<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 09:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 14 2008, 09:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 09:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 14 2008, 09:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 09:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 14 2008, 08:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 08:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 14 2008, 08:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The "Democratic body" selected her as speaker.</div> And yet they're not radical enough to cut funding. It's a complex issue to me, reflecting on both parties. </div> That's right. They don't have the balls to cut funding. Not only would they sabotoge our country they'd sabotoge their political futures and the future of their party. But that's the only way they could fufill their campiagn process now. This is the Democratic party in a nutshell: </div> Well actually, that seems harsh. The funding issue is a tight rope to walk and complicated in it's own sense. </div> I'll say it in a nicer way. We cut the funding, our soliders are put into even greater danger than they already are. I'm sure some of those younger Democrats with bright futures in Politics don't want their opponents bringing up the fact they voted to cut funding for our bravest men and women. The Democrats do that, they look worse than the Republicans do right now. </div> I wouldn't cut the funding either, and I'm against the war. </div> But see, they ran on this campaign promise to end the war! That's why they are there in the first place! Don't they have an obligation to the people that elected them to this office to fufill their campiagn promise? </div> They will only be able to do it in the long term. </div> Then why didn't they say that?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 14 2008, 09:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 09:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 14 2008, 09:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 09:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 14 2008, 09:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 09:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 14 2008, 08:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 08:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 14 2008, 08:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The "Democratic body" selected her as speaker.</div> And yet they're not radical enough to cut funding. It's a complex issue to me, reflecting on both parties. </div> That's right. They don't have the balls to cut funding. Not only would they sabotoge our country they'd sabotoge their political futures and the future of their party. But that's the only way they could fufill their campiagn process now. This is the Democratic party in a nutshell: </div> Well actually, that seems harsh. The funding issue is a tight rope to walk and complicated in it's own sense. </div> I'll say it in a nicer way. We cut the funding, our soliders are put into even greater danger than they already are. I'm sure some of those younger Democrats with bright futures in Politics don't want their opponents bringing up the fact they voted to cut funding for our bravest men and women. The Democrats do that, they look worse than the Republicans do right now. </div> I wouldn't cut the funding either, and I'm against the war. </div> But see, they ran on this campaign promise to end the war! That's why they are there in the first place! Don't they have an obligation to the people that elected them to this office to fufill their campiagn promise? </div> They will only be able to do it in the long term. </div> Then why didn't they say that? </div> They have values that appeal more to the public, like the urge to stop the war.
This is the Democratic Party, right? The party of bad but expensive schools, ruining the health care system through non-free markets, warmongering (every war since the Revolution and before Gulf War I), ghetto projects (public housing), super high tax rates, and the like?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 14 2008, 09:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the Democratic Party, right? The party of bad but expensive schools, ruining the health care system through non-free markets, warmongering (every war since the Revolution and before Gulf War I), ghetto projects (public housing), super high tax rates, and the like?</div> I'd rather guarantee life saving surgery or health care for people and hurt the economy than not. We have people that can't talk because of health care costs. The Republicans have been off their game recently, so they'll be punished for it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 07:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 14 2008, 09:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the Democratic Party, right? The party of bad but expensive schools, ruining the health care system through non-free markets, warmongering (every war since the Revolution and before Gulf War I), ghetto projects (public housing), super high tax rates, and the like?</div> I'd rather guarantee life saving surgery or health care for people and hurt the economy than not. We have people that can't talk because of health care costs. The Republicans have been off their game recently, so they'll be punished for it. </div> You mean guarantee it for the rich, since they'll be the only ones able to pay big enough bribes to get it while it would be life saving (or go to south america or europe where such things can be bought). Health care costs so much because malpractice insurance is absurdly expensive because... guys like Nader and Edwards sue any doctor any time if there's a chance to score $millions off the insurance companies for their clients.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 14 2008, 10:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 14 2008, 07:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 14 2008, 09:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the Democratic Party, right? The party of bad but expensive schools, ruining the health care system through non-free markets, warmongering (every war since the Revolution and before Gulf War I), ghetto projects (public housing), super high tax rates, and the like?</div> I'd rather guarantee life saving surgery or health care for people and hurt the economy than not. We have people that can't talk because of health care costs. The Republicans have been off their game recently, so they'll be punished for it. </div> You mean guarantee it for the rich, since they'll be the only ones able to pay big enough bribes to get it while it would be life saving (or go to south america or europe where such things can be bought). Health care costs so much because malpractice insurance is absurdly expensive because... guys like Nader and Edwards sue any doctor any time if there's a chance to score $millions off the insurance companies for their clients. </div> And people would still suffer less if it was guaranteed (like some kind of pseudo-socialist country I suppose).
