Sirkit, interesting points. I will try to respond to most of them...

I do not understand why you would think that. What conservatives want to get rid of is underperforming schools, that by the way are generally run by teachers with tenure and no desire to improve their methods. I was a victim of such teachers.

I think vouchers are a good way to jolt the system until the schools finally start improving. Blocking them in favor of teachers unions gets votes from teachers, but sacrifices the students. Can't buy this position at all.

The teachers have nothing to do with it? I beg to differ. There are teachers making a big difference, and part of it has to do with how they get the parents involved. Your first sentence quoted is right on, however. Vouchers empower the parents to find better teachers, don't they? Why, then, would someone who believes as you do be against them?

I understand the direction you are coming from, but the question for those who are against abortion is morally, where do you draw the line? At some point, the law always steps in and arbitrates what will happen in disagreements. I asked the question where one draws the line, and I draw it in a different place than you, apparently. In some things, there is room to disagree without a moral outrage, but in this case, that line has gotten far to far out for my taste. I cannot agree that third trimester abortions should ever be allowed. But then, I think that abortion is used as birth control in 99% (not meant to be an exaggeration) of the cases, and for abortion to be used as birth control is just wrong. I have drawn the line, and I will work for that principle as long as I live.

They are good questions. Bush made a speech a few months ago decrying the policies of the last 30 years in the Middle East, not that war was or is the answer now, but that the specific policies of the past were more pragmatic than moral, and that we have paid a price for that. I liked that speech.

Clinton was president when welfare was cut by a conservative congress, and was president when that same conservative congress cut spending deeply. For both those wins, we owe more to the Newt Gingriches of the world than to Wild Bill. Don't you remember the about face he made halfway through his first term, then tried to make all that sound like his idea. He is a liar and has no backbone at all. For him, it was all about staying in power, never about what was right for anything. I cannot respect that.

This is getting long so instead of quoting parts of the rest of your post, I will just say generally that I can support GWB because while I do not agree with him on one issue, I would rather be wrong on that issue and with him than right on that issue and with someone whose values are so completely bankrupt (as Clintons, or Kerry's, or Dean's, IMHO). I do not have time to say why I think Dean should not be supported, and it doesn't seem that it would matter anyway.

Again, I think that the Iraq situation has the makings of a big positive turning point in the history of the Middle East. I wish we didn't have to have done it. I would not have done it. But it may turn out pretty good. The Status Quo was not good. We weren't getting shot at, but SH had not become harmless. We were being targeted in the no fly zones. And SH was one of history's biggest bastarts. So, it was a gutsy call by GWB, but it may work out. Opposing the current effort, trying to make it fail, really seems bizarre to me.

Just my two cents worth...

 

I am only going to take a few of the ones above so its not to long.

That would be incorrect. Conservatives like me want to do away with poor teachers and get rid of their HUGE public school bureaucracy which is nothing more then a huge hole in the ground where most of our tax money ends up at.

Should parents be involved with their children’s education? You bet absolutely, but it is the schools RESPONSIBILITY to INSURE the children our receiving the best possible education while the child is in their control. This does not happen usually in public schools and thus the reason for competition with school vouchers. I should have a choice where my tax money goes, not some bureaucracy that is basically worried about how many kids actually show up so their receive their check from the federal government…

With all due respect, you have got to be kidding me right? You can’t really be serious with the above comment, can you?

News flash: Liberals think the federal government should be involved with EVERY possible aspect of private citizens life, from telling them what they can and can not eat, what is ok to say in public and what is not, what is ok to wear and what is not, that everyone should accept everyone else “except” those of us that disagree with them and liberals in general do NOT support an individuals right to live.

Perfect example is the situation in Florida, the liberals are up in arms over Jeb Bush blocking a court order that ordered a hospital to KILL another human being that is completely defenseless, and she is in her 30’s.

Give me a break about how liberals what people out of their life’s they only want people out of “their” life when and how they choose, but have no problem telling everyone else HOW they should live their lifes.

No we don’t need to go to Africa, No we don’t need to go to South East Asia. We are fighting the main priority at the moment, the former Home Depot of terrorist supplies from Saddam in Iraq.

That’s the thing with liberals when they don’t get their way they whine about all the other things they have failed at and were not able to accomplish.

