Sophandros Wrote:That some people choose to do those things (and even that is much more rare than people like to claim) is on them, but that's not the goal of the policy.

....but it's generally the outcome. No way you should pass me over for entrance into a university because of your color. You got the grades, have at it.

RebelKev Wrote:

RobertN Wrote:That is the same problem with Thompson, he is WAY too far to the right. If the right elects him as their candidate, it is over for them.

....and all of the Dems running are so far to the left they make JFK look like a Neo-Con. What's your point?

Did you even bother to read the post I was qouting or did you just jump on me because I posted something? He was calling the Republicans "average" then goes on to call the Democrats "socialists", frauds and Obama was just too far left. I said(without calling your candidates names) he was too far to the left to actually win the Presidency but he very well could be the Republican candidate.

Sophandros Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I will be voting for whoever the repubs nominate, but would probably vote Thompson in primary.

the next election tilts the courts one way or the other, probably be atleast 2 SCOTUS nominations coming up, the Dems will only nominate Activist/totalitarian Judges, the Repubs are atleast claiming they will nominate Constructionist judges, this is a big deal.

also, the Dems are suicidal on War on Terror and marxist on the economy. The most important thing is to keep them out of power.

Wow. Just Wow.

How can one be so brainwashed?

I think it is funny how he is saying the Democrats will select "activist/totalitarian" judges, yet he is advocating the right do the same thing if they choose the judges. These silly right wingers are

Sophandros Wrote:Brown v. Board was also an example of "activist" judges.

By the way, GG, if you're anti-choice, don't have an abortion. Plain and simple.

actually brown was decided on 14th amendment

Judicial activism is finding something that isn't there, i.e. legislating from the bench. Roe is good example of this, or Justice Ginsburg who goes to Foreign Law to make rulings which she should be impeached for. very different from constructionist judges.

the national DNC is trying to turn this country into the complete failure that Western Europe is. If not worse because even there they recognize late term and partial birth abortion to be an outrageous yet our Dem. president veto's partial birth abortion ban 3 times.........this combined with understanding Adam Smith vs. Karl Marx is why I will not vote for any Dem on the national level and will vote for the best candidate to keep them out of power, even if it means someone I disagree with on abortion and guns, rudy.

RobertN Wrote:

Sophandros Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I will be voting for whoever the repubs nominate, but would probably vote Thompson in primary.

the next election tilts the courts one way or the other, probably be atleast 2 SCOTUS nominations coming up, the Dems will only nominate Activist/totalitarian Judges, the Repubs are atleast claiming they will nominate Constructionist judges, this is a big deal.

also, the Dems are suicidal on War on Terror and marxist on the economy. The most important thing is to keep them out of power.

Wow. Just Wow.

How can one be so brainwashed?

I think it is funny how he is saying the Democrats will select "activist/totalitarian" judges, yet he is advocating the right do the same thing if they choose the judges. These silly right wingers are

constructionist does not equal activist

GGniner Wrote:

RobertN Wrote:

Sophandros Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I will be voting for whoever the repubs nominate, but would probably vote Thompson in primary.

the next election tilts the courts one way or the other, probably be atleast 2 SCOTUS nominations coming up, the Dems will only nominate Activist/totalitarian Judges, the Repubs are atleast claiming they will nominate Constructionist judges, this is a big deal.

also, the Dems are suicidal on War on Terror and marxist on the economy. The most important thing is to keep them out of power.

Wow. Just Wow.

How can one be so brainwashed?

I think it is funny how he is saying the Democrats will select "activist/totalitarian" judges, yet he is advocating the right do the same thing if they choose the judges. These silly right wingers are

constructionist does not equal activist

Whatever. Again, the right can't see their hypocracy. But I have come to expect that.

GGniner Wrote:the national DNC is trying to turn this country into the complete failure that Western Europe is.

Um, I was unaware GWB was a Democrat. He seems to be doing a nice job of bankrupting this country and making it "into the complete failure that Western Eirope is".

DrTorch Wrote:

aTxTIGER Wrote:some of these comments make Endzone2 sound like a scholar.....and im talking to those on both sides.

first of all, reagan is not a top 3 president. top 10, most likely, but he aint breaking through lincoln, washington, and jefferson. he would be in that 6-10 range with wilson, monroe, fdr, and truman.

Don't flatter yourself. Wilson? The one who force fed Alice Paul, and threatened to have her committed to an asylum?

What about Teddy Roosevelt? William McKinley?

i would put teddy roosevelt 4th. McKinley....probably 10-15.
1. Lincoln
2. Washington
3. Jefferson
4. TR
5. Jackson
6. FDR
7. Truman
8. Monroe
9. Reagan
10. Wilson
11. Polk
12. Madison
13. Eisenhower
14. Cleveland
15. McKinley
16. Adams
17. Hayes
18. Nixon
19. A. Johnson
20. JQ Adams

Jimmy Carter: Inflation 18% Unemployment 12% Interest rates 18% Russians in Afganistan, Hostages in Iran, Energy Crisis at home, 75% tax rates on upper incomes. A Boycott of Moscow games which resulted in Russians Boycot of our LA games 4 years later. Carter had a 3 to 1 majority in Congress, but he couldn't get along with his own party to get things done. We had Communist dictators up and down Central American. Russian's even beat us in basketball when Jimmy was in charge.

