English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Bush JUST talked about bi-partisanship. Is he lying, just like he lied last time when he said that?

Republicans plot to bring down Pelosi ... and Clinton with her
By Hans Nichols and Philip Sherwell in Washington, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:28am GMT 19/11/2006

New Speaker's embarrassing week has made it easier for her opponents to attack

Republican strategists plotting their party's comeback after it lost control of Congress have identified the "first lady" of Democrat politics as a key target in the 2008 White House campaign — even though she will not be running.

Senior party operatives told The Sunday Telegraph that they are already co-ordinating plans to attack Nancy Pelosi, the liberal Californian congresswoman and Speaker-in-waiting who suffered a damaging rebuff from her own party caucus last week.

The Republican strategy is not only to undermine Mrs Pelosi's control of th

2006-11-19 12:44:13 · 20 answers · asked by Brendan G 4 in Politics & Government Politics

20 answers

Our Republican Administration is power and money hungry for themselves. They are only interested in big business who supply their party with unlimited money to play with as they see fit.

They take very good care of themselves, giving themselves salary increases every year, the finest health care and pensions.

They want to hang on to their ill gotten gains and will go to any lengths to achieve this. They disrespect the opposition party and as they cannot discuss issues or their own achievements ( of which they have none) they resort to dirty tricks, lying and name calling. All we can do is not vote for them when we have to chance to do so.

2006-11-19 12:55:19 · answer #1 · answered by madisonian51 4 · 2 3

Both the Republican party and the Democratic party are guilty of lying through there teeth, and very often at that. In fact, it's practically a rule if you want to be in politics or run a multi-million dollar corporation. It's all about public image. The reason why Bush says one thing last week, and something totally different this week is because people a majority of people are either too busy, too disinterested, or believe creating a good public image is the necessary evil of politics that wins over intellectual honesty. Since it happens on both sides of the aisle anyways, how can you change your vote so you don't reward it? Pretty much refrain from voting, in which case your voice is not heard. So just vote whatever best represents your political views.

2006-11-19 12:54:19 · answer #2 · answered by ginnsu 2 · 2 1

i see it as pathological greed . lower back in '88 reagan decrease the ideal fed tax bracket for millionaires from 70 % to 35 % . this decrease a million/4 of the entire gross sales intake of the treasury . he suggested if we provide the wealthy that a million trillion funds a 300 and sixty 5 days tax harm , that some could trickle all the way down to the working guy . in 24 years it positioned 24 trillion funds greater in the wealthy mans pocket , 24 trillion much less into the treasury , yet not one dime ever trickled down . in '02 bush gave the wealthy an further a million trillion funds a 300 and sixty 5 days tax harm ( yet another a million/4 ) , he suggested if we did this it may " develop the economic equipment and create jobs " . in ten years it positioned 10 trillion funds greater in the wealthy mans pocket , 10 trillion much less into the treasury . look on the economic equipment , the place are those jobs ? we are being lied to .

2016-10-22 09:33:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Please take you conspiracy theories somewhere else.

As a former Democrat , I can tell you the " party of the people isn't lily white pure " in the way you are talking about. They also are NOT as diverse as the general public is led to believe. While they will accept anyone's money their local leadership is "lily white" and there is no reason ( 2 colleges within 50 miles and 3 county seats within 60 mile radius) for it other than secret ballots keep it that way.

Hillary's problem with Nancy Pelosi isn't of the Republicans making . It is that Pelosi is too liberal and Hillary is trying to get moderates and conservatives of both parties to see her as a centralized candidate. That is why Hillary has sponsored a number a bill with a Republican co-sponsor.

So please get off your high horse before the hot air blows you off and you hurt yourself.

2006-11-19 12:57:32 · answer #4 · answered by Akkita 6 · 2 2

I got news for you, buddy, you show me a honest politician, republican or democrat and you'll be showing us all a miracle. Doesn't matter who they are, they all tell you anything you want to hear...once in office it all goes by the way side. They may start out believing what they say but once they get in office the corruption starts. Not strong enough to buck the system, peer pressure, maybe, payoffs, maybe. Who knows, but your living in a dream word if you think its going to get better now that democrat's are in. Wait and see!!!

2006-11-19 13:04:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

PEOPLE lie...not just Democrats or Rebublicans. They also make prejudicial, inflamatory statements just to see what others will say! Do you not remember that clip of Bill Clinton saying,"I not NOT have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky."

2006-11-19 12:53:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Yes, the Republicans are pathological liars. But that doesn't mean we should let Democrats off the hook either.

2006-11-19 13:06:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

We are neither pathological or liars.
As for trying to undermine a political opponent, just Business as Usual.

2006-11-19 13:46:53 · answer #8 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0 1

THERE IS MORE TO LIFE THAN REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS!

I'm so sick of this Republicans are ___________, Democrats are ___________ BS.

The issues in the U.S. are bigger than finger pointing and name calling amongst two political parties. Get over it, and start paying attention to the actual issues!

2006-11-19 12:48:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

He's just using the Dem's definition of bi-partisanship.

2006-11-19 12:47:52 · answer #10 · answered by ML 5 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers