"Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d00ap31c9j72jf16fr84eoiki9oqnaf7ck@4ax.com...
> "Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
> babble
>>> Unfortunately, the South Carolinians - being AGAINST amnesty and wanting
>>> to be rid of the illegals - are falling hook line and sinker and voting
>>> for McCain - they just are NOT paying attention. I posted from Roy Beck
>>> just before.
>>Its true. They seem to have nearly split evenly between Hack
>>(evangelical-only) and McAmnesty (allegedly defense & foreign policy).
>>They weren't paying attention.
>>if Florida goes to Rudy then Super Tuesday will be a mess.
>>Florida:
>>McCain: 23.2%
>>Giuliani: 20.3%
>>Romney: 18.0%
>>Huckabee: 17.3%
>>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/florida-primary.html
> It's looking more and more like a floor fight followed by a backroom
> deal that won't be based on voter input.

An actual tie is probably realistically impossible. I expect there to be an
actual winner.

But ignoring the strong second place finisher could cause problems.

"Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
babble
>Most (real) Floridians are religious, quite conservative, extremely
>pro-military. Most (real) Floridians consider ourselves and our state
>almost like a separate country. We like the rest of you okay, not so much
>really, but a little bit.

You certainly like our money.

Swill

"Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
babble
>>>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/florida-primary.html
>> It's looking more and more like a floor fight followed by a backroom
>> deal that won't be based on voter input.
>
>An actual tie is probably realistically impossible. I expect there to be an
>actual winner.
>
>But ignoring the strong second place finisher could cause problems.

I didn't say anything about a tie. I'm talking about nobody hitting
the magic number and needing extra delegates to win.

Swill

> "Patriot Games" <Patr...@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
> babble:
> >Most (real) Floridians are religious, quite conservative, extremely
> >pro-military.

And yet, last week, you were repeatedly denying Florida IS a Red
State, PG.

What a fucking liar you are. But then sane Usenet readers knew that
already.

-Tom Sr.

"Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:emsdp3tbpei9ia6nov7jqg1ae0al60vjab@4ax.com...
> "Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
> babble
>>Most (real) Floridians are religious, quite conservative, extremely
>>pro-military. Most (real) Floridians consider ourselves and our state
>>almost like a separate country. We like the rest of you okay, not so much
>>really, but a little bit.
> You certainly like our money.

Youbetcha! We like money. We like money a lot.

And we like a lotta money!

Money doesn't know who it used to belong to.

"Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:jpsdp3tc0epe59br7q3uat96ut8egqoh97@4ax.com...
> "Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
> babble
>>>>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/florida-primary.html
>>> It's looking more and more like a floor fight followed by a backroom
>>> deal that won't be based on voter input.
>>An actual tie is probably realistically impossible. I expect there to be
>>an
>>actual winner.
>>But ignoring the strong second place finisher could cause problems.
> I didn't say anything about a tie. I'm talking about nobody hitting
> the magic number and needing extra delegates to win.

The guy with the most delegates wins....

And that guy gets the biggest say in What the GOP stands for.

And the biggest issue is Amnesty.

The GOP will (or will not) Officially be the Party of Amnesty for Criminals
based on who wins the Nomination.

That's no small thing.

On Jan 17, 10:05=A0pm, AnAmericanCitizen <NoAmne...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> A 'truth squad' aims to blunt any political dirty tricks like the smears t=
hat hurt
> his 2000 bid. Critics say he's too aggressive.

McCain is just plain c r a z a y.. fighting imaginary terrorists while
the economic husk of a neocon parasitized America collapses around his
ears.

He says that America's economy is basically 'sound'....(as more jobs
and wealth flood out of the US)

His supporters are pleased... he seems such a nice traditional moron.

"Tom Sr." <tomswiftsr@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0598b8ea-8e9d-4756-a546-83bbc58a3062@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 18, 6:07 pm, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@America.com> wrote:
>> If a pro-amnesty Repubican runs for President
>> against a pro-amnesty Democrat then Amnesty
>> will NOT EVEN BE AN ISSUE.
>> If a pro-amnesty Repubican runs for President against a pro-amnesty
>> Democrat then Amnesty is GUARANTEED.
> The name of your party is spelled "Republician", not "Repubican",
> Patriot Games. Why am I not surprised you misspelled that.
> So WHO are you going to vote for, PG? Hm.
> McCain - favors immigration reform, "moderate" of the GOP candidates,
> even though he wants to keep American troops in Iraq for another 100
> years.

I'm NOT voting for McAmnesty. Period. No exceptions. That ain't
happenning.

> Giulian - pro-choice and pro-gay rights.
> Romney - was pro-choice and pro-gay rights, major flip-flopped, hired
> illegal aliens himself...and *Mormon*!

Either one. I prefer Mitt but if Rudy is the GOP candidate I can live with
it.

> Ron Paul - Libertarian, not a conservative, especially not an
> ultraconservative.

He's not a factor. He's just a sorry old fool. He's probably a nice guy
for all I know but he's from the Planet Tard!

He was on TV today saying we need to encourage SAVINGS.

Time out! We are currently holding the LARGEST consumer credit debt of all
time. We are currently seeing the LARGEST increase in late payments and
missed payments. Even for the people NOT having consumer credit issues its
THREE WEEKS after Christmas and MOST NORMAL people want to pay off THAT
debt.

If you give these people CASH MONEY they WILL NOT put it in SAVINGS....

Hheelloooo.... Attention Planet Tard!

Some of these people, who have already said "Fuck it" because their credit
is already fucked will blow the cash on who knows or cares what. That's
good for the economy.

NOBODY will save it.

> Huckabee - believes the Earth was created 6,000 years ago -- may pull
> out of Florida because of lack of money (i.e. lack of support).

He won't be a factor. If he maintains a standing around 20% he will be a
factor in both national and party politics however.

> And your vote, Patriot Games, goes to...???

If McAmnesty is the GOP candidate I'm voting for YOU. I'm going to write
your name in!

You will then be IMMORTALIZED.

500 years from now some historian will be looking over the actual official
voting register and see a write-in for "Tom Sr." and say "Who the fuck is
that?"

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:22:15 -0800 (PST), lorad474@cs.com wrote:

>On Jan 17, 10:05 pm, AnAmericanCitizen <NoAmne...@earthlink.net>
>wrote:
>> A 'truth squad' aims to blunt any political dirty tricks like the smears that hurt
>> his 2000 bid. Critics say he's too aggressive.
>
>McCain is just plain c r a z a y.. fighting imaginary terrorists while
>the economic husk of a neocon parasitized America collapses around his
>ears.
>
>He says that America's economy is basically 'sound'....(as more jobs
>and wealth flood out of the US)
>
>His supporters are pleased... he seems such a nice traditional moron.
>
>
The New York Times endorsed him tonight .... that should be the kiss of death for
him....AAC

On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:47:22 -0800, AnAmericanCitizen
<NoAmnesty@earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:22:15 -0800 (PST), lorad474@cs.com wrote:
>
>>On Jan 17, 10:05 pm, AnAmericanCitizen <NoAmne...@earthlink.net>
>>wrote:
>>> A 'truth squad' aims to blunt any political dirty tricks like the smears that hurt
>>> his 2000 bid. Critics say he's too aggressive.
>>
>>McCain is just plain c r a z a y.. fighting imaginary terrorists while
>>the economic husk of a neocon parasitized America collapses around his
>>ears.
>>
>>He says that America's economy is basically 'sound'....(as more jobs
>>and wealth flood out of the US)
>>
>>His supporters are pleased... he seems such a nice traditional moron.
>>
>>
>The New York Times endorsed him tonight .... that should be the kiss of death for
>him....AAC

He is a Geraldo Rivera Republican. In this last debate he said if he
won he would get his economics advice from Jack Kemp. Jack Kemp is the
most disgusting Illegals-loving RINO out there, bar none, I think Kemp
he would actually felate male Illegal Aliens just to get it out of his
system.

