The US which tortures and kills innocent people, illegally spies on it's own populance, blows the value of the dollar to hell on cronies and a mistaken war, etc. etc.... yeh, about 70% of the population wants that US destroyed and a much better one to take it's place.
Blah blah blah... spare me your yammering about innocents, when your leftist ban on DDT has resulted in the deaths of 100 million people from Malaria since its inception. Bottom line is, all of your criticisms about Bush's zealous terrorism defense are nothing in federal intrusions that go with the higher taxes (in particular, carbon), the banning of the personal ownership of weapons, the nationalization of health care, that you people advocate. Under Bush, an almost statistically insignificant (out of a population of a few hundred million Americans) few muslims get sent to gitmo and some people get tapped. But you'll have police searching every house for illegal guns, monitoring every fire or fuel burnt, tracing every bank account, and yes, you'll be expanding, again, the IRS.... You live in a completely double think world, where the policies you propose are by their very nature far more damaging to the amount of freedom a person has than anything George Bush has ever done. Indeed, when you factor in tax cuts, environmental deregulation, a consistent record of siding with free enterprise, an overturn of the silly assault rifle ban, George Bush is the freest President his country has had since Reagan.
But really, all of those policies are red herrings. If Move-On is pro-American, name me one web page where Move-On advocates -any- policy that will:
a) improve the world share of American GDP b) improve American access to or control of world's natural resources. c) support American corporations, over foreign corporations
Please, just one. There aren't any. Your whole world view of sharing the planet peacefully through the United Nations precludes you from putting America first. That's all fine and dandy. I like Star Trek too. But, don't say that you are pro-American, because you aren't.
PS. The USA is going to win the war in Iraq, and Exxon Mobil will be investing billions of dollars in that country to bring back all those oil wells on line. The Iraqis are going to get stinking rich, and the USA is going to have an exclusive source of the world's largest source of petroleum, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.
Blah blah blah. At least our party believes in advancing an American agenda versus the world, rather than sitting there like the Dems waiting for the UN to rule everything.
If Moveon was wrong about Petraeus, how come he hasn't sued them?
Why bother?
More importantly, Petraeus LIED TO YOU. Things *SUCK* in Iraq. Why support him?
Actually, Petreaus's report is backed up by the Brookings Institute, hardly arch conservative. The fact of the matter is, conditions are improving in Iraq, and, even if the war were without any complications whatsover, Moveon would still be against it, because, MoveOn wants the United States to be destroyed.
The Left always does what they accuse the Right of doing
Well, let's not righteous... I mean, it's not like we've ever accused the left of expanding presidential power, being reckless with federal finances, inept diplomacy and involving our country in stupid, mismanaged wars, now, have we?
And I'll cheer God when you get cancer.:) I'm not being cute. I really, really hope you get cancer.
Hey, I thought you liberal types didn't believe in God. Oh, fancy that. Kinda hard to get divine justice from the Flying Spaghetti Monster, now, isn't it.
Hmmm, I wonder what country we bloodthirsty Republicans can bomb next. I'll have to think about that next time I run out to kick some homeless people. Sorry, but your kind doesn't believe in God... can't even have it on the pledge.... lol.
Besides, dumby. If I get cancer, I can really have the death penalty once, and if I don't believe in God, then what does that mean for you?
I just looked at the article, and I honestly couldn't get past the Cha Cha part. I mean, who seriously make anything called "Cha Cha" that isn't some sort of dog food or diapers for crippled canines. They should fire that guy just for doing that, even if he didn't own a piece of it.
Considering how hard the Republican Party has fucked the world those past few years, I think they're as evil as you can get. Consider this: Al Qaeda killed 3000 americans on 9/11. The Bush administration and its republican minions are responsible for the death of over 4000 american soldiers in Iraq, plus close to 1 million Iraqis, and 4 millions refugees.
This is a bunch of crack. First off, evil arabs killed the 3000 American soldiers. Your million Iraq figure is bloated beyond all possible lies, and even if were accurate, for the most part, Iraqis are killing each other.
So take your oil money, and shove it your ass. Traitor. Go ahead and cheer on Google for their censorship, and I'll cheer George Bush when your traitor ass is sent off to Gitmo.
So much for free speech from the left wing. The fault here really isn't Google, although they could arguably using a weak legal argument to be sympathetic to a particular group, it's MoveOn, whose basically taken a page from the book of scientology to try and avoid criticism of itself. What a bunch of thugs!
