In America, we are electing our Congressmen

[thepixiesrock]

Dick Devos hates America, and Jennifer Granholm is a murderer! It's a wonder anyone votes for either of them!

Edited November 8, 2006 by thepixiesrock

[jaguars4ever]

Governator FTW!1

[Guard Dog]

Looks like Dems won the House and may yet get the Senate. It's going to be a long two years. But after two years of their unique blend of American socialisim, massive tax increases, and nasty condescending attitude towards all things traditionally American, the voters will show them the door in 2008. Just like in 1996.

Edited November 8, 2006 by Guard Dog

[Pidesco]

I thought this was funny:

 

http://alienlovespredator.com/index.php?id=213

[Lucius]

Calling democrats communists or even socialists is laughable. You haven't been to Europe, have you? :crazy:

[Pidesco]

Looks like Dems won the House and may yet get the Senate. It's going to be a long two years. But after two years of their unique blend of American socialisim, massive tax increases, and nasty condescending attitude towards all things traditionally American, the voters will show them the door in 2008. Just like in 1996.

 

I was wondering what those traditionally American things are, especially the ones Democrats are condescending to.

[Lucius]

Oh you know, the good old republican ways, beating up gays, giving your boy a gun at birth, invading all sorts of nations, being a good christian with a traditional family, like Pastor Ted Haggard, you know, all that ****! :joy:

 

 

[Guard Dog]

Oh you know, the good old republican ways, beating up gays, giving your boy a gun at birth, invading all sorts of nations, being a good christian with a traditional family, like Pastor Ted Haggard, you know, all that ****!  :joy:   

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Heh! No actually I am far more worried about State rights vs Federal rigths (Kelo v New London ring a bell). Individual freedoms, like firearm ownership for example. Crippling business growth with punative taxation. Trying to assault the First amendment with their "Fairness Doctrine". And the biggest American tradition of all, smaller governement. Not that the Repubs are any better. One is growing the government slowly, one wants to do it quickly. Like I said eariler, it's the lesser of two evils.

 

As for Dem socialisim, last time they were in power they tired to nationalize 1/7th of the US economy. QED!

 

What we need is a libertarian government that will restore the Monroe doctrine to US forigen policy. And an immediate cessetion of ALL US aid to any non-western hemisphere country. So vote for me in 2008! :D

[TravisPennington]

I didn't want to make a topic if we already had one involving voting / politics, so I'll vent my frustrations here in this one.

 

The harsher of the two public smoking bans in Nevada passed. I can't believe it. Boo. Go back to California you mongrels. :angry:

 

Now you can't even smoke in bars that serve any kind of food! The lesser of the two only really banned it in restaurants, which I was okay with. But the one that actually passed bans smoking in any establishment which serves any sort of food. That's not just restaurants. That's all types of pubs, and those relaxed bars with those neat little grills in the back. You can't smoke in casino areas of grocery stores or gas stations anymore either (although that's not that bad to be honest). I'm only upset about the banning inside bars. You can still smoke in bars if they don't serve any sort of food, but christ. No more beer and wings nights at the local pub for you.

 

And the minimum wage act passed. Now people on minimum wage make a whole $1 extra an hour. That wouldn't be a bad thing, but if you have any sense of economics you're going to realize that everyone else is going to complain about how they "only" make $1 more than minimum wage, or $5 more, or whatever. People are going to get paid more all around, prices on practically everything are going to go up, then it's going to stagnate. All in a few years. The raising of minimum wage will have achieved practically nothing.

 

And I am done venting. Congratulations to you Californians on retaining the Governator for four years, btw.

[Fenghuang]

Man, I voted for the Governator, I admit it.

 

Angelides was the only other viable candidate and he was an ****. I don't like Governator very much what with all the cuts, but damned if I didn't Angelides even less.

[kumquatq3]

Man, I voted for the Governator, I admit it.

 

 

 

You shame us all

 

 

Seems the Dems get the Senate as well, hard to come up with 1500+ votes and 8000+ votes in a recount

[taks]

What we need is a libertarian government that will restore the Monroe doctrine to US forigen policy. And an immediate cessetion of ALL US aid to any non-western hemisphere country. So vote for me in 2008! :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

my sentiments exactly. well, mostly. i don't think the monroe doctrine really holds anymore with such global interaction, but there are certainly alternatives to the way it has been.

