Wisconsin Primary

[Harlan Huckleby]

possible the election won't happen in October. If it looks like the Sadrists have a good chance of doing well, Bush and Maliki may find a reason to postpone it.

Anything is posisible. Malaki said today that political parties with militias are ineligible for the election. Sadr offered to disarm his militia. "Disarm" means put weapons under beds, but that's good enough.

These are local elections. The U.S., at least, doesn't care much who controls the provinces, legitimacy & local control is what counts.

It doesn't make sense to guess about the futur, it's impossible to understand the present. But a positive drift in Iraq is a good thing, and Dems should hope for it too.

[Harlan Huckleby]

the Republicans inevitably gain BECAUSE THEIR CORE POSITIONS ARE MUCH MORE IN TUNE WITH THE PEOPLE.

the polls don't show this.

the Republicans run strong in presidency because they have more presidential candidates. and they are good at running negative campaigns.

[Joemailman]

Obama gets Dick Move Of The Week award:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...a_n_95875.html

[Harlan Huckleby]

Robert Byrd of West Virginia was re-elected in 2006 at 88. “I’m told that 90 is the new 80,” he said.

[the_idle_threat]

Obama gets Dick Move Of The Week award:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...a_n_95875.html

[texaspackerbacker]

the Republicans inevitably gain BECAUSE THEIR CORE POSITIONS ARE MUCH MORE IN TUNE WITH THE PEOPLE.

the polls don't show this.

the Republicans run strong in presidency because they have more presidential candidates. and they are good at running negative campaigns.

OK, I'm going to try and be scrupulously fair and balanced in describing the key issues and comparative positions. If anybody disagrees, let them feel free to say what they might think the respective parties' positions are in their opinions.

These are pretty much in what I consider order of importance:

PREVENTION OF ACTS OF TERROR AGAINST AMERICA:

Republicans favor basically what Bush has done--called by opponents the "Cowboy Approach", called more objectively, Interventionist Foreign Policy--America acting on its own to attack countries seen as needing to be attacked for our own interests, security and otherwise. Also, enhanced security at home, monitoring terrorist communications, denying foreign terrorists the rights that WE have in the Constitution, and THEY do not of due process--locking them up at Gitmo and using harsh interrogation.

Democrats hate the "Cowboy Approach", instead favoring putting our security in the hands of the UN and other countries like old Europe. They also favor the "police approach" which John Kerry articulated in his presidential campaign--NOT intervening in other countries, NOT fighting pre-emptive wars, just waiting for terrorists to hit us, then tracking down the perpetrators like police. Democrats also opposed the Patriot Act and other domestic security measures, opposed monitoring terrorist communications, opposed harsh interrogation of terrorists, and favored giving those foreign terrorists the rights which are Constitutionally given to Americans.

THE WAR:

Republicans invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and won the military phase of those theaters of the war. They basically favor "staying the course"--continuing to progress toward victory in the form of stable representative democracies--as now seems within reach.

Democrats favor either immediate unilateral withdrawal or setting a timetable for withdrawal of troops--in Iraq, at least, thus risking the enabling of the enemy to gain control, destabilizing the entire middle east and giving them a base for terrorist actions against America and our allies.

THE ECONOMY:

Republicans favor lower taxes and in most cases, less government spending for various domestic and social programs.

Democrats favor higher taxes and greatly enhanced domestic and social program spending.

REGULATION/INTRUSIVE GOVERNMENT:

Republicans abhor it; Democrats embrace it. Republicans think government gets in the way of people solving their own problems; Democrats think government is the primary solver of problems.

MORALITY AND CULTURAL ISSUES:

Most Republicans oppose making abortion easier, oppose mainstreaming homosexuality as a morally equivalent lifestyle; Democrats favor both of those things.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION:

Approximately 70% of Republicans--not including Bush and McCain--favor a strict approach to closing the border and denying amnesty for illegals. Approximately 70% of Democrats favor a less strict approach to closing the border and favor amnesty for illegals.

That's about all of the important issues I can think of. If there are others, feel free to bring them up.

