[quote]Bambi wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]njrusmc wrote:
^I’m not sure about that. He felt the states should be free to ban them, but without Federal influence. His 2005 book about Catholic values was not exactly appealing to 2/3 of American women with full-time jobs. I admit, the guy had some big hairy balls to publish stuff like that in the 21st century, and I respect him for his views. But I do not trust that he wouldn’t wield his power as president to force those views on us.
There are some seriously extreme right-wing bible-beaters who would love that. Not enough for him to get elected, but the fact that he made it as far as he did really worried me. Quite frankly, I would consider keeping Obama in office (and paying outrageous taxes) than seeing a nut like Santorum accept communion on Capitol Hill. He doesn’t like that I have sex with women for pleasure? Sorry dude, but don’t care to hear him talking about that at a political rally.[/quote]
Agreed 100%. I was trying to think of a hypothetical person to run as a democrat that right wingers would dislike as much as we do Santorum but for opposite reasons, but nothing comes to mind. Any ideas? And no its not Obama, it would have to be some Atheist with a clear anti-Christian agenda.[/quote]
Yes, actually it is Obama. Check his voting record, he is actually more liberal than Santorum is conservative!
But, the media forgot to vett him and his “hope and change” campaign was brilliant, so we got stuck with him. Obama is THE most liberal President to ever be elected.
[/quote]
So liberal that he deferred to the Pakistanis and Osama Bin Laden is still safe to wreak havoc through Al-Qaeda.
Obama’s foreign policy is little different from a Republican presidency.
Why he got the idiotic ‘Peace Prize’ I will never know.
[/quote]
You’re not thinking Bambi. My comments were about how liberal he was and still got elected. Just as others attack Santorum for being conservative. I was comparing the two. When someone is elected to the Presidency the first thing that we notice is that foreign policy wise they tend to drift toward the middle.
As for Obama being liberal he did push through the most gigantic government take over of individual rights in the history of the country–National Health Care. And as for running up the debt the 4 trillion he’s added in only 3 1/2 years is more than the past three republican Presidents COMBINED!
So yeah he’s still quite liberal and that’s why the country is in the mess it is in. Liberalism does not work. And this can be checked by the number of liberal Governors that any particular state has had over a period of time. For example two states that are in huge trouble california and New York have had more liberal Governors than most any other state.
Coincidence? I think not. In the process of raising taxes and driving business out of their states they get into huge fiscal trouble-- Can you imagine that?
Why anyone would ever vote for a liberal at this stage of the game is for other reasons than they think that he’ll be good for the country.
And that is why the democratic base is now made up of mostly special interest groups.
Liberalism has failed everywhere it’t been tried.
One more point, if you think I’m wrong all you have to do is split up the US by red vs. blue states. The blue states can literally not survive without feeding off the red states.
The jury is in and liberalism has failed!
This is something that your liberal professors failed to tell you. And why? Because they have a lip lock on the public nipple because they are just one more special interest group.
Simple stuff Bambi…