ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Do you have any idea how stupid your reasons sound? Not only stupid but very arrogant.
Stupid platform the GOP has taken, isn't it? I prefered them when they were for small govt, accountability, and fiscal restraint.
Now, when they need votes they either use religious zealotry, bigotry, or outright falsehoods.
So, which of the three do you fit into?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by RS; 11-01-2005 at 09:11 AM..
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Bull, my man, bull. I see some conservatives spin facts all the time, and I see some liberals do the same. They're both called 'dishonest', and they're dishonest because they have something to gain (they're making money from their politics). But there's nothing in our limited life experiences that could convince me that "more liberals" or "more conservatives" do it, you just pay attention to one over the other.
On this thread you were honest enough to admit that the money in the 'poverty' programs goes to waste, pork and the bureaucracy rather than the poor. Props to you for that. However I haven't seen the type of criticism of the dems and their policies, on other threads that I have seen of the pubbies by conservatives on this thread. If not give me an example of some of the lefties wandering from the party line.
__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."
Trying to say it is worse now than before is nonsense. Not to let the pubies off the hook here, they are guilty as charged. Currently spending as a % of GDP is lower than during the salad days of the Clinton era. This is a result of the Growth of the economy overall.
If you're going to distort data and make things up, it's going to be difficult to discuss things with you. You keep throwing things out there, without backing them up.
Beginning in the 1990s, Clinton brought federal outlays as a percent of GDP down, and then Bush brought them back up starting in 2000. Here's a nice, conservative Cato Institute report to back up my claim:
The difference between the left and right is we'll criticize our guys when the don't do the right thing, the left always spins.
And you just spun, and you keep spinning in your previous sentences. The difference between the left and right is we know when we're playing political games, while you delude yourself into believing you're honest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by patsfan13
This thread is a prime example. The righties have criticized the Bush spending policies the lefties spin how they were better when at best it is a push when it comes to enlarging goverment (I am being extremely generous here).
The righties have been forced to criticize Bush because the spending has gotten so out of hand. If you checked threads from a few years ago, you would have seen numerous explanations, including blaming the Clnton recession, attributing it to necessary spending for the war on terror, and so on. The fact is the facts are so against you on this one that the righties are having trouble deluding themselves any longer.
If you're going to distort data and make things up, it's going to be difficult to discuss things with you. You keep throwing things out there, without backing them up.
Beginning in the 1990s, Clinton brought federal outlays as a percent of GDP down, and then Bush brought them back up starting in 2000. Here's a nice, conservative Cato Institute report to back up my claim:
And you just spun, and you keep spinning in your previous sentences. The difference between the left and right is we know when we're playing political games, while you delude yourself into believing you're honest.
The righties have been forced to criticize Bush because the spending has gotten so out of hand. If you checked threads from a few years ago, you would have seen numerous explanations, including blaming the Clnton recession, attributing it to necessary spending for the war on terror, and so on. The fact is the facts are so against you on this one that the righties are having trouble deluding themselves any longer.
But the best part of this is watching them continue to try...
Its really quite amusing. Its as if they know they've been swindled, and keep coming back for more.
Isn't that like the abused wife syndrome? Splains these peoples personalities perfectly.
They are so scared they are sucking their thumbs and hoping Bush makes the pain stop.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
On this thread you were honest enough to admit that the money in the 'poverty' programs goes to waste, pork and the bureaucracy rather than the poor. Props to you for that. However I haven't seen the type of criticism of the dems and their policies, on other threads that I have seen of the pubbies by conservatives on this thread. If not give me an example of some of the lefties wandering from the party line.
Couple of things here... first, the Republicans are a riper target for critisism because their party is in power. The 90's had a very different feel - Clinton and the Dems took more of the heat. I don't like the Democratic party (I'm a member of the LP), but I feel like I'm temporarily more aligned with them because the enemy of your enemy is your friend. Second, nothing done by any poster on this board (or even all posters combined) makes the example valid for all liberals and conservatives. This is one, small group of people with their own idiocincracies and doesn't extrapolate well to America at-large.
Couple of things here... first, the Republicans are a riper target for critisism because their party is in power. The 90's had a very different feel - Clinton and the Dems took more of the heat. I don't like the Democratic party (I'm a member of the LP), but I feel like I'm temporarily more aligned with them because the enemy of your enemy is your friend. Second, nothing done by any poster on this board (or even all posters combined) makes the example valid for all liberals and conservatives. This is one, small group of people with their own idiocincracies and doesn't extrapolate well to America at-large.
Pujo...I think you need a correction.
Like me, you identify more with Dems not because the enemy of your enemy is your friend...the GOP is not the enemy, although the Bush version which distorted conservatism so badly is.
The real reason you ID with Dems is because the only thing worse than a two party system is a one party system...which encroaches in areas of authoritarianism. I'm sure you know what Im talking about given your experience and broad world view. That and the fact that you've lived it to some extent, I would think.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
So, let me see if I get this straight. You typed a long post. I responded to most of it (in red) and you respond with the post here that I am quoting.
Does that mean that you cant debate, or debunk, my comments..and have no defense for what I said.... or are you just going to attack the messenger, which is the neo con game plan? Just wondering.
Nothing to debate. I just don't agree with any of your "red" comments.
I listed things that I was unhappy or disagreed with Bush & the Rep's.
I then asked you to list 5 things that you were unhappy or disagreed with the Dem's. And, you replied that I didn't reply to your reply.
List your 5 things if you want to. I'll see you on the football forum-NO POLITICS.
Parting Shot:
Here's another disagreement I have with Bush/cons- abortion. I think it should be legal for all liberal women so they don't raise liberal children.
Well, Bush lovers, who do you blame for this one: the Bush administration that set up the Department of Homeland Security or the contractors? Or can you find a way to deny responsibility, as you often do, and blame Clinton? Good luck!
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A dependence on no-bid contracts and inadequate oversight have contributed to extensive waste and misspending at the Department of Homeland Security, The Washington Post reported on Thursday, citing a congressional investigation.
In the latest report on the agency's spending, U.S. government investigators found problems involving "significant overcharges" or "mismanagement" in 32 DHS contracts worth a total of $34 billion, the Post said.
The findings were to be released on Thursday. The Washington Post said it had obtained a copy of the report.
According to the newspaper, the bipartisan congressional report says an explosion of no-bid deals and a critical shortage of government contract managers created a system prone to abuse.
So, let me get this straight. Because the media is reporting things that are happening under the Bush Administration, you think its never happened before? You think that there haven't been mismanagement issues on other government contracts? That is par for the course. Its been one of the problems with the Federal Government for DECADES. This is nothing new.
Hey, I have a bridge in Nebraska for sale. Would you like to buy it?
Re: More Bush administration incompetence
Linear Mode