President Bush can only solve so many problems left behind by former liberals so give him a break, he didn’t sit back and give China basically all the information they needed to put them 20 years ahead of the game on nuclear weapons and the missile technology that can now be launched from China and delivered to our door steps.

President Bush did not sit back while North Korea was developing nuclear weapons that liberals and Clinton pretended not to see so things would “seem” ok. It’s come home to roost a lot has come home to roost and it always ends up in the laps of Conservatives to clean up the messes left by liberals and their failed programs and lack of adult responsibilities. Just like the Clinton recession and the over 2 million jobs lost due to Clintons failed economics…

It’s called standing up and protecting ones right and it is called taking responsibility. Again something liberals have no clue about and let go until a grown up adult conservative gets in office to clean up.

Hey, if some scared liberal wants to stand in the middle of the play ground and pay off the bully so the bully don’t beat him senseless then fine, give up your money to the bully. However I am not going to stand their and pay someone off I am going to “try” my best to get enough good hits in so the bully thinks twice, and three times before even thinking about asking me for my money…

Clinton cut welfare because he was FORCED to by a majority run house, no if ands or butts about it. Clinton did indeed pay down the national debt by raising taxes. That same illogically economic plan is what gave us the Clinton recession that was handed to President Bush, it also cost more then 2 million jobs being lose (wow, Clinton is great, gave us a recession and killed over 2 million jobs)

President Bush is well above Clinton, Schroder and Chirac (the three stooges) when it comes to moral values. The Three Stooges had very little moral values mainly because they lacked any real courage and ran their governments by what the daily polls tell them to do rather then what their “moral compass” tells them to do…

That’s all I have for now…

 

I do not let others think for me. I, however, am not privy to the same information as the President of the United States. I do not know fully what resources are available to the Commander in Chief, and I cannot have a clear view of the situation from my position in life. That is what representative government is about. I elect someone whose judgement I can respect and am willing to follow. Having done that, I follow him, except when there is gross misconduct. This is one of the most morally straight administrations in memory. Perhaps one has to go back to Carter to find a comparable one (but then, he had Bert Lance...)

I had bought into Carter's vision for a shrunken role for the US in world terms, but Reagan did not, and because he did not, the US has been able to do a lot of good in the world. I was shocked at Greneda, and shocked at Panama, and astounded at the fall of the Berlin Wall. Carter would not have led us there.

I had got it in my head that Bush Sr. needed to listen to his base a little more, never realizing that the result was going to be Clinton! I could have happily lived with Bush Sr's lapses compared with Slick Willie! So you see why I can live with some things I disagree with, when there is so much more that I agree with.

TS.

 

Mr. Clinton's 'moral compass' pointed directly into Monica's mouth.

That is as true a statement as can be said about that whole sad affair. THAT disgusts me.

TS

 

Do you honestly believe the Republican Controlled Congress (which did not have a serious majority at the time), could have cut welfare or any other program if Clinton had not wanted them cut? Please be realistic.

I've never thought of oral sex as "sex" but I guess that comes from growing up in the corrupt city.

I am the one who has been saying all along that in the end, parents are the ones ultimately responsible for educating their children. I do not like Hillary Clinton but I voted for her because the alternative was the weasel Rick Lazio. He inspired all the confidence and trust of a rat.

I stand by what I said. Our economy was never more prosperous than when we had a Democratic President and a Republican Congress.

-Don

 

And what about Strom Thurmond knocking up his 16 year old maid and then fighting to keep his own daughter a second class citizen?

If you want to talk about morally bankrupt people you need to start at home.

-Don

 

Don,

I am not from South Carolina, or from Georgia, and while I live in Texas, I hate being called Texan. Why do you say I need to start "at home" when talking about Strom Thurmond?

I did not bring up Strom Thurmond, nor did I express support for him or admiration for him in any way. Why do I have to answer for him?

He knocked up a 16 year old maid. Seems to me that such puts him in Clinton's league, and I am disgusted by it. There is no excuse. No basis for defense. He is (was) slime. She was black, he was a rich white. He got away with it. Slimey.

He is also dead. He also did that well before he was in office, which does not make it right, or even okay, only that it makes Clinton's act even worse. Strom Thurmond would not have been called a Neo-Conservative, would he? I guess it is because of the actions the likes of Mr. Thurmond that I prefer the label "Neo-conservative".