If you can't trust the ballots you can't trust the system. It's fundamental.
Well, that's the thing. And, Nixon could see that in 1960, although Gore could not in 2000. Let's the Dems "win" after 8 recounts, and suddenly Gore is president in 2000. How long do you think it would be, before every Republican on the planet began crying out that the "fix was in", and this was just part of an overall liberal conspiracy. It didn't matter who really won in Florida 2000. Even Iraq is less important, long term, than the national disaster that began when Al Gore's lawyers first contested that vote. From here on out, no matter who wins an election, we will not trust the people that counted the votes. At some point, mute protests from either side will give way to even greater distrust, and ultimately, we'll do what the Romans did in their electoral disputes - spend a century in civil wars until we beg for someone like a Julius Caeasar to come around and save us from ourselves.... at that point, sometime in the distance, Democracy will truly be dead, but nothing will save Al Gore from being the first man arrogant enough to throw the stone against the glass wall of our democracy, and for that, he deserves to be judged quite harshly, indeed.
Or you could stop being a fat american and drive a medium sized car
I'm not fat. I am built like Jet Li. I have less than 10% b.f., weight lift 3-4 times a week, and you can kiss my ass, when my giant tankmobile runs over your sissy Ford Mexideo.
My goodness you're right, I'm not rich enough and consumers aren't getting screwed enough.
So what's your stupid alternative. Hey, let's get a bunch of preachers to go and talk about civic action and community and the need for collective action to solve some problem, rile everybody up, and then, what will you get? A government agency stuffed with a bunch of incompetent buddies of all these preachers, and when absolutely nothing works, you'll wind up with everyone in that organization saying, "geez, we need more money."
There's no "argument" involved at all in this. I don't like it when a bunch of money grubbing idiots call me a sinner for what kind of movie I watch, and I don't like when a bunch of money grubbing idiots call me a sinner for the kind of car I drive. Jerry Falwell, Rex Humbard, Al Gore, Al Sharpton, Rachel Carson, the head of NOW, the boss of the Sierra Club, are all doing the exact same thing, and are cut from the same damn cloth - pointing at other people, dividing society, and begging for more money so they can do it more. If you took the head of every not-for-profit organization, and shot them, this world would be a better place, and of you fools that go and read the latest MoveOn.org action alert with baited breaths, or read on about some great liberal conspiracy, you are all just a bunch of stupid suckers.
Honestly, I don't like SUVs - as I prefer the mix of a genuine pickup truck for hauling stuff, and a family sedan for moving people. If I had more money, I'd get back my Pontiac GTO for commuting to the train station, or short family trips. But, if all these assholes keep bitching about my lifestyle, I'd just as soon buy an SUV loaded with a bunch of warmovies, guns, liquor and porn, and tell all of these faux-righteous jackasses to go fuck themselves...
I think we in the United States ( I am in immigrant from India) are so used to big cars as a way of life ( and I drive an SUV too) that we refuse to make changes that might inconvenience us just a wee bit but, may be better for our future.
Better for our future? The thing that frosts me is that environmentalists bitch so much about SUVs and V8 engines, as if, that's the problem. It's not the real problem. The real problem is insufficient electricity. Nuclear power is the answer for that. If enviros wouldn't have ruined nuclear power with all of their blocking activities, we would have been onto electric cars along time ago, because we'd have a grid with enough power to run them.
Or you could teach people how to actually drive those behemoths, assuming they have a real reason for doing so (no, hauling the crotch-spawn around in an SUV doesn't count).
You just wait until you have kids. Then I will laugh at you, as you try and contort a couple of car seats into some tiny japmobile. And, if you never have kids, then I'll still laugh at you, because you have eliminated your genetic destiny.
n the US (and I believe in most countries), the physical layer of telephone and cable tv is by definition not a free market because the government grants the phone and cable companies monopolies. It does this because fiber, coax, and phone cabling are natural monopolies:
That's actually not really true. Fiber, coax and phone cabling are all communications services, and they do compete against each other. The local governments provide a spot where these cables can go, but its up to the carrier to actually make use of each spot. For example, if you see a bunch of guys underground in the city of Philadelphia, they will be either driving a Comcast truck, a Verizon truck, or some other truck (usually a non-union third party contractor). I think cities actually charge for this in some way, or they have a tax on the service.
Only to be crushed by being undersold until you go bankrupt, then watch in horror as the prices go back up.