The question I would ask everybody, is how many of those issues do you agree with the Republicans on, and how many with the Democrats? It is my contention that when the filter of leftist media bias is removed and it comes down to actual comparative positions, on virtually all of those issues, the vast majority of Americans favor the Republican position.

[Harlan Huckleby]

tex, if repubs have all these issues, why'd they get whupped in 2006 elections? Fooled by media again?

the public no longer believes that tax cuts are solution to economy.
the public is fine with "mainstreaming" homosexuals, you just haven't noticed.
I lack the patience to dissect your points, except to mention that you missed the pivotal domestic issue, health care. Most of the issues you list are ideological old canards. country is under stress, public is ready for change.

I might vote for McCain despite his membership in GOP. I have some problems w/ Obama & Obamamania. But I sure hope & expect dems to kick butt in congress like they did last time.

[Harlan Huckleby]

dp

[BallHawk]

I talked with multi-millionaire white people today about Obama....probably the most pathetic, yet hilarious conversation of my life.

[packinpatland]

I talked with multi-millionaire white people today about Obama....probably the most pathetic, yet hilarious conversation of my life.

Elaborate

[texaspackerbacker]

Harlan, I come back 24 hours or so later, and you and all the other Dems are MIA when it comes to discussing the issues?

Hell Yeah, the rotten leftist mainstream media successfully corrupted the electorate in the '06 Congressional Elections.

Could you possibly disagree with my intended-to-be objective characterization of the two parties' positions on those issues?

You are sort of right that I left out medical care. I covered it indirectly in referring to REGULATION/INTRUSIVE GOVERNMENT.

On MEDICAL CARE, most Dems favor a Canadian style "single payer system", where the government pays for all, but all private care is actually FORBIDDEN. Republicans range from "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" to programs like medical savings accounts. The sure thing among Republicans, though, is a free market solution.

When all the facts about the horrors of the Canadian system are known, do you really think people would support it?

The consistent scenario is that DEMOCRATS GET ELECTED BY MASKING AND COVERING UP THEIR TRUE AGENDA--WITH THE COMPLICITY OF THE MEDIA, while REPUBLICANS GET ELECTED BY MAKING THEIR TRUE POSITIONS KNOWN TO VOTERS.

I challenge any Dem supporters to DENY or DISPUTE that logically/factually.

Just look what goes on here. All the Dem voters are ashamed/afraid/whatever to show up and discuss issues--any more than brief bits of inane sarcasm. It's the same on the national stage.

[BallHawk]

I challenge any Dem supporters to DENY or DISPUTE that logically/factually.

If there is one place where logic and facts don't make any sense is politics.

At the end of the day, no matter how many statistics one gives or how logical his arguement may be, it doesn't mean a thing. There is nothing more stubborn than a man's opinion. That rings especially true in politics.

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, here it is another 24 or so hours later, and none of the Dem/lib posters have the balls even to defend left wing positions--but how could they? Those liberal positions are simply indefensible.

[The Leaper]

the Republicans run strong in presidency because they have more presidential candidates. and they are good at running negative campaigns.

Wrong and wrong.

The GOP keeps winning the White House because the Dems have exceptionally crappy candidates. Just a month ago, everyone was yelling about how GREAT the Dems choices were. Now, after Obama has removed all doubt about how out of touch he is with most Americans and after Hillary has exhibited negative campaigning that even the GOP recoils at, are Dems still excited about their choices?

The Dems may have an advantage on issues...but their candidates often come off as two-bit liars who really don't have any true feeling for the issues they claim to hold dear. Hillary and Obama already are exhibiting the signs of that.

Sorry Obama...religion is not a crutch for most Americans. It is not the opiate of the masses. Sorry Hillary...snipers were not aiming at you, and half your campaign stories lack accuracy.

As an American, I struggle to see why Obama, Hillary and McCain are the best we can come up with.

[Joemailman]

Harlan, I come back 24 hours or so later, and you and all the other Dems are MIA when it comes to discussing the issues?

Hell Yeah, the rotten leftist mainstream media successfully corrupted the electorate in the '06 Congressional Elections.