McCain is the most electable liberal running <g>. Every scared
Democrat supports him. In truth, they secretly wish he was a Democrat
so they could run him instead of Hillary.

"Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
babble
>The GOP will (or will not) Officially be the Party of Amnesty for Criminals
>based on who wins the Nomination.

Well, it certainly has been since Reagan was President.

Swill

"Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
babble
>> Ron Paul - Libertarian, not a conservative, especially not an
>> ultraconservative.
>
>He's not a factor. He's just a sorry old fool. He's probably a nice guy
>for all I know but he's from the Planet Tard!
>
>He was on TV today saying we need to encourage SAVINGS.

Nothing wrong with that. It would certainly increase the supply of
cash for investment. Clinton wants to exempt simple savings account
interest from taxation much like tax exempt retirement funds. Too bad
she'll have to pay for that by hiking cap gains taxes.

Swill

Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
to babble
>He is a Geraldo Rivera Republican. In this last debate he said if he
>won he would get his economics advice from Jack Kemp. Jack Kemp is the
>most disgusting Illegals-loving RINO out there, bar none, I think Kemp
>he would actually felate male Illegal Aliens just to get it out of his
>system.
>
>McCain is the most electable liberal running <g>. Every scared
>Democrat supports him. In truth, they secretly wish he was a Democrat
>so they could run him instead of Hillary.

I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Did in the Texas primary in 2000.
He's the most honest of the candidates running. Nobody in either
party can match him for integrity. Too bad Americans don't like
honest politicians.

Swill

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 03:42:54 -0500, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
>to babble
>>He is a Geraldo Rivera Republican. In this last debate he said if he
>>won he would get his economics advice from Jack Kemp. Jack Kemp is the
>>most disgusting Illegals-loving RINO out there, bar none, I think Kemp
>>he would actually felate male Illegal Aliens just to get it out of his
>>system.
>>
>>McCain is the most electable liberal running <g>. Every scared
>>Democrat supports him. In truth, they secretly wish he was a Democrat
>>so they could run him instead of Hillary.
>
>I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Did in the Texas primary in 2000.
>He's the most honest of the candidates running. Nobody in either
>party can match him for integrity. Too bad Americans don't like
>honest politicians.
>
>Swill

He honestly supports things that are anathema to Conservatives. He is
an OEM replacement part for Dubya Bush.

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 03:42:54 -0500, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
>to babble
>>He is a Geraldo Rivera Republican. In this last debate he said if he
>>won he would get his economics advice from Jack Kemp. Jack Kemp is the
>>most disgusting Illegals-loving RINO out there, bar none, I think Kemp
>>he would actually felate male Illegal Aliens just to get it out of his
>>system.
>>
>>McCain is the most electable liberal running <g>. Every scared
>>Democrat supports him. In truth, they secretly wish he was a Democrat
>>so they could run him instead of Hillary.
>
>I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Did in the Texas primary in 2000.
>He's the most honest of the candidates running. Nobody in either
>party can match him for integrity. Too bad Americans don't like
>honest politicians.
>
>Swill

Surely you jest. He was just caught in a big lie during this week's debate. He's
flip flopped on a number of issues. Now claims the bill he wrote with Kennedy wasn't
amnesty (but they would have all qualified for citizenship). He's one of the party's
best examples of a RINO. He's a liberal, he votes with the liberals and is sooo
proud of his liberal gang of fourteen.