I think these problems are more in your head than they are anything else. Your whole argument is so much fear mongering to mask a political agenda... "we can't compete, so therefor, let's get the government to do everything for us." That's as silly as it is not true, because, people have competed, and, if you do have the government steal the lines that a company laid down, you'll only be creating a single entity with no competition at all.
After all, how did Comcast do it then? At one point, the only communications cable that ran to homes in the USA was, in fact, AT&T, a gigantic monopoly. Yet Comcast and other cable companies got through the red type, got their cable laid, and did it. And, to compete with Comcast, now, Verizon is running fiber everywhere.
The claim made is that you have been using more than your share of energy for the world. Countries like India and China have been using less than their share of energy. So if the only way you can use less energy is by living in HUTS, then that is what you are supposed to do!
You retard. We Americans have 15,000.25 megaton reasons why the USA will not live in huts.
No, people like SUVs because they were traditionally based on pickup truck designs. If you actually knew anything about cars, you would realize that in the 1970s, carmakers switched from body on frame and good steel and rear wheel drive to unibody and cheaper steel and front wheel drive. There were a lot of people that liked the way it was, and the only way you could get that was in a truck. To wit - people buy trucks and trucklike things because they like the way they drive! Body on frame is also safer in a lot of crash cases - sure unibody has crumple zones, but a good frame is like a cage. Also, until very recently, trucks and SUVs were cheap compared to cars.
Just, to make a sweeping statement about Detroit and trucks vs cars just shows that you totally don't know what you are talking about. Just because you like ricer fagmobiles, doesn't mean everyone else has to..
I'm not asking you to judge this family that you don't know.
But, you do...!
The basic problem is that Americans have become such wimps.
If that's not a judgement, I don't know what is. I don't understand how you can say ours is a nation of wimps when we are the only nation that has the balls to try and straighten out the mess that is the middle east. I don't see the Europeans in their. Truth be told, Europeans are all a bunch of pussies that can't even breed enough to keep their kind going. All the Cathedrals in France will be Mosques in a 100 years and Philip the Fair will be rolling over in his grave.
Really, you keep making this argument that Americans have to have less and share with the world? Why? Really? You do realize, as "evil" as some might make it, there is the alternative of exterminating the rest of the human race, really, just kill the rest of the planet off, so we could have the whole earth for the 300 million of us.
Bit higher than India's national average, isn't it?
Yes, it is, and when you try to make me lower my energy consumption, you are ultimately trying to make me poorer. But of course, like all Orwellian double thinkers, Enviros will argue that if you have to have smaller houses, smaller cars, less water, less washing, that you will somehow have more. I bet finding that more will be harder than finding Jesus, for sure.
I am sick of everybody pretending the free market is at work so everything is great. It isn't.
The whole point of the free market is, if you do not like the way companies provide a good or a service, you are more than welcome to secure your own investors, get your own right of way, run your own cable, and sell your own broadband.
As much as BushCo and the Republicans ballooned the government and borrowed, Democrats seem to be hell bent on raising taxes like no tomorrow. Not only do we have a tax increases for VoIP from this bill, but their so-called "childrens bill" would have raised cigarette taxes almost 60 cents a pack. Then, you have the looming expiration of the original tax cuts, the global warming tax increase (50 cents a gallon on gasoline, at least, plus an end to the mortgage interest deduction if your house is too big), then, you really, wind up, in total, with potentially the largest increase in taxes since Johnson was president.
All the Democrats had to do is keep taxes roughly the same, perhaps cut defense spending a bit, and quit the war in Iraq, the budget would be balanced, and they could claim the mantel of fiscal responsibility. But instead, they are going to raise taxes, spend on a ton of social programs, make it illegal to make fun of gender benders in the workplace... it's just silly. Right now, there are some Democrats arguing that they need to have someone run up against Barney Frank because he isn't gay enough... I mean, how crazy is that.
IT's like the only hope we Republicans have, is that Democrats would out-stupid us..., and honestly, the way we ran congress since 2000, that's pretty hard to do. But, Pelosi and Reid sure are making a good run for it. Oh yeah, raise taxes, go after gun owners and then make gender benders sacred cows... and that would just about hand the House back to us in 2010.
Slashdot Mirror
The US which tortures and kills innocent people, illegally spies on it's own populance, blows the value of the dollar to hell on cronies and a mistaken war, etc. etc. ... yeh, about 70% of the population wants that US destroyed and a much better one to take it's place.
