Sure we’d all like to start a grass roots effort and take back the country…but what does that mean? Populism? I voted for Perot in 1992 because Bush 1 broke his promise “Read my lips…no new taxes”. All that accomplished was to ensure a Klinton victory.

The Libertarians sound good, but they lose me completely with the open borders thing. The Independent candidates almost never have critical mass either.

So I am done with the populism approach, unless something changes my mind. Unfortunately we are stuck with the lesser of two evils, and what I see of the Democrite leadership is just plain worse evil.

Look at the rogue’s gallery listed in post #7. Is there a name there that isn’t a pos? Giving political aid and comfort to the enemy? Chapatraitor Kennedy, undermining the President during the Cold war? F’ing traitors! Can you name an equivalent Republican politician who has done the same? They may be crooks, they may be jerks, they may be liars, but they haven’t done what this Democrite Hall of Shame has done.

So I’ll have to hold my nose and go with the clear lesser of two evils. Doing anything else just ensures that the greater evil prevails.

Bottom line: was Reza Pahlavi better in place than Ayatollah Khomeini and his militant Islamic theocracy? For the people of Iran, for the Middle east, for U.S. interests, for the safety and security of the world? This point doesn’t even require further analysis or comment.

how the republicans have sold the government to muti national corporations. how the number of uninsured have risen while they brag about the economy.

Huh? Rhetoric, more textbook Democrite rhetoric (from some of the richest people in the Gov’t who have huge interests in those same corporations)

Dick Cheney said that people who voted for Mr. Lamont were giving comfort to “Al Qaeda types.”

And he was wrong? You bet the terrorists are watching everything that happens in this country very carefully, as were the NVA during the Vietnam war. And they are getting plenty of encouragement, political “aid and comfort’ from the Democrite side.

yeah Hitler sounds fair:after all i took Judas Isacariot.

Huh? WTF does any of this have to do with Jesus? Although if Democrites had been around during Jesus’ time, I’ll wager they would have sold him out in a New York second if there was political advantage to be gained.

the democrats betrayed Jesus Christ, according to you.

Uh huh. I posted that…uh huh…I hear the Twilight Zone theme music again, shiloh. That’s where you have gone…again.

But look at the facts FAO posted—can anyone say that Republicans are just the same, that they have done the same or equivalent things? I submit that in general the Democrites tend to sink to the very lowest level of the political barrel, that no technique, no disgrace, no degeneracy is out of bounds for them. I think the evidence shows it.

Can anyone honestly disagree? Reread FAOs post, then make a case, if you can.

How Jay Rockefeller’s trip to the mid east warning of the impending invasion of Iraq boosted US security?

How Muertha’s plan to redeploy to Okinawa would work seeing as the Okinawans have asked the US to reduce and eventually eliminate the US military presence there?

How trying to defeat the Patriot Act enhances our ability to defend ourselves against terrorists?

How the Clinton administrations force reduction and reenlisting bonus reductions made our military more powerful?

How the Clinton administration’s policy of refusing to reenlist prior service service members benefitted the military? (I personally know about that one because I tried to reenlist on three occasions during the Clinton Administration.)

How the Clinton administration’s selling of missile technology to communist China has benefitted the US?

How the Church commission’s legislation that gutted US human intelligence operations overseas has helped secure the US?

How Jimmy Carter’s failure to support the Shah to prevent Ayatollah Khomeini from gaining control in Iran helped to insure the security of the US?

How the Democrats in Congress are intentionally mischaracterizing the now exposed NSA intercept program as domestic spying when it’s actually intercepting ONLY international calls involving persons of interest or calls into or out of areas with high concentrations of known terrorists?

How can the party that has consistently been this wrong on national security have the audacity to try and claim that they’re the best party to be in charge of it? They are also the party that has consistently striven to deteriorate the rights delineated in the Constitution. They have given us censorship in the form of Political Correctness, they’ve fought tooth and nail against private ownership of firearms despite their own studies showing that gun control actually leads to MORE crime, not less. They have consistently stagnated the economy through increased taxes and increased poorly designed social welfare spending. They have consistently sought to reduce or eliminate jail sentences for violent criminals and fought against both mandatory minimum sentences and three time loser laws. Both of these have proven far more effective in reducing crime than any amount of feel good rehabilitation programs. Anyone with an unbiased knowledge of history has to see how the liberal agenda has failed miserably. They have fought to prevent low income parents from having the ability to send their children to private schools. They have continuously voted to reduce military and intelligence budgets even while at war.

Thanks SFL- you’ve earned a bit of respect today, FWIW.