Thread: conservatives push to maintain spendin'

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy SupPackFan,

ahh well...its okies dokies matey. 'tis clear ye disagree with me.

with any luck, both yerself and i shall enjoy good health in the years to come, and we'll have time to put the lookin' glass to our eyes and see how them Tea Party freshman 'o today turn out....and yer right, advocatin' spendin' cuts does not mean one must oppose all spendin'; this be especially true if the aforementioned spendin' is in a congressperson's own district.

i have a hard time believin' that they're really that much different than the garden variety politician. from me own point 'o view, they still be wet behind the ears and are already provin' me right...and ye think differently, and thats fine mate.

when the budget be laid out proper, we'll see whar them chips fall. if the Tea Party freshmen enforce noteworthy spendin' cuts in the military, i'll be a happy pirate. if the Tea Party freshmen actually follow through with military spendin' cuts in thar own districts, then perhaps it be a new day in DC.

*bows*

- MeadHallPirate

ps - i don't quote Huffpo too often, in six years or so, ye can probably count on one hand the times i done so. i apologize, me friend. i've probably quoted Fox News and Huffpo 'round the same amount 'o times in me postin' history.

This is one area where we certainly do agree. Six months does not make solid congressional history to truly judge by - good or bad - and the coming budget battle and so on will give us further information. Nobody can be sure how the freshman class will turn out long term. History would be on your side. I am holding on to hope - as ridiculous as that may seem in politics today!

I have no problem with the news source if the story is legitimate and fair. Not every story in the Huffpo is trash . . . they would not survive if that were the case. But yeah, I also would put it on my list just about as high as the Limbaugh Letter, or anything that leaves Hannity's lips.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy ConservSpeakin',

matey, i disagree that both parties be controlled by extremists.

the democratic party currently be "controlled", by a conservative...albiet a moderate one, me hearty. in the words 'o Bruce Bartlett;

Barack Obama: The Democrats? Richard Nixon?

those be the words 'o Mr. Bartlett, who served both President Reagan and President HW Bush. if ye want to argue with him, have at it matey.

i would agree that at least currently, the wind that fills the sails 'o the GOP seems a bit extremist, fer it be the Tea Party that be at the helm 'o thar vessel.

- MeadHallPirate

I have no intention of arguing with him. He is right. By the same token, I could claim that Bush was a Liberal because of some of the things that he did. You know things like continuing Clinton's measures in the Sub-Prime markets, or his pushing for Immigration Reform. But in the end, a few moves in one direction or the other does change the overall agenda of an administration. When all things are considered there is far more proof that Obama is a Liberal and Bush is a Conservative.

Originally Posted by ConservSpeakin'

I have no intention of arguing with him. He is right. By the same token, I could claim that Bush was a Liberal because of some of the things that he did. You know things like continuing Clinton's measures in the Sub-Prime markets, or his pushing for Immigration Reform. But in the end, a few moves in one direction or the other does change the overall agenda of an administration. When all things are considered there is far more proof that Obama is a Liberal and Bush is a Conservative.

One thing I often find through questioning people who are moderate or independent . . . most of the time they are conservative in most every way but are also pro-choice. It irritates me that (both parties) leave so many out in the cold over this one issue. There may not be as many 'moderates' as the polls say - as they are really only pro-choice conservatives and pro-life liberals.