MR

What a load of shit. The stats don't lie. Republicans, in general, have higher income, are generally far more educated, have a substantially lower crime and unemployment rate and are far less reliant on the government. While not a perfect party, they're far more of an asset to this country than a bunch of inner city trash, race hustlers and hollywood weirdos.

Results of a national poll conducted by SSI in 2004:

The higher the education level, the more likely respondents were to be concerned about climate change. Among those with high school education or less, 39 percent are "very concerned," while 68 percent of those who have completed at least some graduate work are "very concerned."

The Wall Street Journal - a haven for neo-conservatives:

For those voters, especially ones without college degrees, the fact that Sen. Obama is black may not be as much a disqualifier as his background as a Democrat from the Frost Belt with no national security or executive experience and a voting record judged by the nonpartisan National Journal as the Senate’s most liberal during 2007

And perhaps the most damning of all:

http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1339


While these attitudes are linked to partisanship and ideology, there also are clear generational and educational differences. Younger and more educated white voters hold significantly more racially liberal beliefs than do older whites and those with less education.

On interracial dating, equal rights, and racial and ethnic diversity, younger white voters consistently hold more liberal views than white voters over 50. The same is true of voters who have attended college; more than three-quarters (77%) of whom believe that increasing ethnic variety is good for the country. By contrast, 61% of those who have not attended college hold the same view.

Canseco, I love ya, bud, but the truth is Democrats are more well-educated than Republicans.

7 Wishes wrote:Results of a national poll conducted by SSI in 2004:

The higher the education level, the more likely respondents were to be concerned about climate change. Among those with high school education or less, 39 percent are "very concerned," while 68 percent of those who have completed at least some graduate work are "very concerned."

Yeah, we need to agree to Kyoto and anyone else who wants to syphon the money out of this country. This is a serious problem.

http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-Spe ... arming.htm

I'm a pretty liberal guy but neither of the two main candidates do it for me.

Gonna be doing some research on the third-party guys in the months to come... say I'm throwing away my vote all you want, but someone's gotta throw these guys a bone.

Saint John wrote:What a load of shit. The stats don't lie. Republicans, in general, have higher income, are generally far more educated, have a substantially lower crime and unemployment rate and are far less reliant on the government. While not a perfect party, they're far more of an asset to this country than a bunch of inner city trash, race hustlers and hollywood weirdos.

You're right, most of them are better than you. But they're still mostly a bunch of right-wing bigots.

7 Wishes wrote:Results of a national poll conducted by SSI in 2004:

The higher the education level, the more likely respondents were to be concerned about climate change. Among those with high school education or less, 39 percent are "very concerned," while 68 percent of those who have completed at least some graduate work are "very concerned."

The Wall Street Journal - a haven for neo-conservatives:

For those voters, especially ones without college degrees, the fact that Sen. Obama is black may not be as much a disqualifier as his background as a Democrat from the Frost Belt with no national security or executive experience and a voting record judged by the nonpartisan National Journal as the Senate’s most liberal during 2007

And perhaps the most damning of all:

http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1339


While these attitudes are linked to partisanship and ideology, there also are clear generational and educational differences. Younger and more educated white voters hold significantly more racially liberal beliefs than do older whites and those with less education.

On interracial dating, equal rights, and racial and ethnic diversity, younger white voters consistently hold more liberal views than white voters over 50. The same is true of voters who have attended college; more than three-quarters (77%) of whom believe that increasing ethnic variety is good for the country. By contrast, 61% of those who have not attended college hold the same view.

Canseco, I love ya, bud, but the truth is Democrats are more well-educated than Republicans.

lol...you can come up with all the fucking polls you want, dude. Inner cities are basically 100% democratic and government dependent. They do a few things...always vote democratic, hardly ever finish school, are responsible for virtually all crime nationwide and infest the prison system as well as the streets of all major cities with gangs. Go to any major shithole city in this country where's there's rampant drug use, gangs are out of control and the crime rate is higher than Amy Winehouse on a Saturday night and you can bet your ass that it's a staunchly democratic area. You'll never see Republican areas like this...ever. Dude, work your way out of your utopic fantasy land and go to the streets of Chicago, Philly, New York, LA, Detroit, or DC and you'll see some neighborhoods that make Fallujah seem like a nice place to live. And yup, you guessed it...they're democratic strongholds. Have you no pride? How can you affiliate yourself with the very maggots that have crippled this country's infrastructure by government dependence, a general refusal to work, being led by Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other race hustlers, and have flooded our biggest cities with gangs and drugs. Seriously, bow your head in shame, slap yourself and go stand in the fucking corner...right now.

Saint John wrote:

7 Wishes wrote:Results of a national poll conducted by SSI in 2004:

The higher the education level, the more likely respondents were to be concerned about climate change. Among those with high school education or less, 39 percent are "very concerned," while 68 percent of those who have completed at least some graduate work are "very concerned."

The Wall Street Journal - a haven for neo-conservatives:

For those voters, especially ones without college degrees, the fact that Sen. Obama is black may not be as much a disqualifier as his background as a Democrat from the Frost Belt with no national security or executive experience and a voting record judged by the nonpartisan National Journal as the Senate’s most liberal during 2007

And perhaps the most damning of all:

http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1339



While these attitudes are linked to partisanship and ideology, there also are clear generational and educational differences. Younger and more educated white voters hold significantly more racially liberal beliefs than do older whites and those with less education.

On interracial dating, equal rights, and racial and ethnic diversity, younger white voters consistently hold more liberal views than white voters over 50. The same is true of voters who have attended college; more than three-quarters (77%) of whom believe that increasing ethnic variety is good for the country. By contrast, 61% of those who have not attended college hold the same view.

