|support for leaders||DougSloan|
Jul 12, 2003 10:37 AM
|I don't think anyone has ever known a political leader with whom they agreed on all issues. Leaders are the best compromise "our side" can come up with at the time, of those who even want the office. The only leader with whom I'd agree all the time is me, and even then I change my mind now and then.
Lots of times we have discussions where we take sides, arguing details of support or opposition to a party or leadership position. Regardless, I'll just go ahead and fess up right now to the fact that I may not agree with everything Bush or the GOP does, but dammit they are who we elected and for whom I voted, and I'm standing by them. There ain't squat you can say to change my mind, as I trust them and support them. That's the thing with politics, as with friendships and family -- you choose your allies, and you loyally stand by them, right or wrong, good and bad.
So, there you have it. All attempts at nitpicking any claimed concerns about "my side" are a waste of time, so don't bother.
I just can't wait until Libertarians are elected.
|You mean "elected**"||MR_GRUMPY|
Jul 12, 2003 7:23 PM
|Note the asterisks.
My support goes away when my trust goes away. I never liked Bush, but it now looks like he did something very very bad. Something that will make Nixon's offenses looks like nothing.
If nothing turns up in the next month or two, Bush may not have to worry about running for reelection.
|it's a shame you didn't feel that way||MJ|
Jul 14, 2003 12:27 AM
|about Clinton when he was elected by 'us' - or is it just for leaders that you vote for? (how magnanimous of you)|
|'We' isn't 'us.' Don't you understand the right wing||OldEdScott|
Jul 14, 2003 7:23 AM
|mindset by now? The Left -- wait, all Democrats -- are treasonous and anti-American, and do not count.|
|Oh just great||Ridearound|
Jul 14, 2003 12:35 AM
|Another lemming giving our great "elected" leader carte blanche to carry on misusing the power of the office.
That just about sums the whole problem up:-
"There ain't squat you can say to change my mind, as I trust them and support them."
The ain't none so deaf as those who refuse to listen. Heaven help us...
|Since we can't 'nitpick' I'm not sure||OldEdScott|
Jul 14, 2003 7:07 AM
|of the purpose of this post. I take it you're happy and content politically, for which I congratulate you. Will defer nitpicking for a more appropriate time.|
|did you actually vote libertarian? (nm)||ColnagoFE|
Jul 14, 2003 7:14 AM
Jul 14, 2003 7:49 AM
|"you choose your allies, and you loyally stand by them, right or wrong, good and bad."
Wow! That is the worst thing I have ever read. At least we know where you stand. I guess Bush could start systematic genocide and you wouldn't have a problem with it since you chose him as your ally. Sad, very sad.
|There you go, 'nitpicking.' nm||OldEdScott|
Jul 14, 2003 7:55 AM
|Patently irresponsible abdication of civic duty. (nm)||czardonic|
Jul 14, 2003 10:14 AM
|Oh, czar ...||OldEdScott|
Jul 14, 2003 10:41 AM
|You ought to know 'there ain't squat you can say to change my mind.'|
|"My mind is closed" would've been more succinct, less vulgar. nm||czardonic|
Jul 14, 2003 10:49 AM
|Support GOP leaders the way they support Gray Davis?||Me Dot Org|
Jul 14, 2003 11:18 AM
|For those non-Californians, we are about to have a recall election of our Governor, financed and supported by members of the GOP.
In today's San Francisco Chronicle there was an article by editorial writer James Heavy. In it he suggests that Democrats should consider supporting a Republican in the recall. Why? I quote:
"....The GOP would have a major stake in the effectiveness of the state government and the need to have a responsible fiscal policy..."
In California, state budgets must be passed by a 2/3rds majority. The GOP does not have any major statewide elected officials, nor does it control the State House or Assembly. It CAN, however, block any budget proposal because Democrats do not have a 2/3rds majority in the House and Senate.
What the editorial writer is essentially saying is that the only way to get the GOP to work constructively on solving the budget crisis is to let them have the Governorship.
It the GOP wants constructive bipartisanship, perhaps it should indulge in a little self-examination. The "big tent" party vision of Lee Atwater has been steadily shrinking...
|That's a novel strategy.||czardonic|
Jul 14, 2003 11:41 AM
|However, Heavy's strategy hinges on what should be the long defunct notion that the GOP is the party of responsible fiscal policy. Ha! With a Republican in the Governors office, they'd simply revert to blaming the state's fiscal problems on minorities and immigrants, as they did under Pete Wilson.|| |