As you're no doubt a liberal, Swill, I can see why you like him....AAC

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:55:02 GMT, Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 03:42:54 -0500, Governor Swill
><governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
>>to babble
>>>He is a Geraldo Rivera Republican. In this last debate he said if he
>>>won he would get his economics advice from Jack Kemp. Jack Kemp is the
>>>most disgusting Illegals-loving RINO out there, bar none, I think Kemp
>>>he would actually felate male Illegal Aliens just to get it out of his
>>>system.
>>>
>>>McCain is the most electable liberal running <g>. Every scared
>>>Democrat supports him. In truth, they secretly wish he was a Democrat
>>>so they could run him instead of Hillary.
>>
>>I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Did in the Texas primary in 2000.
>>He's the most honest of the candidates running. Nobody in either
>>party can match him for integrity. Too bad Americans don't like
>>honest politicians.
>>
>>Swill
>
>He honestly supports things that are anathema to Conservatives. He is
>an OEM replacement part for Dubya Bush.

You said it so much better than I did, Bjorn, and with less than half the
words....AAC

"Senator McCain, we know about your POW heroism. Now, as a
Republican primary voter, I'd like to hear some straight talk
on domestic issues. I want to hear you talk about your record on
immigration, free speech, Gitmo, global warming, and opposition
to tax cuts. Talk about how proud you are of leading the Gang of 14
and your alliance with Kennedy, Edwards, Lieberman." ....Rush Limbaugh

Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
to babble
>
>He honestly supports things that are anathema to Conservatives. He is
>an OEM replacement part for Dubya Bush.

You'd rather have President Hillary? McCain is the leading GOP
candidate most likely to defeat her in November.

Better a Rino than Hillary, eh?

Swill

On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 02:51:26 -0500, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
>to babble
>>
>>He honestly supports things that are anathema to Conservatives. He is
>>an OEM replacement part for Dubya Bush.
>
>You'd rather have President Hillary? McCain is the leading GOP
>candidate most likely to defeat her in November.
>
>Better a Rino than Hillary, eh?
>
>Swill

Better neither, Swill.

And no, I don't think that political submariners, politicians whose
character is equivalent to a TV Preacher doing meth in motel rooms
with a prostitute, I don't think such individuals are better. If I'm
going to have an anti-american elitist I'd rather have someone whom
you're free to criticize as such, someone who openly presents themself
as a member of the opposition.

Only a partisan lib would want a RINO for Republican voters. Still
believe you're fooling anyone other than yerself, Swill? What a tool.

Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
to babble
>>You'd rather have President Hillary? McCain is the leading GOP
>>candidate most likely to defeat her in November.
>>
>>Better a Rino than Hillary, eh?
>>
>>Swill
>
>Better neither, Swill.

You don't have much choice. I don't think Romney can carry the
southern states and getting a Republican elected without them is not
very likely. Whether you think so or not, the middle does the
electing and the middle has gotten tired of faith based politics and
mud flinging. You may not like McCain, but of the GOP nominates
anybody else in September they might as well start right there and
then to plan for 2012 because they'll lose to the Democrats in 2008.

>And no, I don't think that political submariners, politicians whose
>character is equivalent to a TV Preacher doing meth in motel rooms
>with a prostitute, I don't think such individuals are better. If I'm
>going to have an anti-american elitist I'd rather have someone whom
>you're free to criticize as such, someone who openly presents themself
>as a member of the opposition.

That would be Edwards. There's not one other candidate speaking out
so clearly against the established way of doing things except for Ron
Paul who we all know isn't really a viable candidate.

Not that Edwards is electable either. He has the experienced and well
oiled Clinton machine to fight and another change candidate who
doesn't even have to campaign on change. He has only to show off his
tan.

>Only a partisan lib would want a RINO for Republican voters.

False. I'm a moderate. Partisan libs don't want a Republican of ANY
kind for President. I'll be watching the congressional races down to
the wire. Unless it looks like the GOP will regain control of one or
both Houses, I'll be voting for a Democrat this time no matter who it
is. But if it looks like the Dems will retain or increase their hold
on Congress, I'll vote for the GOP candidate but only if that
candidate is McCain.

> Still believe you're fooling anyone other than yerself, Swill?

