Right you are. And that is why Democrats left in droves during the Regan years and onward. Although Obama has some lure for my vote, he is like a young Harkin. The guy who wanted to institute programs like the WPA from the great depression.

__________________
Frugal tip: To keep potatoes from budding, place an apple in the bag with the potatoes.

How to Fold a Shirt

Salty's Blog

1) Bush on spending? How so?
The "tax and spend democrat" is a popular rejoinder, but the truth is that people don't recognize the "spend and spend republican" alternative.
Look at the history under Reagan/Bush.
Bush has been right on target with Republican tendencies.
Furthermore, this claim that it has "annoyed Republicans"????
WHERE???
WHAT party leading (or elected) Republicans have shown "annoyance"?

2) "Harriet Miers to the SC"?
How the hell is that "Democrat"?

3) Immigration...
I realize that it's the great stereo-type to pretend that immigration problems belong to Republicans, but THINK about it.
For Bush to pass any immigration legislation, it has to go through the previously Republican dominated congress.
The truth is that Republicans talk a good game, but when push comes to shove, they turn around and sell their vote to sway the new citizen base that they help create to become more Republican voters.

4) "McCain's bi-partisan attempts ..."
You try to associate those with Democrats, yet you openly admit "bi-partisan"...



Quite frankly, the overall picture of what you paint is simple.
It leads one to the conclusion that America IS NOT as conservative as you would like it to be.
Even the Republican party is not as conservative as you would like.


Wrong.
You want to SAY the center is one place, when the truth is that it isn't there.
You haven't a clue what the "moderate" truly is.
You talk about the "not so conservative" vs the "more liberal", but LOOK at the election results.
By your way of thinking, wouldn't people be less split?
Wouldn't it overwhelmingly favor the "Republican" candidate that you claim is "not so conservative" because people are turned off by the "extreme" liberal?

You are stuck in the 70's. You just pointed to Bush nominating Harriet Miers as democrat tendencies. And Bush and the republicans spending and borrowing as Democrat tendencies. How often does the right have to do these things until we decide that these are the tendencies of the right. The right has been borrowing and spending since 1980. Whereas the last time a Dem was in office we had a surplus. So eventually you guys will have to be known for what you really do. Not what you say you believe.
How does picking Harriet Miers sound like a Democrat. We had nothing to do with that one. That was your great leader who came up with that. Own it redd.
An what is Democrat about campaign reform? I thought that was bipartisan.

And then you post this.

On the other side of the aisle, the Democrats have nominated 2 people (Kerry 2004/Obama 2008) that were recognized to have THEE MOST LIBERAL RECORD of anyone in the Senate...

Who recognized it? And just like I asked another person here. How can you just post something that has no basis at all. You can't tell me what it is about any vote that either of the candidates made that was liberal can you? Because first you have to identify a liberal vote. Which you really can't.

I asked this yesterday. If your representative votes for a bill without a means to pay for it is it lib or con.?


Or is it a little too grey

__________________
Talking about music is like dancing about architecture