I am probably going to open a whole new can worms here. I might regret opening later, but some of the topics being discussed really got me thinking about things. One of the things said that really kind of got me going on this was:

Pattygreen: Christians (usually conservative republicans) for the most part try to live moral, virtuous, nonsinful lives.

I am not a Christian and I live a moral, virtuous, and for the most part nonsinful life. I know several people who live the same, and are not Christian, and have conservative beliefs.

Cleo's Mom: First of all, "conservative republican" is redundant, because they are all conservative. I don't think there are any moderate republicans left particularly among those elected to office.

However, I just wonder if it is MORAL to mislead or outright lie, because listen to what these conservative republicans have said:

Dana Perino said on Fox: We did not have a domestic attack during bush's administration.

A month later Mary Matalin said: bush inherited 9/11 from Clinton.

Yesterday, Rudy Giuliani said that we never had a domestic attack under bush but we had one under Obama.

Now, I ask you - do these people think the American public is really that stupid? Apparently. Those on the right just make things up and keep repeating it. And when they repeat it often enough eventually some people begin to believe it.

They reduce things to some emotional, hate filled sound bite: death panels, obamacare, socialism, hitler, nazi.

This is because they are unable to engage in meaningful, intelligent, fact-based discussions. Maybe they don't want to do that because they don't have the facts on their side.

First I am a moderate Republican. I do tend to lean a little more to the right, but on some issues I lean to the left. Some things I can lean pretty right, and others I lean pretty far left. It really depends on the issue. I'd like to think that would make me moderate. I know many people who are moderate Republicans also. So we are still out there. There are some politicians who are still moderate also.

Second just because you are a Republican does not mean that you can not have a intelligent, meaningful, fact-based conversation. That is like saying liberals have their heads in clouds and live in fantasy nerf world filled with rainbows and butterflies.

Both sides sling mud back and forth. Both sides have their hate filled idiots. Both sides have their good and bad points. Both sides LIE, LIE, and LIE some more.

I get so sick and tired of hearing about how the Republicans have screwed everything up...I mean really they did it all alone.....no help from the left at all???

I personally feel that if you lean too far left or right you can't have a very grip on reality, and when our politicans lean too far left or right it's not good for our country either way. I hope someday too see more moderate politicans in office.

Cleo'sM: I love the idea of patty trying to pull up all the names you've called the opposition. Then we can all have a field day posting hers. Trust me, she'll get the award for the most inflammatory, outrageous, hateful words used in these discussions about not only political parties but even in the threads that wind up being about religion.

Hey, I'll bet I can even compete in this contest, eh?

Are you trying to tell me that the teabaggers who sought out a business to print these buttons and paid for them are the equivalent of black people calling another black person the N word?

Do you think that black people would have buttons made to sell at one of their marches or protests that said "Proud to be a N*****?

Don't try to deflect from the fact that I was using a word that they called themselves. Don't blame me for using a word that resulted from the name they gave themselves. They caused this word to be associated with their party. They should have been smarter about their name choice. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, now, though.

Now, if you want to go back and quote my posts, go right ahead. I can do the same with you. However, I will never shrink from calling it like I see it.

Nice try. But as the Lord has said," Remove the plank from your own eye before trying to remove a sliver from someone elses."

All I know is this: It is very typical of you too call people names that don't agree with you. But when others do it, you jump all over them as if they were 'evil' and 'dangerous'.

One way to explain it to you, patty, is for me to use your own post. Yes, the Democrats are involved in party politics and they wheel and deal. Republicans do too. That's how stuff eventually gets done in Washington. Negotiations, deal making, bargaining, etc. It isn't always pretty, but it has become the way to get change in Washington.

But the difference is that Republicans lie to the public. They don't tell the truth when they want to go to war. They lie about the past even though we were all alive to remember what they did. In campaigns they create letters and petitions that are based on lies - and then they sign them and mail them and publish them in newspapers as an ad. They lie when the truth looks better.

And to clarify because I do respect some Republicans - not all Republicans are lyin', cheatin' homewreckers, who will stop at nothing to get their way. Just some of them.

