Okay I understand now, thank you. I agree with you. I debated a person for a while until I found out that he lied about his background. From that point on I could not discuss any topic because I did not trust him anymore. I don’t know about leaning towards biased opinion or propaganda but if the person who is taking the other side has been making stuff up just to make points rather than an honest mistake why would you want to listen to the person? It all becomes and issue of integrity. If you honestly believe your point is correct that is fine with me. If you are shown that your point is incorrect and still cling to that point then you are intellectually dishonest. When you make up things to support your incorrect position, then you are untrustworthy and a waste of time. Sure they may be telling the truth on another point but having proven a liar why take the chance.



I don’t know who MAC is. Conservatives vote for the one that most closely represents their thinking. We knew Mr. Bush was a liberal just like his father but he got the votes because the alternative was worse. Conservatives will not support someone that does not at least respect our views. Look at what happened to President George H. Bush, he was too liberal and we ended up with Mr. Clinton. Then the choice was Mr. Gore or Mr. Bush and we dove for cover and voted for Mr. Bush. He was not as bad as we feared but still a liberal.

Oh, he was bad! Don't keep pulling the wool over your eyes. As for calling either Bush liberal is ridiculous, especially the son. Raising taxes[read my lips] or spending[for a war and 9/11] does not make one liberal.

This part did not bother me, it was an obvious liberal trap and the president fell into it. He was going to get most of what he wanted if he allowed a modest tax hike. I see the logic behind it. I was surprised that the trap worked so well. It did not work on Mr. Reagan because he did not try to promise what he might have to back down on. He like Mr. Bush did the best he could and got as much as he could. It was not the read my lips thing that got conservatives upset it was the other things he did or didn’t do like finish the war in Iraq. Read my lips was a red herring that the liberal democrats thought worked and it may have on their side but not with conservatives. Remember we did not want him as president in the first place but he was all we had after Mr. Reagan left office. We hoped he would not be so liberal but he could not go against his nature and people were not inspired to vote for him. We knew Mr. Clinton was a dirt bag and no one wanted either as president. Remember in both elections Mr. Clinton never even got 50% of the vote. Mr. Bush 43 on the other hand had Mr. Gore as an opponent and no one wanted that on my side and a lot of the democrats did not want him either. For the last election it was not even a hint who the people trusted out of the two choices we had.



That does not bother me either. It is the growth of the federal government that I don’t like. I am an employee of a sorts for the feds and I still don’t like the size of our government.

The elder I can easily see. He is from the New England wing of the Republican party, and for the most part, they are liberal (Chafee and Jeffords anyone??). Moderate would probably be closer to the truth (althoug while anyone right of Kerry looks conservative to liberals, anyone left of Hagel looks liberal to conservatives).

Bush Jr, was a solid moderate. Some conservative, some liberal. Over all, a C- in both camps (for the ones not consumed by hate).



It did me. for 2 reasons - that he made such a strong statement, and then broke his promise. And that he was so stupid as to fall for the liberal trap. It is not like they have not tried that line before - many times.

Dr. remember president Reagan? He got the tax cuts passed because he was willing to let the democrats have some of what they wanted. What they wanted was to kill the tax cuts. Mr. Reagan got 50% of what he wanted and in his mind brought him 50% closer to his goal. Mr. Bush said no new taxes, the democrats gave him 75% of what he wanted it was a good deal for America bad for him politically. He put the nation above himself.

He was promised 75%, but got 0%. He was a fool.

Maybe so but is that not worth the effort? He proved them to be liars and instead of focusing on that you focus on his attempt to better the country as a negative. It is the intention rather than the results that liberals care about. Bush is a liberal.

Well, Martyrs prove that their opposition will kill. Somehow I dont think most do any good.

Currently "flipflopping" is out of style;we're going back to where modifying one's stand is a good sign.  

Yea, I heard bell bottoms were back in too.

Really--I liked the tapered kind. There was a bread delivery company [Krugs]that had a fleet of electric trucks--maybe that knowledge will return.