Reagan came in during one of the lowest points in American History. He cut taxes that improved the economy, made peace with the evil empire after calling the Russians bluff on Nukes. That strong stance forced Russian people to reject Communism and led to the breakup of the Soviet Bloc. Today the biggest growth in international markets are in eastern Europe. Had Reagan not been so strong against the Russians, much of those markets wouldn't have had the chance to become emerging markets today.

Reagan won Massachusetts. You have done very well when your a Conservative Republican and you win that state and about 48 others. Only Minnesota went to Mondale......only because Mondale was from there.

The Savings and Loans Scandal that involved the Rose Law Firm with Hillary Clinton and many folks just like them were one of the reason for the recession that hurt George Bush Sr re-election in 1992. Bush made a decision bail out the savings and loans on his watch instead of spreading the bailout out the long term which resulted in a short recession during his presidency, but would restore the economy for the long term. It worked, but the election cycle didn't give him the time he needed. Bush Sr broke his no new taxes pledge to save the government from shutting down and compromised with Congress for the good of the country. Democrats broke their promise to control spending making Bush look like a fool for holding up his side of the bargin. Years later Bush Sr looks like a better president than people gave him credit for. He put the country first. He was very good at foreign policy. He got his beat bad by Clinton in '92, but he's got to be way ahead of Clinton and his son at this point. Clinton didn't act and GWB perhaps acted to fast with Iraq. The fact that Clinton didn't deal with North Korea, Bin Laden, or Iraq and left it up to GW Bush to handle shows he lacked the experience in international affairs. He had experience in affairs, but those were domestic. GWB perhaps lacked the diplomatic skills his father had.

Get over the abortion thing for Christ's sake. So many bigger issues out there than a woman's right to choose.

All of the current Democratic candidates are socialists. Just look how they all support universal healthcare. That's the fastest way to kill any good healthcare we have. Hillary is the worst of them all.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0507/4230.html

Read that and try and tell me she's not a socialist.

fsquid Wrote:Get over the abortion thing for Christ's sake. So many bigger issues out there than a woman's right to choose.

Agree 100%. To me the biggest issue is how the Democrats want socialized medicine. Worst. Idea. Ever.

Yeah, it's a much better idea to be forced to choose from an extremely short list of health care providers in your HMO, while watching your deductibles go up while your coverage goes down.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Yeah, it's a much better idea to be forced to choose from an extremely short list of health care providers in your HMO, while watching your deductibles go up while your coverage goes down.

All that **** started under Clinton. Got another, dumb***, and unresearched complaint?

How old are you?

RebelKev Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Yeah, it's a much better idea to be forced to choose from an extremely short list of health care providers in your HMO, while watching your deductibles go up while your coverage goes down.

All that **** started under Clinton. Got another, dumb***, and unresearched complaint?

How old are you?

Insightful commentary. Did someone else have to type it for you?

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Yeah, it's a much better idea to be forced to choose from an extremely short list of health care providers in your HMO, while watching your deductibles go up while your coverage goes down.

Maybe you should look at the company you work for or the coverage you elected before you start whining about it. My healthcare deductible went down ~2 years ago, and has not risen since.

GrayBeard Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Yeah, it's a much better idea to be forced to choose from an extremely short list of health care providers in your HMO, while watching your deductibles go up while your coverage goes down.

Maybe you should look at the company you work for or the coverage you elected before you start whining about it. My healthcare deductible went down ~2 years ago, and has not risen since.

For my company, the number of providers has decreased and the deductible has gone up.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Yeah, it's a much better idea to be forced to choose from an extremely short list of health care providers in your HMO, while watching your deductibles go up while your coverage goes down.

Maybe you should look at the company you work for or the coverage you elected before you start whining about it. My healthcare deductible went down ~2 years ago, and has not risen since.

For my company, the number of providers has decreased and the deductible has gone up.

Is that the fault of the American health care system, or is it a problem with the plan that your employer provided?

Somewhere.... Sometime....... the right will finally come to grips that we have socialized medicine right now..... the only problem is the one's with jobs are paying for it. We aren't getting the bang for our buck. You wouldn't think twice about passing a levy for police and fire protection or a water levy for sewer service. We need to start putting Doctors and Hospitals in the same mindset.

GrayBeard Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Yeah, it's a much better idea to be forced to choose from an extremely short list of health care providers in your HMO, while watching your deductibles go up while your coverage goes down.

Maybe you should look at the company you work for or the coverage you elected before you start whining about it. My healthcare deductible went down ~2 years ago, and has not risen since.

For my company, the number of providers has decreased and the deductible has gone up.

Is that the fault of the American health care system, or is it a problem with the plan that your employer provided?

Well, the American health care system is motivated by profit so I'll have to say it's their fault. They're trying to squeeze as many dollars from the American public as possible while providing as few benefits as possible.

It is what it is.