Congradulations Mr. President!

On Nov 5, 11:02*am, Peaceful Bill
wrote:

I would like to see some of the rightwing traitors and war profiters
put on trial and shot. :+8

Dave
HeeHaw

On 2008-11-05, Conan The Librarian wrote:

And hopefully Palin goes back to doing whatever it is she was doing
before, never to be heard from again on the national scene.

What was that quote in Time mag? "Palin and Fey have one thing in common.
They're both better entertainers than politicians" ....or something to that
effect. Maybe she could get a job on SNL.

FrankTV already has a BO clone, but Frank is so unfunny as to be too painful
to endure.

nb

On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 06:56:54 -0600, Peaceful Bill
wrote:

daytripper wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:03:46 -0500, "Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time!

Op

Indeed, and it's so much more than just electing Obama as President. Between
this election and the mid-terms of 2006, the Republican Party has suffered
tremendous losses at all levels of government - basically, it has had its head
removed and handed back to it. Such is the cost of their having run the
country into a financial, moral and ethical ditch while they were in control.
Now they have two choices: sit on the sidelines and snipe, while hoping things
get worse, or change their stripes, moderate their dogma, and join in the
effort to extricate the country from the abyss that the neocons sank it in.

But, for me at least, the very best part of this election: it was a wholesale
repudiation of those who would divide this country through hate.

The list of losers is long and utterly undistinguished, but to mention just a
few, kicked to the curb were the likes of Karl Rove, Phyllis Schlafly, William
Bennett, Laura Schlessinger, Newt Gingrich, Rudi Guiliani, James Dobson, Ralph
Reed, Pat Robertson, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham,
Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rupert Murdoch and the entire Fox
News organization...and on and on. The whole collection of bad actors got
their hineys roasted, and cannot escape the reality that if they ever actually
held sway over any significant part of the American electorate, they've been
diminished to near irrelevance. And it's about time.


Meanwhile, for the sake of good order, props to John McCain, for a magnificent
speech to close out his campaign - and the wisdom to keep Sarah Palin quiet.
The irony is, of course, that this signified the return of the man that most
people once knew and had some respect - the John McCain of 1999 - instead of
the 2008 candidate that not only allowed his campaign to get rolled into the
wingnut/neocon mud hole, but contributed with his cynical selection of Sarah
Palin ("Country First" my white shiney ass!)

One can only wonder, had McCain taken the high road through this presidential
campaign, if the outcome could have been different. Perhaps not - clearly, the
electorate was disgusted with the Republican Party and may not have shown any
quarter. In any case, there is reason to be hopeful that McCain will provide a
positive contribution to the raising of the ship of state, before he rides off
into retirement.

And so now we wait and watch as the next Administration is formed - and hope
that the current, disgraced Administration goes away quietly...

/daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day)

You're so fos and hate. The outcome of this election was decided by the
press a year ago. My daughter, the grad student in journalism, was
actually embarrassed by the unequal treatment of the two candidates by
the press.

One needs to consider why, with the negative approval for the president,
the election was as close as it was.

We can only hope that Obama and his three vice-presidents don't actually
start implementing Obama's promises. Or maybe we should just to prove
how clueless they really are.

Ah - so rather than actually debate a single point, you go with the
intellectually lazy response, play the "hate card" - and make my point
for me. Nice work!

But...I am a Pisces. Excellent lover, lousy hater.

Heck, I don't "hate" Bush, Cheney, Rove - or even Sean Hannity (sure,
I've love to see Hannity get run over by a speeding bus, but I don't
"hate" him ;-)

Bottom line: *You* are the reason why the Republican Party has taken
it in the shorts for the last two election cycles. And unless you -
and your party - wake the **** up, you're both heading to the dustbin
of political history...

/daytripper (hth - or not)

On Nov 5, 1:02 pm, Peaceful Bill
wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:

Non sequitur. You *were* whining. I wasn't blaming anyone for anything.

Re-read the thread and try again.

BTW, I don't recall seeing anything about flyfishing from you. Are you
just a troll?

Chuck you. Maybe you have trouble finding fishing posts.

That's the best you can do, eh? Predictably, no response to my
point about your whining and non sequitur.