Not fooling anybody. Watch the voting and this time next year,
remember what you've said this year.

> What a tool.

*shrug* Whine all you like. Be as partisan as you like. In the end
it won't matter. The People have seen what partisan politics have
done to this country. We've noted how the lies of both sides, lately
more on the GOP side have created false impressions and led to errors
in judgement at the ballot box. The vast, non aligned middle that has
been steadily growing for forty years will make fools of both parties.

Swill

On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:14:10 -0500, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
>to babble
>>>You'd rather have President Hillary? McCain is the leading GOP
>>>candidate most likely to defeat her in November.
>>>
>>>Better a Rino than Hillary, eh?
>>>
>>>Swill
>>
>>Better neither, Swill.
>
>You don't have much choice. I don't think Romney can carry the
>southern states and getting a Republican elected without them is not
>very likely. Whether you think so or not, the middle does the
>electing and the middle has gotten tired of faith based politics and
>mud flinging. You may not like McCain, but of the GOP nominates
>anybody else in September they might as well start right there and
>then to plan for 2012 because they'll lose to the Democrats in 2008.

I think precisely the opposite. If they nominate a liberal in
Republican clothing, they more-likely lose. Trying to out-Democrat the
Democrats, or out-Republican the Republicans, usually makes a loser.
That is just a tried & true fact of two-party politics. But they
retake that path regularly because it's a big electorate, almost
evenly split between libs and conservatives and swings. They read the
numbers and talk themselves into chasing the margins. They lose their
Principles and make weasel-talk pleasing no one very much, and then
they lose their election. Unless the electorate is mortified of a win
by one of the parties' candidate. 2002, a glaring example. That has
been the Democrat problem for many many years, apart from a certain
convincing Democrat named Clinton, who then turned out to be the
biggest liar of all of them.

And ignoring the fact that the Dems are going to run either a Negro or
a Woman with a history as a liberal feminist, bringing back a grating,
impeached President who'd like to live in the White House again, well,
have a sweet goodnight.

One look at Obama's Kenyan family with their African Muslim beanies
and it will be over, he can say "change" all he fucking likes, but
young boobs don't vote, it's too much bother, doesn't play to their
hormones. That is a fact as well.

You libs want McCain, or Huckabee a month ago, because you want an
flake if you must have a Republican, someone who'll instinctively get
on the Left of the Democrats when they give him a hard time. Basic
stuff, transparent.

>
>>And no, I don't think that political submariners, politicians whose
>>character is equivalent to a TV Preacher doing meth in motel rooms
>>with a prostitute, I don't think such individuals are better. If I'm
>>going to have an anti-american elitist I'd rather have someone whom
>>you're free to criticize as such, someone who openly presents themself
>>as a member of the opposition.
>
>That would be Edwards. There's not one other candidate speaking out
>so clearly against the established way of doing things except for Ron
>Paul who we all know isn't really a viable candidate.
>
>Not that Edwards is electable either. He has the experienced and well
>oiled Clinton machine to fight and another change candidate who
>doesn't even have to campaign on change. He has only to show off his
>tan.
>
>>Only a partisan lib would want a RINO for Republican voters.
>
>False. I'm a moderate. Partisan libs don't want a Republican of ANY
>kind for President. I'll be watching the congressional races down to
>the wire. Unless it looks like the GOP will regain control of one or
>both Houses, I'll be voting for a Democrat this time no matter who it
>is. But if it looks like the Dems will retain or increase their hold
>on Congress, I'll vote for the GOP candidate but only if that
>candidate is McCain.
>
>> Still believe you're fooling anyone other than yerself, Swill?
>
>Not fooling anybody. Watch the voting and this time next year,
>remember what you've said this year.
>
>> What a tool.
>
>*shrug* Whine all you like. Be as partisan as you like. In the end
>it won't matter. The People have seen what partisan politics have
>done to this country. We've noted how the lies of both sides, lately
>more on the GOP side have created false impressions and led to errors
>in judgement at the ballot box. The vast, non aligned middle that has
>been steadily growing for forty years will make fools of both parties.
>
>Swill

Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
to babble
>I think precisely the opposite. If they nominate a liberal in
>Republican clothing, they more-likely lose. Trying to out-Democrat the
>Democrats, or out-Republican the Republicans, usually makes a loser.

