[schrocat]

The former President of the United States never recieved over 48% of the votes cast in either presidential election. When you don't agree with a party or an individual it's comforting to try and paint supporters as "out of the mainstream".

Not refering to the core of the party as being out of the mainstream at all. Bush won as a wartime President, and with the added assistance of an inflammed Christian base.

Bush won a clear majority of the vote. If only a "rabid 10%" of the Republican party supported him and his policies he would be mending fences on his ranch today.

I don't know about that one. Remove the clinic bombers and his numbers would definitely come down...kinda pedestrian math actually. Might match his first popular vote numbers...I can't recall those numbers, was it a blowout?

I assume that you are trying to alude that you are a former Republican - no offense, but B.S. You are as much of a Republican as I am a Sandinista! No Republican would compare members of his own party with whom he had an honest disagreement to a terrorist organization (that type of hyperbole is pure Democratic demagoguery).

Drum roll please....WRONG! Dang. You'll get one right eventually.
Card carrying Republican...former Libertarian. I just keep the W sticker on my car (like everybody else)for job security (when can we take these stickers off btw it's starting to feel like Passover). You can search for me under McCains PAC contributors list if you wish.

In terms of McCain, his appeal to the left is directly proportional to the degree that he is percieved to be in conflict with Republican party policies.

...and I should have a problem with that? Actually I thought his appeal was directly proportional to the number of his Saturday Night Live appearances.

The truth is that if he ever became the nominee of the Republican party, your "unabiased" media, and leftist supporters would turn on him even quicker than they turned on Lieberman.

Lieberman was turned upon? I didn't notice. I did notice his Social Security belly flop...he should have seen the bus wheels coming on that one.

Only the terminally naive would believe that McCain is fundamentally out of sync with the values of the Republican party. Despite his open disagreements with GW, he shares the core values of the Republican Party. If you believe any differently, you probably believe Hillary Clinton's recent move to the center is sincere.

Boy oh boy! If only we had heard more of that in 2000!!! Can I take this time to ask you to make a donation to John McCain? I'll match you.

As a final point, I don't quite get the conection between ones net financial worth/medication strength and entitlement to sympathy/compassion/understanding. To assume that ones wealth mitigates personal problems is decidely pedestrian.

I can only assume you've taken the sentence "having to have the ACLU bail him out" literally. I was refering to the ACLU (his favorite group of all time) stepping in to attempt to keep the States Attorneys office from checking into his multiple doctors and their multiple prescriptions.

As I said, it is doubtful that you and I can agree on anything political.

Wrong again. We agree on being in the same party...

In my profession, I know when I have an opportunity to change minds and influence opinions, and when I don't.

Can you bend spoons also? ...j/k

In this case, it's obvious that I'm not going to change your opinion about anything,

so what if you don't? no biggie.

so what type of soft corals do you have?

off topic.

[NoSump]

Can you bend spoons also? ...j/k

That would be a lot easier!


So, you are a "former" Libertarian?

I've had the impression that Libertarians must even agrue with themselves in private! I've never met a group of more personally "disagreeable" people in my life. I understand that a requirement of party membership is that one must have been dropped on their head as a child. 70% of the Libertarian agenda is right on the money - the other 30% is pure "looney tunes".

Have a good day - I've got to go bend some spoons.

Chuck

[schrocat]

Originally Posted by NoSump

Can you bend spoons also? ...j/k

That would be a lot easier!


So, you are a "former" Libertarian?

I've had the impression that Libertarian's must even agrue with themselves in private! I've never met a group of more personally "disagreeable" people in my life. I was under the impression that a requirement of membership was that one was dropped on their head as a child. 70% of the Libertarian agenda is right on the money - the other 30% is pure "looney tunes".

What is looney tunes specificly? 30% seems high.
In North Florida today, most Libertarian candidates seem to be disgruntled Republicans who didn't get backing from the GOP. In the past, the party members localy seemed to me to be (IMO) almost "Greenish".
That perception is changing rapidly.
I think it might have to do with a popular radio host who comes on before Rush in our AM market.
Fiscal conservatives have been duped and abandoned by this administration.
People who want less government and transparancy have been abandoned by this administration.
People who agree with the seperation of church and state have been abandoned by this administration.
People who want an end to illegal immigration have been abandoned.

...and no offense. But if we had it their way...and yours apparently, we'd all just lock arms and march into the deficit ocean without a peep.

The Dems are not the only folks "misrepresenting their core constituents to appeal to an extreme element of their party"...both sides should ditch these folks.

[acer]

HMMM.. I could have sworn that I just was trying to learn, and communicate, about reef aquariums and then- BAM- I found that this website , even a moderator, is completely absorbed with their hate of the rebublican party. GET OVER IT!!! Your party lost. Take a Pill or something. Can we get back to "reefing" or NOT. If not- I will be one of the many people that sign on to be part of this site and then sign off, never to return. I know, I can hear you now- "NO great loss"- well that is what your party has been saying for a while now. Better take a look- you lost the house, you lost the senate, and you lost the White house. Maybe us "little guys" do make a difference and you "smart people" should start paying attention. Just a thought------------

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by acer

Can we get back to "reefing" or NOT.

The General Discussion Forum is NOT the appropriate forum for the discussion of reef-related topics. I believe I have pointed this out to you previously.

If you are unable to discuss politics and current events with other members of the community in a civil manner, you should refrain from participating in such threads. Your continued rude posts in this forum will NOT be tolerated.

[Ninong]

The President is definitely talking about "personal accounts" and not "private accounts," so it looks like he got the memo. I think.

"I repeat, personal accounts do not permanently fix the solution." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 16, 2005


Additional comments by the President on the Social Security issue:

"If you're a younger person, you ought to be asking members of Congress and the United States Senate and the president what you intend to do about it. If you see a train wreck coming, you ought to be saying, what are you going to do about it, Mr. Congressman, or Madam Congressman?" —George W. Bush, Detroit, Mich., Feb. 8, 2005


Not quite related to Social Security but informative nonetheless:

"You work three jobs? … Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that." —George W. Bush, to a divorced mother of three, Omaha, Nebraska, Feb. 4, 2005


Related to Social Security but not all that informative:

"Because the — all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those — changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be — or closer delivered to what has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled." —George W. Bush, explaining his plan to save Social Security, Tampa, Fla., Feb. 4, 2005