Blah blah blah... spare me your yammering about innocents, when your leftist ban on DDT has resulted in the deaths of 100 million people from Malaria since its inception. Bottom line is, all of your criticisms about Bush's zealous terrorism defense are nothing in federal intrusions that go with the higher taxes (in particular, carbon), the banning of the personal ownership of weapons, the nationalization of health care, that you people advocate. Under Bush, an almost statistically insignificant (out of a population of a few hundred million Americans) few muslims get sent to gitmo and some people get tapped. But you'll have police searching every house for illegal guns, monitoring every fire or fuel burnt, tracing every bank account, and yes, you'll be expanding, again, the IRS.... You live in a completely double think world, where the policies you propose are by their very nature far more damaging to the amount of freedom a person has than anything George Bush has ever done. Indeed, when you factor in tax cuts, environmental deregulation, a consistent record of siding with free enterprise, an overturn of the silly assault rifle ban, George Bush is the freest President his country has had since Reagan.
But really, all of those policies are red herrings. If Move-On is pro-American, name me one web page where Move-On advocates -any- policy that will:
a) improve the world share of American GDP
b) improve American access to or control of world's natural resources.
c) support American corporations, over foreign corporations
Please, just one. There aren't any. Your whole world view of sharing the planet peacefully through the United Nations precludes you from putting America first. That's all fine and dandy. I like Star Trek too. But, don't say that you are pro-American, because you aren't.
PS. The USA is going to win the war in Iraq, and Exxon Mobil will be investing billions of dollars in that country to bring back all those oil wells on line. The Iraqis are going to get stinking rich, and the USA is going to have an exclusive source of the world's largest source of petroleum, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.
big dumbo party.
Blah blah blah. At least our party believes in advancing an American agenda versus the world, rather than sitting there like the Dems waiting for the UN to rule everything.
If Moveon was wrong about Petraeus, how come he hasn't sued them?
Why bother?
More importantly, Petraeus LIED TO YOU. Things *SUCK* in Iraq. Why support him?
Actually, Petreaus's report is backed up by the Brookings Institute, hardly arch conservative. The fact of the matter is, conditions are improving in Iraq, and, even if the war were without any complications whatsover, Moveon would still be against it, because, MoveOn wants the United States to be destroyed.
I mean, if Russia is a haven for spammers, couldn't we just block most Russian traffic?
The Left always does what they accuse the Right of doing
Well, let's not righteous... I mean, it's not like we've ever accused the left of expanding presidential power, being reckless with federal finances, inept diplomacy and involving our country in stupid, mismanaged wars, now, have we?
And I'll cheer God when you get cancer. :)
I'm not being cute. I really, really hope you get cancer.
Hey, I thought you liberal types didn't believe in God. Oh, fancy that. Kinda hard to get divine justice from the Flying Spaghetti Monster, now, isn't it.
Hmmm, I wonder what country we bloodthirsty Republicans can bomb next. I'll have to think about that next time I run out to kick some homeless people. Sorry, but your kind doesn't believe in God... can't even have it on the pledge.... lol.
Besides, dumby. If I get cancer, I can really have the death penalty once, and if I don't believe in God, then what does that mean for you?
I just looked at the article, and I honestly couldn't get past the Cha Cha part. I mean, who seriously make anything called "Cha Cha" that isn't some sort of dog food or diapers for crippled canines. They should fire that guy just for doing that, even if he didn't own a piece of it.
Considering how hard the Republican Party has fucked the world those past few years, I think they're as evil as you can get. Consider this: Al Qaeda killed 3000 americans on 9/11. The Bush administration and its republican minions are responsible for the death of over 4000 american soldiers in Iraq, plus close to 1 million Iraqis, and 4 millions refugees.
This is a bunch of crack. First off, evil arabs killed the 3000 American soldiers. Your million Iraq figure is bloated beyond all possible lies, and even if were accurate, for the most part, Iraqis are killing each other.
So take your oil money, and shove it your ass. Traitor. Go ahead and cheer on Google for their censorship, and I'll cheer George Bush when your traitor ass is sent off to Gitmo.
So much for free speech from the left wing. The fault here really isn't Google, although they could arguably using a weak legal argument to be sympathetic to a particular group, it's MoveOn, whose basically taken a page from the book of scientology to try and avoid criticism of itself. What a bunch of thugs!
It's a high end Desktop chip, Xeon are server chips.