You know it's like some Christians are obnoxious, hell fire and brimstone, my way or the highway folks and others try to emulate Jesus.

So it's never good to generalize and I am guilty of doing just that. But the proof is in the pudding and the clowns that are running the Republican party right now are mired in pudding like mud.

There was a time when all of this deceitfulness and corruption was done in the dark. Still wrong, but at least politicians 'knew' it was wrong and was ashamed to have it brought into the light. Now, democrats are 'bragging' about their corrupt deals. "No. it wasn't 1 million dollars, it was 3 million dollars that I was bribed with and I'm proud of it!" (making what's wrong, 'right' and what's right, 'wrong'.) Shame on them.

Bull. That's no response or rebuttal at all.

There are a majority of the people who are fully aware that the president and much of congress are working their level best to come up with a change in our health care system - BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WANT IT!

You keep saying that the president is doing something that people don't want. Well that's poppycock. People do want it. YOU don't want it but that has nothing to do with the rest of us who are thankful that we have a president who is trying to do what we need in the United States of America. And the obstructionists are yelling to the rooftops that the American people don't want it. It's merely a ploy in their fight to keep us down because they, like you, seem to think that if they say it loud enough and long enough, others will believe them. Some do, but it's to their detriment that they believe it.

Bull. That's no response or rebuttal at all.

There are a majority of the people who are fully aware that the president and much of congress are working their level best to come up with a change in our health care system - BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WANT IT!

You keep saying that the president is doing something that people don't want. Well that's poppycock. People do want it. YOU don't want it but that has nothing to do with the rest of us who are thankful that we have a president who is trying to do what we need in the United States of America. And the obstructionists are yelling to the rooftops that the American people don't want it. It's merely a ploy in their fight to keep us down because they, like you, seem to think that if they say it loud enough and long enough, others will believe them. Some do, but it's to their detriment that they believe it.

Yesterday, with the senate vote, the people in MA have spoken loud and clear for America. WE DONT WANT IT! They don't want Obama's agenda to go forward. They don't want what the liberal far left democrats want. They don't want corruption. They don't want any more deals to get made to get what the dems want. They don't want health care reform. They don't want socialism. They don't want schemes and lies and deceit and things done behind closed doors. They don't want all the spending to continue. They don't want the debt He has incurred for us. They don't want democrats in Congress! Are you in denial? The people are sick of the government and their corrupt ways. Just wait till November. If this happened in Mass., the MOST liberal state in the country, it's going to happen everywhere. Hooray!

Yeah and people voted for Sara Palin so I do get that.

But you started out by saying that "WE" don't want it and then you changed it to "THEY" don't want it because you probably realized that one election in one state does not provide a national referendum for anything.

But you might be right in November. Perhaps all the Democratic bums will be thrown out. Then what are you going to do? Does this mean that the Republicans will actually come up with any progressive solutions to our long-time problems? Since they're nearly guilty of not fixing any of it when they were in control, I have no hope of that.

So you're right. If the Republicans gain control of Congress, we won't get any of the things that will make this a better country (and we sure have a long way to go for it to be the best place to live.) We will get back to the government you like, which under the Republicans actually means, I dunno, what? It seems to mean MORE government incentives and tax breaks for the behemouth corporations, more help for wealthy Americans and the rich will keep getting richer and the number of poor people in this country will grow.

Yeah, congratulations on this big win. I am sure that all Americans are rejoicing today and in hardly any time at all things will sit squarely back on the shoulders of the fair and even-handed Republicans. I mean after all, like you said THEY are the party of high morals, right?

Can you say, with no doubt, that they ran a good, clean, fair campaign in Mass?

Yesterday, with the senate vote, the people in MA have spoken loud and clear for America. WE DONT WANT IT! They don't want Obama's agenda to go forward. They don't want what the liberal far left democrats want. They don't want corruption. They don't want any more deals to get made to get what the dems want. They don't want health care reform. They don't want socialism. They don't want schemes and lies and deceit and things done behind closed doors. They don't want all the spending to continue. They don't want the debt He has incurred for us. They don't want democrats in Congress! Are you in denial? The people are sick of the government and their corrupt ways. Just wait till November. If this happened in Mass., the MOST liberal state in the country, it's going to happen everywhere. Hooray!