 

the good thing about democrats in the house is now we have a power split. nothing will get passed. that means even the new-age "tax and spend republicans" will not get to spend money like water (which has been the case). face it, tax revenues after the tax cut are up incredibly, much more than the so-called "experts" predicted. that's what a booming economy does for tax revenue. unfortunately, the republicans have taken it as their cause to spend all that revenue rather than concentrate on eliminating debt. ugh.

 

taks

[taks]

The harsher of the two public smoking bans in Nevada passed. I can't believe it. Boo. Go back to California you mongrels.  :angry:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

a federal court just ruled that such bans are an unconstitutional meddling into private business rights (i think in texas, which is the 5th, or 3rd district?). anyway, that precedent will be hard to get rid of and may result in many of these bans being overturned. colorado's included, which is soon before our federal courts.

 

taks

[Enoch]

Seems the Dems get the Senate as well, hard to come up with 1500+ votes and 8000+ votes in a recount

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not over yet. The late votes that haven't been added in yet tend to be absentee, absentee votes tend to be military (particularly in VA, which has very strict rules on who may vote absentee), and military voters trend Republican.

 

As for the libertarians, my pet theory is that Libertarianism is very much like Socialism, only slightly less stupid. It is like hardcore socialism because the vast majority of the supporters of both theories are either wackos who hand out newsletters on the streetcorner or college sophomores who think they're being profound. Of course, because Libertarianism is slightly less stupid than socialism, their main debate tactic is to call everything that is not libertarianism "socalist."

[kumquatq3]

Seems the Dems get the Senate as well, hard to come up with 1500+ votes and 8000+ votes in a recount

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not over yet. The late votes that haven't been added in yet tend to be absentee, absentee votes tend to be military (particularly in VA, which has very strict rules on who may vote absentee), and military voters trend Republican.

 

Not over, no. I rather be a Democrat today though.

 

 

Edit: BTW, due to the new voting machines, there are no paper recounts.

Edited November 8, 2006 by kumquatq3

[taks]

As for the libertarians, my pet theory is that Libertarianism is very much like Socialism, only slightly less stupid.  It is like hardcore socialism because the vast majority of the supporters of both theories are either wackos who hand out newsletters on the streetcorner or college sophomores who think they're being profound.  Of course, because Libertarianism is slightly less stupid than socialism, their main debate tactic is to call everything that is not libertarianism "socalist."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

true they tend to be of the wacko sort often, though i don't agree with the comparison to socialism. libertarians are diehard capitalists that agree with most everything else that would be labelled "liberal." (technically, "liberal" w.r.t. economics is capitalist so they're truly "liberal" in every respect).

 

taks

[Darth Drabek]

Here's how I look at the smoking ban issue. It's not going to stop smokers from going to bars. The number of smokers who boycott bars will be negligible. The ban will bring people to bars who don't normally go, however - those folks who don't like to smell like an ashtray when they leave.

 

So basically, it's win-win for bar owners. The smokers will huddle outside to have their cigarettes, then belly right back up to the bar.

 

Heh, most of the bars I know will reek of smoke for years anyway, because years and years of it has soaked into the walls.

 

In Ohio, we had two choices: SmokeFree Ohio, or SmokeLess Ohio (that's honestly how they were promoted). SmokeFree Ohio was the full-on ban, and SmokeLess was a amendment to the state constitution allowing smoking in bars and restaurants. The thing that irked some people about SmokeLess Ohio was that as a constitutional amendment, it would overturn city ordinances - for example, the city of Columbus passed its own smoking ban several years back. That ban would have been overturned had the SmokeLess initiative passed.

 

Although... at least one city in Ohio has repeatedly voted down proposed smoking bans, and now their population's mandate is being overturned. So that's a bummer for them... but it's for their own good, right?

[taks]

Here's how I look at the smoking ban issue. It's not going to stop smokers from going to bars.

actually, it does. not larger bars (i.e. nightclubs), but the smaller mom and pop bars are the ones that take the hit. the biggest hit being the day crowd that comes in to have a few beers, smoke a pack of cigarrettes and relax after a hard day of watching soaps.

