I'm seriously considering voting for Obama...

Saw a funny(not really) clip of Obama on the rope line talking to a plumber that owns his own business. You know the guy. He is the new billionaire as a few on here would have you believe, and by God he just needs to pay more!

He actually told this man he doesn't want to hurt him, but he wants to "spread the wealth". Someone sent it to me in a youtube segment from fox news. I have looked for other news agencies and not a single one is running it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY4K23Y7Qas

I am curious. Since wealth redistribution is such a noble thing, why can't dems just say it in the light of day? And why do republicans not recoil from being labeled conservative, but democrats hate being called liberal(except among friends)?

 

Because Liberals have never met a perceived social "injustice" they didn't like.

 

Funny because I am actually a democrat and conservative. However democrats that are liberal, do not like being labeled liberal. You can call it an insult but it represents a definitive path on social, economic, and foreign policies. Just as conservatism does.

The opposite of liberal is conservative, not neo-con. You use neo-con as an insult for everyone that does not agree with you. I guess it works better for you than facist(though I have seen you use it), goose-stepping(though I have seen you use it), and nazi(though I have seen you use that as well). If I were trying to use liberal as an insult, I would have said pinko-commie liberal. But I merely said liberal. And I said nothing about moderates, much less self-proclaimed moderates with a decidedly left of center lean. And since you refuse to allow anyone to characterize what you say or think, don't bother doing that to me either. As usual, you can't stay on point.


And of course, you chose to completely ignore the "liberal" idea stated clearly by Obama to "spread the wealth". :lol:

 

Where did I say this about moderates? Again, you can't stay on point. I was talking about liberals and conservatives, not moderates. And who says I was referring to you? I merely said self proclaimed moderates with a left of center lean. That could be a lot of people on here. But since you can't answer the original point of my post and instead insist on focusing on what I am...

Probably because I am not a "right wing guy" as you have described.

To quote yourself, "I am the world's friggin' expert on what I think, so why don't you try telling us what you think, instead of what I think?"

I have said it before, but you ignore it because it doesn't fit into your world view of goose-stepping, facist, nazi, neo-con, conservative ideas that clash with your liberal ones.

I don't think the federal govt should regulate or pay for abortion. This should be up to the states, and if the community wants it, abortion should be legal. I am not for gay marriage, but for legal unions among gay couples. Regardless, the Feds should not get involved and again it should be handled by the states. I am not against social welfare programs or expanded access to medical care. I am against abuse of the programs which has been systemic and requires reform. I could go on and on.

As it turns out, on many social issues I am quite liberal, and on many economic issues, I am quite conservative. Democrats in the south are traditionally more conservative than our north-eastern brethren so that would explain how the republicans carry the south so easily. Sometimes I vote for democrats and sometimes for republicans. I am not a party line democrat nor would I ever just vote for a republican. Each race is different and requires attention to the issues that are important to me.

So in effect, despite you trying to incorrectly stereotype me(even though you despise it when it happens to you), I am actually a moderate.

 

No Red, I was talking about Liberals and Conservatives. You interjected moderates into the conversation. Shall I have the court reporter read the transcript back to you?

No Red, I am quoting you. I just have not bothered to do a search to pull up all your various quotes. But everyone here has seen you use them enough to know I am telling the truth. Deny it if you like.

Below is an actual example of trying to characterize someone:

and

See a difference? No? Doesn't matter, because everyone else does. Your penchant for touting rules that you personally never obey is beyond tiresome. Can't you argue anything on it's merits?

No Red, I have been this way my entire life. You just had to have it compiled and spelled out for you because you are not perceptive enough to have gathered it from what I have posted. You only see the conservative because you don't approve of it. It's not my problem if you need the prescription on your glasses changed.

So you claim. And all the while characterizing me as the right winger. Tit for tat amigo. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

 

Good article by Peggy Noonan, conservative columnist from WSJ:

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html

Finally, some conservatives with integrity, that I agree with. In La. in the 70's and 80's, I registered Dem because of the closed primaries, you voted in the Dem primary or your vote didn't count. I always voted repub for president. Moved to Tx in 87, registered repub ever since, but quit voting repub for pres after Bush I. I saw the repubs go "pro business" to the exclusion of being "pro american". There is something wrong with that party, and the conservative columnists see it and a few of them are having the guts to speak out about it. If they could find some fiscal responsibility, stop welfare for corporate american, and put in place policies that help the middle class instead of just the upper class, they might get me back. The party needs to cleanse itself, but you can't do that until you admit there's a problem. There are problems with the dems to be sure, right now, I think they are smaller than the problems with the repubs.