This election was about Coakley and the terrible campaign she ran and the well-run campaign of Brown. He did not mention republicans in his victory speech but spoke of independents (who outnumbered both democrats and republicans).

Yes, republicans will win seats in November. The democrats have been saying that all year. It ALWAYS happens that the party in the white house loses seats in mid term elections.

But let the republicans take over. THEY WILL THEN OWN ALL THE PROBLEMS. IT WILL BE UP TO THEM TO SOLVE THEM. BUT WE SAW THEIR "SOLUTIONS" DURING THE FAILED 8 YEARS OF BUSHCARE.

AFTER THEY GIVE TAX CUTS TO THE RICH, WHAT ELSE IS THEIR SOLUTION? THE PARTY OF NO HAS NOTHING.

Nice try. But as the Lord has said," Remove the plank from your own eye before trying to remove a sliver from someone elses."

All I know is this: It is very typical of you too call people names that don't agree with you. But when others do it, you jump all over them as if they were 'evil' and 'dangerous'.:biggrin:

How hypocritical of you to make this about name-calling. I used the term teabagger that the movement itself has used to define itself. They should have given their name more thought. Too bad now. I don't see how that is calling someone a name.

Oh, and BTW, Griff Jenkins from FOX news (your other bible) used the term teabagger in his request to "teabag washington before they teabag you" and urged people to mail a teabag to DC.

Those who can present facts, those who can't quote the bible.

Yeah and people voted for Sara Palin so I do get that.

But you started out by saying that "WE" don't want it and then you changed it to "THEY" don't want it because you probably realized that one election in one state does not provide a national referendum for anything.

There were people from all over this country who sent the funds for Brown's campaign fight. Since when do other states contribute to someones elses state election? Not too often. The stakes were high in the MA election. You have your head in the sand if you don't see how this election has provided a national referendum. Turn on your news station, and see that even your own party recognises its significance.

But you might be right in November. Perhaps all the Democratic bums will be thrown out. Then what are you going to do? Does this mean that the Republicans will actually come up with any progressive solutions to our long-time problems? Since they're nearly guilty of not fixing any of it when they were in control, I have no hope of that.

So you're right. If the Republicans gain control of Congress, we won't get any of the things that will make this a better country (and we sure have a long way to go for it to be the best place to live.) We will get back to the government you like, which under the Republicans actually means, I dunno, what? It seems to mean MORE government incentives and tax breaks for the behemouth corporations, more help for wealthy Americans and the rich will keep getting richer and the number of poor people in this country will grow.

You know, the poor are poor because the government has enabled them to stay that way. They have provided one handout after another and who wants to give up a free ride?

Yeah, congratulations on this big win. I am sure that all Americans are rejoicing today and in hardly any time at all things will sit squarely back on the shoulders of the fair and even-handed Republicans. I mean after all, like you said THEY are the party of high morals, right?

Can you say, with no doubt, that they ran a good, clean, fair campaign in Mass?

I can not. I didn't really watch all the campaigning. Just the last few days before the election.

They gave that name to themselves, I didn't. They are the ones who hung teabags from their hats.

Actually they did not give themselves that name. They started out by calling themselves tea partiers or tea party protesters. The media and others who oppose their agenda, or that were upset by some of the things crazy protesters did and said, gave them the term "teabagger". Some of the tea partiers decided to go with it instead of retaliating or playing along with the mud slinging.

Besides when you say it, it is very apparent that you mean it in a derogatory way..please correct me if I am wrong.

And my apologies if you do not mean it in a derogatory way.

Really my only point to this is that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones..

Actually they did not give themselves that name. They started out by calling themselves tea partiers or tea party protesters. The media and others who oppose their agenda, or that were upset by some of the things crazy protesters did and said, gave them the term "teabagger". Some of the tea partiers decided to go with it instead of retaliating or playing along with the mud slinging.

Besides when you say it, it is very apparent that you mean it in a derogatory way..please correct me if I am wrong.

