Fort Bend Owl Wrote:You know, McCain and Cornyn are only running at about 54 percent in Texas right now. Instead of obsessing about Obama and the democrats, maybe the republicans should take a hard look at their own party for a change and figure out what they need to fix.
Because I've got news for you, it's only going to get tougher in the future as minority populations continue to grow.
I voted for Obama in the primaries because I felt he had a better chance than Clinton to win tonight (still do and I think I was right - I'm not so sure Hillary would have won but maybe she would have). I voted for Obama in this election because I want America to have hope again and I want the world to respect America again. And despite what you think, it's clear that the majority of Americans feel the way I do.
Maybe you should respect our victory and for the good of the country, respect our new president.
I respect our President. President Barack Obama.
I DON'T respect "our" victory... because I don't believe it is "our" victory... unless you are saying that Bush was ALSO "our" victory. America spoke, and we elected a President. That is a victory for our system. If you are speaking of the Democrats, then you're missing (imo) the most important thing about BEING an American. It's the whole us/them mentality that SOME (not saying you) people in this country have that is the problem.
One approach won out over the other... and if that is what you mean by "our", then fine... but that doesn't mean to me what I think it means to you.
The Republican Party... at its core... is about smaller government. It is about getting out of people's way so that they can get things done... including helping each other. The Democratic Party... at its core... is about the government helping those who need help... BOTH are worthy ideals.
The problem is... at least in my opinion... that we have an increasing number of people who can't tell the difference between a want and a need... and don't want to get things done themselves. It is easier to vote themselves a pay raise (in some fashion or another) than to earn it. In the simplest, and most crass (for effect) example... Some people on government assistance (I'm thinking of Obama's aunt who lives in public housing, yet gave iirc 300+ to his campaign) just invested $300 of someone else's money and 4 hours at the polls... expecting to get back as much as $2,000 in tax credits... not to mention healthcare etc... all paid for by just a small percentage of the population. Not the rich, mind you... or at least not the top 2%... but instead, the 3rd-5th percentile. That's a tremendous return on her investment... and an amazing hourly rate.
Does it not say anything to us that there are more people unemployed than are expected to pay for all of the unemployment benefits? Not to mention all the other social services. That's a winning combination. You tax those earning 250, 200, 150... whatever the number is... Keep the deductions that allow people like Ms. Kerry, Perot, Ms. McCain, Buffet and the like from paying even as much in taxes as the AMT that was specifically designed to "catch" them... and you offer assistance not only to those who NEED it, but also to those who just WANT it.
I'm sorry, but in government you get more of what you encourage, and less of what you tax. We are taxing success and encouraging people to vote for the biggest handouts.
It's like putting out a sign at a college that says free beer. Some people (like you) support the policies and will vote for the party because they believe in the principles... SOME people will think its a smart strategy and be drawn to the novelty/ingenuity... and SOME people (I'm betting a decent number) will just go for the beer... MORE than enough to sway an election.
And we wonder why even Republicans are Pork fans. You can't win an election without offering something for nothing.