell you one thing: DO NOT ever twist or manipulate anything I state into you own self serving conjecture. My post was edited to minimally simplistic facts to keep it respectful.

Secondly,

I will never be herded with the masses, thus my decision to be listed as undecided.

Thirdly,

I agree this country needs to change big time, and as I posted previously in an other thread that got locked, there is no better view than from in the trench's.

Fourthly,

Although I meet the requirements to run for the presidency, does it mean that I am qualified to actually do the job? I think not.

If you were lying on an operating table awaiting a quadruple bypass, and you found out that I, as the operating physician, only had 180 days experience in the medical field, would you still want me to perform the procedure? After all, my experience will have a direct impact on the quality of your life for the next 4 years. One thing for sure, the change you seek will most likely not be the change you get.

One more question if you please. If a white candidate belonged too, and openly attended a racially biased church with a preacher nationally known for his radicalism, would we even be having this debate right know?


With respect for your views and opinions,


Tim

although i will be voting Republican in November, it's pretty amazing that after 2 terms of a Republican prez, record high fuel prices, a massive mortgage crisis, a deficit in the trillions of $$$, recession, insanely high federal gov't spending, just to name a few of our current problems, the best that we can do is sit around and bash the party that hasn't held the White House in 8 years. since it seems that most of us tend to vote towards the right, maybe we should be talking about what's wrong with our own party.
A few of points.
Yes we've had a republican president for 8 yrs. During those 8 yrs what have we endured.

We started those 8 yrs with a real recession, one that got it's start well before this president took office.
We got hit on 9/11 which caused this already weak economy to spiral right into the ground.

What did this president do to counter these issues.
He cut our taxes to stop the recession.
He sent troops to Afganistan and routed the Taliban.
He pushed for an energy bill that would have allowed more offshore drilling as well as ANWR. The DEMs filibustered this bill thus killing it. Had this bill passed we'd have that oil on the market today.
Now had Bill Clinton not Vetoed a similar bill in 94 or 95 We would have had that oil even sooner.
The housing crisis was caused in part by "flippers" treating real estate like stocks. The constant buying and selling artificially drove up home values.
Another issue was the fact that many people were going out and buying more than they could afford. When the balloon payments increased many of those buyers just walked away leaving the lenders holding the bag for houses that are worth less than what is owed on the mortgage. To blame the current administration for these issues would be a reach at best.
As listed above the skyrocketing fuel prices could have been thwarted in the mid 90s and again early in the Bush administration.
The president has asked congress to allow drilling in these banned locations again but Nancy Pelosi chose shut down congress and take a vacation without even allowing a vote on the issue.
Why would she not allow congress to do what they have been elected to do?
Because it would pass! She and Harry Reed among others have made it a full time job to keep this president from succeeding at anything. Politics at it's very worst!!
Now some will say that increased production will not bring down the prices yet when President Bush lifted the presidential ban on offshore drilling the mere threat of drilling created a 16.00 per barrel drop over the first week. Then when Barrack Hussein Obama changed his view because of political expediency that he might be willing to compromise on offshore drilling we got another drop in oil prices.
The deficit is compounded by many things.
The Clinton recession, the 9/11 attack, fighting 2 wars, high fuel prices and our current economic slowdown which has been worsened buy the high fuel prices.
Now as to the recession....We are NOT in a recession.
a recession occurs when real gross domestic product (GDP) growth is negative for two or more consecutive quarters.
We have yet to see negative growth in any Qtr in either this yr or the previous yr.
As to bashing the DEMs;
We have to remember these are the folks that promised tons of legislation in the first 100 days.
What have they done?
In a word.....Nothing!
They promised to do something about the skyrocketing fuel prices yet since they took control of congress fuel prices have doubled!! The president can't create or pass the bills, he can only sign or veto them.
Now I'm not saying that President Bush and the republicans in congress are perfect in any way. they are not as conservative on spending as I would like but no one on the left has proved that they wouldn't spend even more on wasteful govt.
The major mistakes I've seen from the President and the Republicans in congress are;
Not forcing 24 hr debates during the Judicial filibusters that the DEMs led during the republican control of congress.
Waiting for the U.N. to make a decision on Iraq. We should have hit them long before we did instead of waiting for the U.N. to decide against going.
Not increasing troop levels in Iraq sooner than we did.
The latest presidential blunder was to not call congress back from their vacation for an emergency session for an energy bill.
Make em put their money where their mouth is.

If you were lying on an operating table awaiting a quadruple bypass, and you found out that I, as the operating physician, only had 180 days experience in the medical field, would you still want me to perform the procedure? After all, my experience will have a direct impact on the quality of your life for the next 4 years. One thing for sure, the change you seek will most likely not be the change you get.

One more question if you please. If a white candidate belonged too, and openly attended a racially biased church with a preacher nationally known for his radicalism, would we even be having this debate right know?


With respect for your views and opinions,


Tim[/QUOTE]


Tim,

Thankyou for your kind words.

I certainly don't intend to twist what you say for my own benefit.

To answer your bypass example, I just have to say that I don't want the man with minimal experience. I also don't want the doctor who follows the failed policies of the doctors who lost their patients in the past, regrdless of how long he's been performng the operation. What a horrible choice to have to make!

Neither Obama nor McCain would be my first choice. I also won't use flag etiquette as proof that one does not love his country. Or even worse, as some have implied, that he is a terrorist in disguise. These are not real issues to me and I won't be sucked into them very far as they discredit whoever says them more than they discredit the candidate. As far as McCain goes, I consider him a man who is way over his head in this game and perfectly comfortable with using our troops and veterans as pawns to get his own way. A man who has openly praised Bush and said he agrees with him on a number of issues. At best he's Bush lite. I wouldn't expect to be told the truth, see practical creative solutions, or even meaningful dialogue while he's in office and he has an excellent chance of winning the election. The next presidential term may just be a long harsh winter with spring at least eight more years away.