And my apologies if you do not mean it in a derogatory way.

Really my only point to this is that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones..

Apparantley you did not see my other post where I showed a picture of a man with the teaparty movement selling buttons saying "proud to be a teabagger". Someone in the movement had to contact a business to print them.

Also, read my above post about Fox new's Griff Jenkins.

The people who don't believe Obama was born in the US call themselves birthers, it was only natural then that those in the tea party movement, with tea bags hanging from their hats, would be called teabaggers.

If they don't like that term, then they should stop selling the buttons, stop wearing tea bags from their hats, stop holding signs that say "teabag washington before washington teabags you" and suggesting that people mail teabags to DC.

patty: "You know, the poor are poor because the government has enabled them to stay that way. They have provided one handout after another and who wants to give up a free ride?"

Really? Do you honestly believe that? My heart bleeds for you.

patty: "You know, the poor are poor because the government has enabled them to stay that way. They have provided one handout after another and who wants to give up a free ride?"

Really? Do you honestly believe that? My heart bleeds for you.

Yes, I honestly believe that. Not all the poor, mind you, but many of them.

When I was 19 years old,(29 years ago) I was on welfare because I figured I could get on it cause I was pregnant, and I didn't want to work anymore. (I'm being brutally honest here) I got on it and after my son was born, I decided to stay on it and collect my $420. a month because my rent (a reduced housing complex) was $115. a month. I was collecting food stamps and WIC also. I had plenty of money to get by on. My choices were to go to work and earn 3X what I was recieving from aid from the government but then lose the WIC and the cheaper rent, or stay on welfare. I chose to stay on it. I reasoned, "why should I work 8 hours a day, and have to be away from my son all day, just to make a little more than I'm receiving for free right now?" The system was enabling me to 'stay' poor. I 'know' now, that it wasn't right what I did, but I was young and others told me how to get something for nothing, and I did it.( I was on welfare for about 2 years. When I got married, my husband and I repaid all of the welfare that I received. They don't require that anymore.) Anyway, Once I stopped recieving welfare, I got a job as an aide in a Home and saved my money till I had enough to go to school and get a CNA license. This got me a better job with HC and in turn I was able to save to go to bible school. I began to better myself financially over time. Oh, I could have chose to stay on welfare for as long as I wanted to, but I reasoned that it wasn't 'good' for me. My boyfriend at the time felt we could live together and I could keep getting all my assistance, while he worked and saved money. It's very easy to cheat the system. People do it every day. But then we wanted to get married, so I got off of it. I would never consider doing anything like that now, and I regret that I did it. I was ablebodied, young, and capable of working to support myself. I just chose the easier route that the government allowed me. Had I stayed there, I would have been one of those that the gov. enables to 'keep' poor.

So you are speaking from experience at having been kept down because of welfare.

When I worked for the Attorney General in Virginia, there was a contentious discussion going on about Nixon's desire to make single mothers go to work by setting up government run daycare centers everywhere. I was a single mother. I was against it. Not because I wasn't able to take advantage of it, which I could have. But I knew that not every situation was like mine and I didn't want the government establishing a whole society of children raised by someone other than their parents - as was happening in some far east countries at the time.

This is not an easy topic to resolve. I agree that people do take advantage of the system. That's on them and the weaknesses in our system.

But we can't fix the problem by setting up some artificial society and forcing women to leave their children with others. And we can't allow seriously needy children to go hungry.

What we need to continue to do is work to improve the way we give help to those who seriously need it. There are some incentives that have been put into effect, but more needs to be done.

I don't know any politician or taxpayer who approves of giving welfare to those who can take care of themselves. But pretending that we can just do away with it because people cheat is counter-productive and clouds the real issues.

I found this interesting dialogue excerpt today. Thought I'd share it since it relates to some of the debates that we've had about politics and war in the U.S.A. Note the date.

Nazi Leader Herman Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trails, 1946 April 18, quoted in Gilbert’s book, Nuremberg Diary:

Goering, “Naturally the common people don’t want war… but it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.”

Gilbert: “There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”

Goering: “Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the biding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”