You can have a Xeon desktop. Hell, I have a dual Opteron desktop. It would be called a "workstation".
If you can't trust the ballots you can't trust the system. It's fundamental.
Well, that's the thing. And, Nixon could see that in 1960, although Gore could not in 2000. Let's the Dems "win" after 8 recounts, and suddenly Gore is president in 2000. How long do you think it would be, before every Republican on the planet began crying out that the "fix was in", and this was just part of an overall liberal conspiracy. It didn't matter who really won in Florida 2000. Even Iraq is less important, long term, than the national disaster that began when Al Gore's lawyers first contested that vote. From here on out, no matter who wins an election, we will not trust the people that counted the votes. At some point, mute protests from either side will give way to even greater distrust, and ultimately, we'll do what the Romans did in their electoral disputes - spend a century in civil wars until we beg for someone like a Julius Caeasar to come around and save us from ourselves.... at that point, sometime in the distance, Democracy will truly be dead, but nothing will save Al Gore from being the first man arrogant enough to throw the stone against the glass wall of our democracy, and for that, he deserves to be judged quite harshly, indeed.
Or you could stop being a fat american and drive a medium sized car
I'm not fat. I am built like Jet Li. I have less than 10% b.f., weight lift 3-4 times a week, and you can kiss my ass, when my giant tankmobile runs over your sissy Ford Mexideo.
My goodness you're right, I'm not rich enough and consumers aren't getting screwed enough.
So what's your stupid alternative. Hey, let's get a bunch of preachers to go and talk about civic action and community and the need for collective action to solve some problem, rile everybody up, and then, what will you get? A government agency stuffed with a bunch of incompetent buddies of all these preachers, and when absolutely nothing works, you'll wind up with everyone in that organization saying, "geez, we need more money."
The article description says "High end", but the link describes a single processor configuration. Am I missing something?
Otherwise, this is a bogus argument
There's no "argument" involved at all in this. I don't like it when a bunch of money grubbing idiots call me a sinner for what kind of movie I watch, and I don't like when a bunch of money grubbing idiots call me a sinner for the kind of car I drive. Jerry Falwell, Rex Humbard, Al Gore, Al Sharpton, Rachel Carson, the head of NOW, the boss of the Sierra Club, are all doing the exact same thing, and are cut from the same damn cloth - pointing at other people, dividing society, and begging for more money so they can do it more. If you took the head of every not-for-profit organization, and shot them, this world would be a better place, and of you fools that go and read the latest MoveOn.org action alert with baited breaths, or read on about some great liberal conspiracy, you are all just a bunch of stupid suckers.
Honestly, I don't like SUVs - as I prefer the mix of a genuine pickup truck for hauling stuff, and a family sedan for moving people. If I had more money, I'd get back my Pontiac GTO for commuting to the train station, or short family trips. But, if all these assholes keep bitching about my lifestyle, I'd just as soon buy an SUV loaded with a bunch of warmovies, guns, liquor and porn, and tell all of these faux-righteous jackasses to go fuck themselves...
I think we in the United States ( I am in immigrant from India) are so used to big cars as a way of life ( and I drive an SUV too) that we refuse to make changes that might inconvenience us just a wee bit but, may be better for our future.
Better for our future? The thing that frosts me is that environmentalists bitch so much about SUVs and V8 engines, as if, that's the problem. It's not the real problem. The real problem is insufficient electricity. Nuclear power is the answer for that. If enviros wouldn't have ruined nuclear power with all of their blocking activities, we would have been onto electric cars along time ago, because we'd have a grid with enough power to run them.
Or you could teach people how to actually drive those behemoths, assuming they have a real reason for doing so (no, hauling the crotch-spawn around in an SUV doesn't count).
You just wait until you have kids. Then I will laugh at you, as you try and contort a couple of car seats into some tiny japmobile. And, if you never have kids, then I'll still laugh at you, because you have eliminated your genetic destiny.
n the US (and I believe in most countries), the physical layer of telephone and cable tv is by definition not a free market because the government grants the phone and cable companies monopolies. It does this because fiber, coax, and phone cabling are natural monopolies:
That's actually not really true. Fiber, coax and phone cabling are all communications services, and they do compete against each other. The local governments provide a spot where these cables can go, but its up to the carrier to actually make use of each spot. For example, if you see a bunch of guys underground in the city of Philadelphia, they will be either driving a Comcast truck, a Verizon truck, or some other truck (usually a non-union third party contractor). I think cities actually charge for this in some way, or they have a tax on the service.
