No, that is not the evidence, that is just the rat eating the cheese. The evidence is in the policy that they push, the free cheese if you will. "here you poor unemployed people with no money, here is some cheese" "no no no, no need to go get a job where you can earn money and buy hamburger, you'll do fine with the cheese" " we have a government program designed especially for you" Of course that is an exageration but sometimes it is called for. I think there is an "Alonzo" video you should watch. Perhaps I might dig it up for you someday. You of course are a liberal. Almost every single one of your post screams it. You aren't alone, your compadre likes to play like he isn't one either but you two stick out like a couple of egrets in a flock of crow. It's beside the point because you just aren't going to see it my way and I'm fine with that.
The Dems sure haven't picked them up? Maybe "the poor" ought to go another direction don't you think? Meanwhile, here in middle class land, the wealthy are keeping us down. We will REVOLT!!
IMO, tax cuts for the rich are a good thing, IF they do what the tax cuts were designed to do. Both sides should acknowledge a big problem with the last round of cuts is that not enough did that. They didn't get richer by investing in the lower classes (job creation) and growing the economy. Don't cut taxes for the rich and then not regulate what they do with it. That's a lot of what made like minded people angry in 06 and 08. Then the Dems turned around and pushed overly controversial policies like health care instead of concentrating solely on the economy. The stimulus bill is not so bad without the stench of health care reform on its heels. That was stupid. Most guys can put on the beer goggles and bang the chick with great body but not so cute face (we call her "butterface"), but if her twat stinks, then she deserves ridicule and shame. Centrist folks can take some bad as long as it's mostly good. Far lefts and far rights still haven't quite figured it out...or maybe they have...hence the constant power shifts.
I haven't heard it mentioned but I wonder what (if any) impact the destruction of ACORN had on this election. They still exist but aren't what they were a few years ago. Had they not been exposed and were still helping to cheat, how many seats would've still belonged to the Democrats? I'm not convinced Harry Reid won fairly (well I guess I'm hoping there aren't that many stupid people in Nevada) and wonder if any close elections would've ended differently had ACORN been in full operation. Speaking of stupidity...I won't be spending a dime in California or Nevada anytime soon. I'm going to borrow a tactic from the Democrats and boycott both states. :hihi:
i still dont see how the policy is the evidence. i think, as with any policy, it will be imperfectly written and implemented. so a percentage of those receiving benefits from the policy should not be. republicans focus on those. there is some deep-seated hatred for those people and the entire policy is tainted because of it. republicans would prefer to throw the baby out with the bathwater. basically they dont care. if they did they wouldnt continually disparage those that benefit from the policy, instead they would talk about reforming the policy. for me it is a much graver offense to deny help to the needy than to imperfectly implement a policy. anyway the real point is that there are many smart and reasonable people that think the ideas of these policies are good. these people may be wrong but that doesnt mean that the policies are some grand dem plan to keep the poor down. i dont tend to post when i agree, so since most here are conservative, thats what you see.
man that's a good point. the republicans are too worried about smearing Obama than they are about doing anything for the people, and that will come out, but their base of old people and middle aged white men will suck it all down. if the democrats played the same game the republicans did (which worked for obama in the election) he will have absolutely ZERO problem winning again in 2012 which the republican party has made it clear that they only care about stopping that from happening, not actually doing anything for this country.
I'll do my best to explain the way I see it. The inherent difference between the two (R & D) as I see it are taxes and social programs which are driven by those same taxes. I don't think for a minute and I doubt that you do as well that the GOP would just as soon let people die on the vine. The GOP doesn't want to steal peoples social security or any of that other propaganda that is thrown out there to scare the bejezzus out of folks. They want to limit/reduce taxes and money spent on social programs sure. The intent is to allow the people that have money to have more of it. The more they spend the better the economy and more jobs are created. Jobs that can be filled by those that once were on assistace. They won't be CEO positions, they may even be only slightly better paying than the free ride they were getting but its a job and you have to start somewhere. You know as well as I do that Charlie freaking Brown(the cartoon dude, not anyone actually named charlie brown) has created more jobs than the fed ever has. It is a load of crap. The dem policies are all set up to keep people on assistance, to keep them dependant on that big government. Its there, you just have to squint with your ears and you'll figure it out. Maybe. What board have you been reading? Uh lets see, I can count maybe 5 including myself and that is a stretch. Its all good though, agree to disagree if we must. I don't expect to change your philosophy, you certainly won't change mine.
