So long.

ferd, i am not a candidate for the loonie bend. i don’t use that type of language with you. if you look back at history you will see some did move from the democratic party to the repubs. and i didn’t say dems championed it. please don’t put words in my mouth. debate all you like but take the insults and throw them out. that is so below your character, sir.

Jesus. I was replying to tek.

I almost feel as if I should just chuck NQ in toto. I am tired of being taken to task for being outspoken by those who take my comments out of context.

This isn’t the first someone has taken me to task for some alleged impropriety or offense –I’m either anti-south (even though I’m an Okie by birth and live in Tennessee or too liberal or too conservative). There are bozos who think my use of “Goober” makes me anti-south. Christ. If I don’t toe the anti-Obama line to a tee, I’m a marxist, and if I don’t draw my pistol every time I post, then I’m just not a real conservative.

Fuck all of you who think this shit.

I want no part of this and I am done. I have battled your bots for you when you had no words and I did it without complaining.

Really, fuck this.

thanks for your comments to me about the democrats turning republican.

Ike appointed Earl Warren and Bill Brennan, two of the greatest liberal Justices. I think Nixon partially redeemed himself for Watergate by appointing honorable conservatives Blackmun, Powell, and Burger. Nixon’s appointees protected the Constitution, with a strong record on privacy, abortion, death penalty, free press and executive privilege, standing up to Nixon in the Constitutional crisis.

There was a time when we didn’t have to fear Repub Presidents appointing hacks and party radicals to the Supreme Court.

Bill Clinton’s years brought sustained growth and prosperity, although he largely lucked out with the real estate and dotcom bubbles. So in 2000, the Republicans backed Bush because his father had been popular except for the economy, which Clinton fixed, so with that hurdle out of the way, Dubya seemed like a safe bet. Good economy, and no wars of any significance (after Clinton got us out of Bush Senior’s Somalia fiasco).

My point is that the Republicans backed off the ultra-conservative views of previous GOP candidates by putting in a different faction of the party. They backed off the evangelicals and hot-button issues by putting forth a candidate who promised to be a compassionate conservative. Unfortunately, I don’t think they knew how corrupt Cheney was, and he was the real power of Dubya’s first term.

Now that the Democrats have gone ballistically liberal, with the consequences we are only beginning to fathom, the Republicans will come back with promises of fiscal solutions, and hopefully backing off the happy warrior stuff. In turn, I hope the Democrats swing back to the center, ideally with Hillary at the helm.

please do your homework and don’t start off slamming posters on here. i am so daxx tired of it.

I was somewhat surprised in researching this piece to learn the Neo-Cons were derived from the same gene pool as the old Conservative Democrats. It’s kind of hard to wrap one’s mind around some of the convoluted twists and turns these political philosophies take in the course of a few decades.

I guess the point I was trying to make in my observations was that if you look back into the history of the political evolutions of the major parties, the lines are often blurry. The politicos who are not feathering their own nests are few and far between. If the political climate calls for liberalism, both parties lean that way, then they lean conservative when the voters want less liberalism. It’s all about getting elected and re-elected so they can use the power for the benefit of themselves and their friends. And that applies to both parties equally, IMO.