Strom kept it secret. That may have benefited him, but it also benefited his daughter. Strom paid her large sums of money for support. You might think it was hush money. Maybe it was. I still didn't like the racist things he stood for early in his career, nor would I condone his actions. There are some slime on the right too. I just don't think GWB is one of them.

So, I think your point is irrelevant. Wouldn't you agree?

TS

 

What about the "current" former KKK leader in the house? Everything ok with him huh?

 

That's great. I just wish you would see that legislation is not the answer. Work to make your community better and these sorts of decisions will never come up.

What do you do about rape victims? Should they be forced to relive their rape for 9 more months or even for the rest of their lives? What about medical concerns? Does the government have the right to tell you you can't have a tumor removed because it is alive? It is a slippery slope on which you tread. I believe it is an issue for your community to deal with and not the bloody government.

The Republicans did not have a significant majority when these cuts were made. Clinton could have veto'd the spending bill if he had so chosen.

Let's look at the Reagan Administration, the Bush administration and the George W. administration: All three grew the federal budget significantly. None had a balanced Federal budget. All three severely increased the size of the National debt.

Kinda like the back pedaling Bush has done since no WMD have been found in Iraq. The reason for this war has changed more time than I can count at this point

I'm actually very curious why you think Dean should not be supported. The man is a doctor. He interned at a tough hospital in NYC. His wife is brilliant and they are happily married. None of his children seem to have drug problems. He was governor of Vermont for 12 years and was re-elected 6 times. Pretty impressive when you consider how partisan Vermont can be.

-Don

 

If you have heard anything I have said in the last month you would realize that I think he should be taken out and shot.

I'm not sitting here and making excuses for the Democrats. I am sick and tired of all politicians, be it Kerry or Bush. My point is that you should not sit there and attempt to snipe at the Democrats when the Republican ranks are just as guilty.

-Don

 

I,m all for good discussion but,

Quote,
"I've never thought of oral sex as "sex" but I guess that comes from growing up in the corrupt city."

Almost like , I never thought of the woods as a forest but I guess that comes growing up around a lot of trees.

OK , so , let's go back about 10 years ago. What promises did Mr. Clinton give us?
Tax cuts-yes, reality-no. More taxes
Better educational system-yes, reality-no, just more money to teachers unions.
A safer USA-yes, reality-no , cut defense to the bone.
Smaller Government-yes, Reality-no, cut 10,000 Fed jobs and added 12,000 oversight jobs and 30,000 police force jobs. Great way produce more criminals for the prisons.

My question to you , what campaign promises did Clinton live up to???

I really can't think of one....

 

Why are you concerned about the age of the girl...In South Carolina 16 is legal. Personally I don't find 16 year old girls sexually appealing, but if it is legal you can't demonize him any more than you can any other adult for having sex with anyone else of legal age.

I do disagree with Strom Thurmond's actions toward his daughter but the man is dead and there isn't anything that can be done by him to make up for it.

If you don't think oral sex is sex try receiving it and have your wife walk in while receiving. It IS sex, at least she thinks so. Unless you have one of those open marraiges.

My last comment is about schools. I can afford to put my child in a private school if I want, but the school selected for him is a good one so I don't want to take him out of it. Some of the people who were not as lucky to be selected for a good school, might not be able to afford to put their kid in a private school. Should these children receive a substandard education because of the economic conditions of their parents?

I agree parents are very important in a childs education, but if the parents are not very well educated how can they help. Tutors cost money. If they could afford the tutors they could afford the private school. If vouchers were allowed then the public schools would either have to clean up their acts or close down. If the school board moves lousy teachers to the school my son attends you can bet he would be going to a school I will pay for. I am already looking for a private middle school for him, the ones around here are very bad.

 

wow!!! A civilized debate!

It must be because I wasn't around.

 

I was talking about Thurmond being a conservative. I was able to infer that you were from Texas by looking at your username.

I don't think getting your 16 year old maid pregnant and then fighting to keep your own daughter a second class citizen is anywhere _near_ the same league as getting a blow job from a 21 year old intern. If you think those are in the same league we have nothing to discuss. (I don't think what he did was right, it just isn't nearly as disgusting).

-Don

 

This question came up in my circle of friends at the time this happened and it _never_ occured to us to categorize oral sex as sex.

Read my lips! No New Taxes! Sound familiar?

The federal budget increased by 4% under Clinton. It increased by far more under Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2.

As for police force jobs, wouldn't that make America safer to live in?

-Don