Only to be crushed by being undersold until you go bankrupt, then watch in horror as the prices go back up.
I think these problems are more in your head than they are anything else. Your whole argument is so much fear mongering to mask a political agenda... "we can't compete, so therefor, let's get the government to do everything for us." That's as silly as it is not true, because, people have competed, and, if you do have the government steal the lines that a company laid down, you'll only be creating a single entity with no competition at all.
After all, how did Comcast do it then? At one point, the only communications cable that ran to homes in the USA was, in fact, AT&T, a gigantic monopoly. Yet Comcast and other cable companies got through the red type, got their cable laid, and did it. And, to compete with Comcast, now, Verizon is running fiber everywhere.
The claim made is that you have been using more than your share of energy for the world. Countries like India and China have been using less than their share of energy. So if the only way you can use less energy is by living in HUTS, then that is what you are supposed to do!
.25 megaton reasons why the USA will not live in huts.
You retard. We Americans have 15,000
They can't compete in the car market
No, people like SUVs because they were traditionally based on pickup truck designs. If you actually knew anything about cars, you would realize that in the 1970s, carmakers switched from body on frame and good steel and rear wheel drive to unibody and cheaper steel and front wheel drive. There were a lot of people that liked the way it was, and the only way you could get that was in a truck. To wit - people buy trucks and trucklike things because they like the way they drive! Body on frame is also safer in a lot of crash cases - sure unibody has crumple zones, but a good frame is like a cage. Also, until very recently, trucks and SUVs were cheap compared to cars.
Just, to make a sweeping statement about Detroit and trucks vs cars just shows that you totally don't know what you are talking about. Just because you like ricer fagmobiles, doesn't mean everyone else has to..
I'm not asking you to judge this family that you don't know.
But, you do...!
The basic problem is that Americans have become such wimps.
If that's not a judgement, I don't know what is. I don't understand how you can say ours is a nation of wimps when we are the only nation that has the balls to try and straighten out the mess that is the middle east. I don't see the Europeans in their. Truth be told, Europeans are all a bunch of pussies that can't even breed enough to keep their kind going. All the Cathedrals in France will be Mosques in a 100 years and Philip the Fair will be rolling over in his grave.
Really, you keep making this argument that Americans have to have less and share with the world? Why? Really? You do realize, as "evil" as some might make it, there is the alternative of exterminating the rest of the human race, really, just kill the rest of the planet off, so we could have the whole earth for the 300 million of us.
Bit higher than India's national average, isn't it?
Yes, it is, and when you try to make me lower my energy consumption, you are ultimately trying to make me poorer. But of course, like all Orwellian double thinkers, Enviros will argue that if you have to have smaller houses, smaller cars, less water, less washing, that you will somehow have more. I bet finding that more will be harder than finding Jesus, for sure.
I am sick of everybody pretending the free market is at work so everything is great. It isn't.
The whole point of the free market is, if you do not like the way companies provide a good or a service, you are more than welcome to secure your own investors, get your own right of way, run your own cable, and sell your own broadband.
As much as BushCo and the Republicans ballooned the government and borrowed, Democrats seem to be hell bent on raising taxes like no tomorrow. Not only do we have a tax increases for VoIP from this bill, but their so-called "childrens bill" would have raised cigarette taxes almost 60 cents a pack. Then, you have the looming expiration of the original tax cuts, the global warming tax increase (50 cents a gallon on gasoline, at least, plus an end to the mortgage interest deduction if your house is too big), then, you really, wind up, in total, with potentially the largest increase in taxes since Johnson was president.
All the Democrats had to do is keep taxes roughly the same, perhaps cut defense spending a bit, and quit the war in Iraq, the budget would be balanced, and they could claim the mantel of fiscal responsibility. But instead, they are going to raise taxes, spend on a ton of social programs, make it illegal to make fun of gender benders in the workplace... it's just silly. Right now, there are some Democrats arguing that they need to have someone run up against Barney Frank because he isn't gay enough... I mean, how crazy is that.
IT's like the only hope we Republicans have, is that Democrats would out-stupid us..., and honestly, the way we ran congress since 2000, that's pretty hard to do. But, Pelosi and Reid sure are making a good run for it. Oh yeah, raise taxes, go after gun owners and then make gender benders sacred cows... and that would just about hand the House back to us in 2010.