Could you possibly disagree with my intended-to-be objective characterization of the two parties' positions on those issues?

You are sort of right that I left out medical care. I covered it indirectly in referring to REGULATION/INTRUSIVE GOVERNMENT.

On MEDICAL CARE, most Dems favor a Canadian style "single payer system", where the government pays for all, but all private care is actually FORBIDDEN. Republicans range from "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" to programs like medical savings accounts. The sure thing among Republicans, though, is a free market solution.

When all the facts about the horrors of the Canadian system are known, do you really think people would support it?

The consistent scenario is that DEMOCRATS GET ELECTED BY MASKING AND COVERING UP THEIR TRUE AGENDA--WITH THE COMPLICITY OF THE MEDIA, while REPUBLICANS GET ELECTED BY MAKING THEIR TRUE POSITIONS KNOWN TO VOTERS.

I challenge any Dem supporters to DENY or DISPUTE that logically/factually.

Just look what goes on here. All the Dem voters are ashamed/afraid/whatever to show up and discuss issues--any more than brief bits of inane sarcasm. It's the same on the national stage.

The only Democratic candidate proposing a single payer system was Dennis Kucinich. The others didn't. Not Obama. Not Hillary Not Edwards. Not Biden.

Last time I checked though, the life expectancy of Canadians was higher than that of Americans, so maybe their system isn't as bad as you suggest. And they pay less per capita than we do. But then, so does everyone else.

[texaspackerbacker]

Maybe that's because so many Canadians come to the U.S. for treatment they can't get at home. Maybe that's because there are so many homicides, etc. in ghettos and elsewhere in America.

Kucinich's plan may have been the purest single-payer system, but the others weren't very far removed--ALL of them restricting freedom of choice and almost certainly resulting in gross inefficiency and delay like in Canada.

I applaud your issue-oriented response on this one issue, anyway.

None of the other leftists have stuck their heads out of the sand long enough to discuss any of them.

[Freak Out]

Maybe that's because so many Canadians come to the U.S. for treatment they can't get at home.

But the Canadian Government still pays for it. They do it all the time here in Alaska.

[texaspackerbacker]

LEAPER, I strongly disagree that the Democrats come out ahead on the issues.

I described as objectively as I could the comparative positions on pretty much all of those issues a few posts back. The Democrat positions on those issues are so completely out of tune with views and values of normal Americans that our forum leftists just don't even dare defend them.

Issue by issue, they simply are on the wrong side of all of them.

[The Leaper]

Tex, many Americans do not agree with you or the GOP.

In terms of National Security and the war in Iraq, neither side has an advantage IMO. Neither side has made a real effort to address our borders or deal with illegal immigrants. On the issue of Gitmo and torture, I don't think you can claim that a majority of Americans support it. I think it is about a 50-50 split by most polling. Again...neither side has an advantage. In terms of the war, I agree that a slim majority are in favor of not making an immediate pullout...but a slim majority also are in favor of having a clear exit strategy at this point, not just "stay the course".

The economy? Sorry Tex, but where has Bush reduced spending and limited government? Bush has created a bigger government and spent more money than the Democrats ever have. The vast majority of Americans favor raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations, so you are dead wrong that the GOP has the people on their side in that regard.

Again, neither side has produced anything of note pertaining to the major economic problems facing us in the decades ahead, so no one has an advantage here.

The public sentiment on regulation is closer to a 50-50 split than you suggest as well. The corporate scandals relating to Enron, Tyco and the mortgage industry have soured the opinion of many Americans on giving business free reign to do what they please. Many Americans favor tighter regulations on business.

Morality is a 50-50 split as well...claiming either side holds a high ground in morality is a joke.

The populist independent stance is one that continues to gain traction in the United States...and I don't think it will be long before a third party is created that seeks to appeal to the common people, not the elites or special interests. Fewer and fewer Americans are finding themselves strongly aligned with either major party.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex, many Americans do not agree with you or the GOP.