BTW, a quick Google groups search shows you with a couple of
fishing related posts compared to a couple of dozen trolls on
political topics.

But I must admit, you've got quite the history of posting on NASCAR
related groups.


Chuck Vance (kind of ironic that your expertise seems to be
*left* turns, eh?)

daytripper wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:03:46 -0500, "Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time!

Op

Indeed, and it's so much more than just electing Obama as President.
Between this election and the mid-terms of 2006, the Republican Party
has suffered tremendous losses at all levels of government -
basically, it has had its head removed and handed back to it. Such is
the cost of their having run the country into a financial, moral and
ethical ditch while they were in control. Now they have two choices:
sit on the sidelines and snipe, while hoping things get worse, or
change their stripes, moderate their dogma, and join in the effort to
extricate the country from the abyss that the neocons sank it in.
snip

I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other
thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think
conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a
conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen in
the past several elections talked a conservative game during their campaigns
and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office. The party's choice
to run for POTUS this time was a lame-assed attempt at trying to prop up a
moderate to draw in independent and moderate voters while retaining their
conservative base. Yeah, *that* will work! IMHO, the party either has to get
back to its conservative roots, present conservative ideas in a way that
draws people to the party, or just get off the stage. Also, "conservative"
shouldn't be confused with "neocon", 'cause they don't have anything to do
with each other. In fact, they're opposing viewpoints entirely.

Well, boys and girls (I *really* miss Nancy Anderson (Cyli) during the
recent roff **** storms), that's just about all you'll get out of me
regarding politics. It's all over now and the US needs to stand behind their
president in unity. The new administration and congress certainly have their
hands full and will need all the prayers and good vibes we can send their
way. Congrats to my Democrat friends here on roff for their party's victory.
God bless the USA.
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

On Nov 5, 6:03*pm, Conan The Librarian wrote:

* *But I must admit, you've got quite the history of posting on NASCAR
related groups.

* * * Chuck Vance (kind of ironic that your expertise seems to be
*left* turns, eh?)

Boy I did not catch that. His expertise is in LEFT turns? . . . and
he is a RED republican? This whole damn thing is like this TV thing I
saw when i was a kid. "The show starred someone names "Philbrick," and
was titled something like "I Led Three Lives." It was all about
Communists. Communists that lived right under your nose.

Like maybe right here on ROFF!

Dave

Tim J. wrote:

I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other
thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think
conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a
conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen in
the past several elections talked a conservative game during their campaigns
and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office.

This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL
conservative to get spending under control!" Name one. Reagan, maybe?

It's instructive to look at this graph of the national debt since WWII:

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Under Truman (Democrat) and Eisenhower (moderate Republican) it went
down, down, down. Under Nixon, Ford, and Carter it held pretty much
steady. Under Reagan and G.H.W. Bush it rocketed up. Under Clinton it
plummeted. Under G. W. Bush it went way up.

The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under
control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the
rich and to borrow money to cover the nut.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

rw typed:
Tim J. wrote:

I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other
thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think
conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a
conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen
in
the past several elections talked a conservative game during their
campaigns
and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office.

This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL
conservative to get spending under control!"
snip
The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under
control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the
rich and to borrow money to cover the nut.

So you agree with me. I knew it would happen sooner or later.
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

Tim J. wrote:
rw typed:

Tim J. wrote:

I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other
thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think
conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a
conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen
in
the past several elections talked a conservative game during their
campaigns
and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office.

This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL
conservative to get spending under control!"

snip

The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under
control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the
rich and to borrow money to cover the nut.


So you agree with me. I knew it would happen sooner or later.

By your way of thinking the last true conservative was Bill Clinton.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"rw" wrote in message
...
Tim J. wrote:
rw typed:

Tim J. wrote:

I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other
thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think
conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a
conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've
seen in
the past several elections talked a conservative game during their
campaigns
and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office.

This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL
conservative to get spending under control!"

snip

The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under
control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the
rich and to borrow money to cover the nut.


So you agree with me. I knew it would happen sooner or later.

By your way of thinking the last true conservative was Bill Clinton.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Actually no. Newt and the Republican Congress got spending under control
for a couple years, and the dot.bomb boom brought in almost more money than
the Feds could spend. Clinton was a lucky POTUS.