Yet this is what happened in the last two elections. Clinton turned
out to not be sucha bleeding heart liberal after all and Bush is no
conservative.

Note that every time the Dems have run a dyed in the wool liberal
lately, they've lost the general election. Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry .
. .

>That is just a tried & true fact of two-party politics. But they
>retake that path regularly because it's a big electorate, almost
>evenly split between libs and conservatives and swings. They read the
>numbers and talk themselves into chasing the margins. They lose their
>Principles and make weasel-talk pleasing no one very much, and then
>they lose their election. Unless the electorate is mortified of a win
>by one of the parties' candidate. 2002, a glaring example. That has
>been the Democrat problem for many many years, apart from a certain
>convincing Democrat named Clinton, who then turned out to be the
>biggest liar of all of them.

Part of his success. Clinton was a very good liar. Like Reagan, he
could create realities, alter perceptions and like Reagan, he was
wildly popular and successful. Bush is a lousy liar and it shows.

>And ignoring the fact that the Dems are going to run either a Negro or
>a Woman with a history as a liberal feminist, bringing back a grating,
>impeached President who'd like to live in the White House again, well,
>have a sweet goodnight.
>
>One look at Obama's Kenyan family with their African Muslim beanies
>and it will be over, he can say "change" all he fucking likes, but
>young boobs don't vote, it's too much bother, doesn't play to their
>hormones. That is a fact as well.
>
>You libs want McCain, or Huckabee a month ago, because you want an
>flake if you must have a Republican, someone who'll instinctively get
>on the Left of the Democrats when they give him a hard time. Basic
>stuff, transparent.

I'm not a lib and I don't want one in office, I want a moderate who
can navigate between the right and left, taking from each their best
ideas and using them to greatest effect.

Swill

"Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rcslp39uv1l2jfpeb4k96334d2pi8ml9ic@4ax.com...
> "Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
> babble
>>> Ron Paul - Libertarian, not a conservative, especially not an
>>> ultraconservative.
>>He's not a factor. He's just a sorry old fool. He's probably a nice guy
>>for all I know but he's from the Planet Tard!
>>He was on TV today saying we need to encourage SAVINGS.
> Nothing wrong with that. It would certainly increase the supply of
> cash for investment.

We could become energy independent by riding horses to work too.

> Clinton wants to exempt simple savings account
> interest from taxation much like tax exempt retirement funds. Too bad
> she'll have to pay for that by hiking cap gains taxes.

Sounds like an excuse to hike cap gains taxes.

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:58:22 -0500, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
>to babble
>>I think precisely the opposite. If they nominate a liberal in
>>Republican clothing, they more-likely lose. Trying to out-Democrat the
>>Democrats, or out-Republican the Republicans, usually makes a loser.
>
>Yet this is what happened in the last two elections. Clinton turned
>out to not be sucha bleeding heart liberal after all and Bush is no
>conservative.

No, that did not happen, that isn't what I said. I said that if a Rep
tries to out-Democrat the Democrats to win an election, and vice
versa, the candidate usually loses. The people you bring up there did
not run on that basis. Bush talked as if he were a Conservative, more
or less, when he could even get a clear sentence out of his mouth.
After his win he pulled a Tranny Surprise on Conservatives. Clinton
posed as a traditional Democrat, JFK and so on.


>
>Note that every time the Dems have run a dyed in the wool liberal
>lately, they've lost the general election. Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry .

That is addressed in the following, about the mortified electorate. It
is the reason Kerry lost to Bush, who was very-much hated by
Conservatives by that time.