My quest is to stop the screaming and dishonest pandering.

Too bad that issues seem to be the last thing on most people's mind when it comes to choosing between two poor choices that have bubbled to the top of the heap.

Thanks for your civil tone.

capt.Ron, something that jumped off the page at me that you left out was immigration. eight years, tens of million of illegal aliens, tens (maybe hundreds) of billions spent on services to people who shouldn't be here, high crime rates among illegals, and not one piece of meaningful legislation to deal with those who are here or to stem the tide.
Ann Coulter says it's the first time she's had to agree with the rantings of liberals- that the only possible reason she has come up with for this president and a Republican controlled Congress (until recently) doing absolutely nothing about the illegal alien fiasco, is to help their buddies keep the flow of cheap labor available. companies that use an illegal workforce save millions in salary, benefits, workman's comp, payroll tax, soc. security, etc. aside from the hardships that it causes legal Americans, it has the potential to cause grief for his own party. in every survey done, an overwhelming number of Mexicans list their politcal affiliation as Democrat (over 80%), so giving 12 million (or more) illegals citizenship and the right to vote, can very easily swing close elections away from the president's own party.

Is It NBA Or NFL?




36
have been accused of spousal abuse




7
have been arrested for fraud





19
have been accused of writing bad checks





117
have directly or indirectly
bankrupted at least 2 businesses




3
have done time for assault



71,
repeat

71 cannot
get a credit card due to bad credit


14
have been arrested on drug-related charges


8
have been arrested for shoplifting



21
currently
are defendants in lawsuits, and




84
have been arrested for drunk driving
in
the last year


Can
you guess which organization this is?

Give
up yet? . . Scroll down,





























Neither,
it's the 435 members of the
United States Congress


The
same group of Idiots that crank out
hundreds of new laws each year
designed to keep the rest of us in line.

Good post.

But I don't see all the new laws as designed to keep us in line so much as designed to satisfy a shallow and scared constituency so they can be re-elected.

Election and then re-election is the game. And the tactic is fear.

at least a long time senior member of the senate could never get away with driving away from a party while drunk, with a woman who was not his wife, plunge the car off a bridge into the water, escape while leaving the young woman to drown, go to a friend's house without ever notifying police or fire of the incident or that there was a drowning girl in a car, and never get charged with a crime because of his family name.

capt.Ron, something that jumped off the page at me that you left out was immigration. eight years, tens of million of illegal aliens, tens (maybe hundreds) of billions spent on services to people who shouldn't be here, high crime rates among illegals, and not one piece of meaningful legislation to deal with those who are here or to stem the tide.
You are correct I inadvertently left that out.
This is something that neither party has tried to fix. In all actuality it doesn't really need fixing. At least not in the terms of new laws.
If every peace officer in this country had been reporting illegals when detected through, traffic stops, arrests, etc... as well as ICE busting employers (as they are starting to do now) we could all but shut down this trickling invasion on our country. I don't have a problem at all with immigrants, it's those who break the laws of this country to get here that gets my goat.
It's funny how the liberals scream and cry about how the president has no plan for dealing with the illegal immigration problem yet when ICE raids those businesses that employ these illegals they scream and cry even more because ICE is deporting those illegals who not only broke our laws to get here but many also had forged documents and stolen identities of American citizens.

Ann Coulter says it's the first time she's had to agree with the rantings of liberals- that the only possible reason she has come up with for this president and a Republican controlled Congress (until recently) doing absolutely nothing about the illegal alien fiasco, is to help their buddies keep the flow of cheap labor available. companies that use an illegal workforce save millions in salary, benefits, workman's comp, payroll tax, soc. security, etc. aside from the hardships that it causes legal Americans, it has the potential to cause grief for his own party. in every survey done, an overwhelming number of Mexicans list their politcal affiliation as Democrat (over 80%), so giving 12 million (or more) illegals citizenship and the right to vote, can very easily swing close elections away from the president's own party.
I like Ann!!
She looks really good in a tight leather skirt!!:o
Yes giving the illegals amnesty was a major mistake. I'm glad enough American people spoke out against it thus causing the bill to die in congress.

I am listed as undecided, that way I can vote for the candidate I feel is best suited for the position. As far as I am concerned any potential candidate for the presidency that turns there back to the flag and does not partake in the singing of our national anthem, or at the very least hold their hand over their heart, is unfit to lead this nation. One could only imagine what would happen to this country if someone like that got into office.

Tim

I would imagine they would do just fine, cause if we lived in country where things like that determined our "patriotism", it would be a pretty sad place. its a PIN, and a HAND.

I would imagine they would do just fine, cause if we lived in country where things like that determined our "patriotism", it would be a pretty sad place. its a PIN, and a HAND.
It's not that such actions or the lack of "Determines" ones patriotism but rather it "reflects" it!!
Not wearing the pin would have been nothing but to go out and make the statement that this was an intentional act to make a point leaves him and his patriotism fair game.
Not saluting or placing ones hand over their heart during the national anthem or the pledge raises many more questions about the kind of respect he has for his country.
Now that the primary is over and he needs the undecided and the less conservative Republicans to vote for him he has chosen to wear that pin that he earlier said he wouldn't wear. Could this be for political expediency just as his now willingness to compromise on offshore drilling??
Can anyone say Flip Flop???[nonono]

When the population can vote themselves government benefits, that is the death of a democratic free market society.

I would imagine they would do just fine, cause if we lived in country where things like that determined our "patriotism", it would be a pretty sad place. its a PIN, and a HAND.

You missed my point Ian.

Simply put, a sign of respect opens the opportunity to earn respect.



Tim