In terms of National Security and the war in Iraq, neither side has an advantage IMO. Neither side has made a real effort to address our borders or deal with illegal immigrants. On the issue of Gitmo and torture, I don't think you can claim that a majority of Americans support it. I think it is about a 50-50 split by most polling. Again...neither side has an advantage. In terms of the war, I agree that a slim majority are in favor of not making an immediate pullout...but a slim majority also are in favor of having a clear exit strategy at this point, not just "stay the course".

The economy? Sorry Tex, but where has Bush reduced spending and limited government? Bush has created a bigger government and spent more money than the Democrats ever have. The vast majority of Americans favor raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations, so you are dead wrong that the GOP has the people on their side in that regard.

Again, neither side has produced anything of note pertaining to the major economic problems facing us in the decades ahead, so no one has an advantage here.

The public sentiment on regulation is closer to a 50-50 split than you suggest as well. The corporate scandals relating to Enron, Tyco and the mortgage industry have soured the opinion of many Americans on giving business free reign to do what they please. Many Americans favor tighter regulations on business.

Morality is a 50-50 split as well...claiming either side holds a high ground in morality is a joke.

The populist independent stance is one that continues to gain traction in the United States...and I don't think it will be long before a third party is created that seeks to appeal to the common people, not the elites or special interests. Fewer and fewer Americans are finding themselves strongly aligned with either major party.

I appreciate the thoughtful reply, Leaper. Some of it I even agree with--in a limited way.

The issue of illegal immigration is unique in that the partisanship doesn't correlate with the two parties. It's maybe 70/30 for stricter versus looser policies among Republicans and maybe 30/70 for stricter versus looser policies among Democrats. The most needed single item IMO is the fence. That along with moderately higher numbers of Border Patrol should take control of the border. And which party do you think gives a better chance of that? Putting the military on the border for that purpose isn't going to happen. It is impractical and against current law for them to actual do police-type practices.

Do you REALLY see the public as opposing what has worked on security in favor of a policy that just seems doomed to failure--Kerry's police approach--which is STILL the policy of the Democrat Party? Just let the Dems try and sell that to people. And do you really think people favor bringing Guantanamo terrorists into OUR justice system, or to ruling out harsh interrogation--or real torture, for that matter, if the lives of Americans are on the line? I say again, just let Obama or Hillary try to sell that to people.

And on the war, as far as we have progressed toward a successful conclusion, do you really think the stupid timetable to withdraw--with all its implications for defeat and bad consequences--is something that is going to win votes for Obama or Hillary?

What you said about higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations rings true--unfortunately. That is a tribute to the class warfare crap pushed for so long by the Dem/libs. Corporation tax is paid by customers, and fair taxing--cutting at the same rate across the board does more to stimulate the economy, since reducing the higher levels allows for more trickling down, which translates to more economic stimulation. Unfortunately, that truth is drowned out by the left's ranting about sticking it to the rich.

Morality issues are NOT a 50/50 split. Go to any school, any bar, any factory, any church, and ask people whether they like the idea of treating homosexuality as nothing worse than a qualitatively equal alternative lifestyle, as Dem/libs promote. And while you are at those places, ask what people think about making abortion more easily accessible. Some other "morality issues", yes, may be about 50/50. But abortion and the gay agenda are the two big ones, and the Democrats clearly are on the wrongside from the point of view of most Americans there.

Likewise, go to some of those places where normal people congregate and ask what they think about the manmade global warming idiocy--and the idea that they--we--should pay through the nose to "fix" it. I think you'll find a lot of acute cases of Algorophobia--fear of Algore's bullshit.

You may be right also on the regulation thing. My idea of regulation is the government harrassing me about safety crap, environmental crap, etc., however, I can see your point of view about people being disgusted over the various corporate scandals. In that arena, it starts with the liberal class warfare crap, but goes beyond that to some real need to rein things in.

Your idea of a third party probably won't happen--it just ain't the American system. If the idea has any chance, though, you would have to combine the populism you are talking about with a healthy pro-American perspective--get away from this Ron Paul anti-war/anti-interventionist foreign policy idiocy.