>
>>That is just a tried & true fact of two-party politics. But they
>>retake that path regularly because it's a big electorate, almost
>>evenly split between libs and conservatives and swings. They read the
>>numbers and talk themselves into chasing the margins. They lose their
>>Principles and make weasel-talk pleasing no one very much, and then
>>they lose their election. Unless the electorate is mortified of a win
>>by one of the parties' candidate. 2002, a glaring example. That has
>>been the Democrat problem for many many years, apart from a certain
>>convincing Democrat named Clinton, who then turned out to be the
>>biggest liar of all of them.
>
>Part of his success. Clinton was a very good liar. Like Reagan, he
>could create realities, alter perceptions and like Reagan, he was
>wildly popular and successful. Bush is a lousy liar and it shows.
>
>>And ignoring the fact that the Dems are going to run either a Negro or
>>a Woman with a history as a liberal feminist, bringing back a grating,
>>impeached President who'd like to live in the White House again, well,
>>have a sweet goodnight.
>>
>>One look at Obama's Kenyan family with their African Muslim beanies
>>and it will be over, he can say "change" all he fucking likes, but
>>young boobs don't vote, it's too much bother, doesn't play to their
>>hormones. That is a fact as well.
>>
>>You libs want McCain, or Huckabee a month ago, because you want an
>>flake if you must have a Republican, someone who'll instinctively get
>>on the Left of the Democrats when they give him a hard time. Basic
>>stuff, transparent.
>
>I'm not a lib and I don't want one in office, I want a moderate who
>can navigate between the right and left, taking from each their best
>ideas and using them to greatest effect.

It is indeed the aim that matters. And your aim is quite obviously
toward what is a liberal reality. I Hate (give that a capital 'H'), I
Hate the smarmy, racist, self-loathing, anti-americanism of liberals.
"Moderate" It is quite often the pose of scoundrels who have not the
character to stand behind what they are really about, they want
unearned credibility via the pretention of being something else.
Moderate, in today's America, is another word for Unprincipled.
Moderation is not what's needed, there is little at this time we want
to preserve through political moderation.

>
>Swill

"Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> used a stick in the sand to
babble
>> Nothing wrong with that. It would certainly increase the supply of
>> cash for investment.
>
>We could become energy independent by riding horses to work too.

Actually, that would cost more. Horses are more expensive to keep
than cars.

>> Clinton wants to exempt simple savings account
>> interest from taxation much like tax exempt retirement funds. Too bad
>> she'll have to pay for that by hiking cap gains taxes.
>
>Sounds like an excuse to hike cap gains taxes.

No reason to increase them. Just tax them at the same rate as regular
wages. Taxing wages at a higher rate is a tax on productivity. The
essence of flat taxation is to remove taxation of productivity and
shift it to consumption.

Swill

Bjorn <was-walmart-greeter@postamerica.net> used a stick in the sand
to babble
>>Yet this is what happened in the last two elections. Clinton turned
>>out to not be sucha bleeding heart liberal after all and Bush is no
>>conservative.
>
>No, that did not happen, that isn't what I said. I said that if a Rep
>tries to out-Democrat the Democrats to win an election, and vice
>versa, the candidate usually loses. The people you bring up there did
>not run on that basis. Bush talked as if he were a Conservative, more
>or less, when he could even get a clear sentence out of his mouth.
>After his win he pulled a Tranny Surprise on Conservatives. Clinton
>posed as a traditional Democrat, JFK and so on.

Even during his campaign Clinton embraced some conservative ideas.
Unlike the more extreme lib Dem candidates who came before him. Even
during his first term he supported many conservative projects. I
can't say this was deliberate, but letting Hillary attempt health care
reform (that he may well have realized couldn't pass) kept that
particular liberal idea from sticking to him. To this day,
Republicans blame Hillary, not Bill for "Hillarycare". Very clever
man, Bill was.

Swill