 

The number of smokers who boycott bars will be negligible. The ban will bring people to bars who don't normally go, however - those folks who don't like to smell like an ashtray when they leave.

unfortunately, that is not really the case, either, at least from what i have seen. the people that supported smoking bans simply aren't bar patrons, either.

 

taks

[kirottu]

Awesome business idea: Ashtray perfume! Selled in those states that ban public smoking.

[kumquatq3]

In Ohio, we had two choices: SmokeFree Ohio, or SmokeLess Ohio

 

Or, of course, rejecting both

[taks]

no kidding.

 

i tell you what, if the republicans lose the senate, too, it will be interesting come the next presidential election. should the democrats wind up with the same level of dominance, things won't get any better. they'll have free reign to spend. kyoto money pit here we come... ugh.

 

taks

[Darth Drabek]

Here's how I look at the smoking ban issue. It's not going to stop smokers from going to bars.

 

actually, it does.  not larger bars (i.e. nightclubs), but the smaller mom and pop bars are the ones that take the hit.  the biggest hit being the day crowd that comes in to have a few beers, smoke a pack of cigarrettes and relax after a hard day of watching soaps.

 

Then what are they going to do to fill that time? Those type of bars are gathering places as much as drinking establishments, and I just don't think smokers will forgo social contact because of the ban. If anything, they'll go there to bitch about the smoking ban!

 

The number of smokers who boycott bars will be negligible. The ban will bring people to bars who don't normally go, however - those folks who don't like to smell like an ashtray when they leave.

unfortunately, that is not really the case, either, at least from what i have seen.  the people that supported smoking bans simply aren't bar patrons, either.

 

taks

 

Okay, I agree that many of the people who would vote for a smoking ban are not bar patrons by nature. But maybe those folks will go out to enjoy a beer and watch the game now that the air is clearer, so to speak.

 

 

Edit because my quotes were atrocious.

Edited November 8, 2006 by Darth Drabek

[kumquatq3]

no kidding.

 

i tell you what, if the republicans lose the senate, too, it will be interesting come the next presidential election.  should the democrats wind up with the same level of dominance, things won't get any better.  they'll have free reign to spend.  kyoto money pit here we come... ugh.

 

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Or, you know, balanced budgets and a new golden age!

 

 

We need a weakly hopeful smiley

 

It's a new breed of Dems tho, more conservative, aka moderate.

Edited November 8, 2006 by kumquatq3

[Enoch]

no kidding.

 

i tell you what, if the republicans lose the senate, too, it will be interesting come the next presidential election.  should the democrats wind up with the same level of dominance, things won't get any better.  they'll have free reign to spend.  kyoto money pit here we come... ugh.

 

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's a new breed of Dems tho, more conservative, aka moderate.

 

Or, you know, balanced budgets and a new golden age!

 

 

We need a weakly hopeful smiley

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm hopeful, too. The Dems owe their majority to an appeal to the center, which is a welcome relief after 6 years of Bush-Rove "the base is all that matters" governing. The problem is that all the committee chairs will go to the most senior Democrats, who also tend to be the most liberal. There's a danger that these members will drive the party's agenda too far to the left.

[taks]

Then what are they going to do to fill that time? Those type of bars are gathering places as much as drinking establishments, and I just don't think smokers will forgo social contact because of the ban. If anything, they'll go there to bitch about the smoking ban! 

sit at home drinking and smoking. hehe, but no, they aren't going to go in just to bitch about the ban. it has measurably hurt every bar i've been in (across the country) where smoking is not allowed. yes, believe it or not, i ask, and i do get around the country due to my job.

 

Okay, I agree that many of the people who would vote for a smoking ban are not bar patrons by nature. But maybe those folks will go out to enjoy a beer and watch the game now that the air is clearer, so to speak.

some, yes. but by nature, these aren't big drinkers, either. the bars that get hit are the types of places where very regular crowds go. demographically speaking, they are big drinkers and smokers. over time that may change, of course, it's only been 4 months so it is hard to say for sure.

 

taks