Canseco, I love ya, bud, but the truth is Democrats are more well-educated than Republicans.

lol...you can come up with all the fucking polls you want, dude. Inner cities are basically 100% democratic and government dependent. They do a few things...always vote democratic, hardly ever finish school, are responsible for virtually all crime nationwide and infest the prison system as well as the streets of all major cities with gangs. Go to any major shithole city in this country where's there's rampant drug use, gangs are out of control and the crime rate is higher than Amy Winehouse on a Saturday night and you can bet your ass that it's a staunchly democratic area. You'll never see Republican areas like this...ever. Dude, work your way out of your utopic fantasy land and go to the streets of Chicago, Philly, New York, LA, Detroit, or DC and you'll see some neighborhoods that make Fallujah seem like a nice place to live. And yup, you guessed it...they're democratic strongholds. Have you no pride? How can you affiliate yourself with the very maggots that have crippled this country's infrastructure by government dependence, a general refusal to work, being led by Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other race hustlers, and have flooded our biggest cities with gangs and drugs. Seriously, bow your head in shame, slap yourself and go stand in the fucking corner...right now.

I can't believe you left San Francisco off your list!

The only thing I hate about the Repubs is their philosophy on BIG BUSINESS. and their insistence on staying in a war so they can make $$$$ for their friends....other than that, I agree with SJ.

HOWEVER, I will not be voting this year.

I'm voting for Richard Pryor. Yes, I know he is dead, but so are our two presumptive nominees.

I'm voting for Al Goldstein.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gAZerK7_7vM

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1fGlNUeO6EI

scarygirl wrote:I'm voting for Richard Pryor. Yes, I know he is dead, but so are our two presumptive nominees.

No matter who I vote for, the world ends December 21st, 2012 anyways!

According to the Maya long calendar...so...ENJOY!

I had forgotten all about that. The Millerites got that one wrong, though.

Also, the Washington Post conducted a national poll of over 4,000 individuals and came to the following conclusions:

“Democratic areas are sopping up people with BA degrees; Republican areas are sopping up white people without degrees. Church membership is declining in Democratic areas and increasing in red counties,” said Bill Bishop, author of “The Big Sort.”

Overall, the most wealthy are still more likely to vote for GOP candidates, particularly in red states, where it is the rich, not the working class, who are most reliably Republican. The split is more evident in education and vocation, with professionals and voters with post-graduate degrees significantly trending Democratic.

Gee Stockton- In the last 10 days the US removed over 2 million tons of yellowcake out of Iraq to Canada to be used in reactors. Oh Saddam had no WMD and the mustard gas he used to kill 300,000 Kurds wasn't WMD either. I remember when the Democratic party was a party of honor. Then Lyndon Johnson started his great society. It has been huge government and one give away program after another to secure votes. But I think I will choose who understands war instead of the guy that has visited the 58 states.

As usual, squirt1 enlightens us with a coherent, structured, and grammatically correct post.

Thank you for proving my point and validating the statistics without the need to cite further references. You did my job for me!

Saint John wrote:

7 Wishes wrote:Results of a national poll conducted by SSI in 2004:

The higher the education level, the more likely respondents were to be concerned about climate change. Among those with high school education or less, 39 percent are "very concerned," while 68 percent of those who have completed at least some graduate work are "very concerned."

The Wall Street Journal - a haven for neo-conservatives:

For those voters, especially ones without college degrees, the fact that Sen. Obama is black may not be as much a disqualifier as his background as a Democrat from the Frost Belt with no national security or executive experience and a voting record judged by the nonpartisan National Journal as the Senate’s most liberal during 2007

And perhaps the most damning of all:

http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1339


While these attitudes are linked to partisanship and ideology, there also are clear generational and educational differences. Younger and more educated white voters hold significantly more racially liberal beliefs than do older whites and those with less education.

On interracial dating, equal rights, and racial and ethnic diversity, younger white voters consistently hold more liberal views than white voters over 50. The same is true of voters who have attended college; more than three-quarters (77%) of whom believe that increasing ethnic variety is good for the country. By contrast, 61% of those who have not attended college hold the same view.

Canseco, I love ya, bud, but the truth is Democrats are more well-educated than Republicans.

lol...you can come up with all the fucking polls you want, dude. Inner cities are basically 100% democratic and government dependent. They do a few things...always vote democratic, hardly ever finish school, are responsible for virtually all crime nationwide and infest the prison system as well as the streets of all major cities with gangs. Go to any major shithole city in this country where's there's rampant drug use, gangs are out of control and the crime rate is higher than Amy Winehouse on a Saturday night and you can bet your ass that it's a staunchly democratic area. You'll never see Republican areas like this...ever. Dude, work your way out of your utopic fantasy land and go to the streets of Chicago, Philly, New York, LA, Detroit, or DC and you'll see some neighborhoods that make Fallujah seem like a nice place to live. And yup, you guessed it...they're democratic strongholds. Have you no pride? How can you affiliate yourself with the very maggots that have crippled this country's infrastructure by government dependence, a general refusal to work, being led by Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other race hustlers, and have flooded our biggest cities with gangs and drugs. Seriously, bow your head in shame, slap yourself and go stand in the fucking corner...right now.

I can vouch for L.A.

squirt1 wrote:Gee Stockton- In the last 10 days the US removed over 2 million tons of yellowcake out of Iraq to Canada to be used in reactors. Oh Saddam had no WMD and the mustard gas he used to kill 300,000 Kurds wasn't WMD either.

The US official who broke this story, while speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the Yellowcake was from 1991 or earlier.
Most of this crap was already accounted for, doing little to vindicate the ginned up WMD lies.

squirt1 wrote:I remember when the Democratic party was a party of honor. Then Lyndon Johnson started his great society.It has been huge government and one give away program after another to secure votes.

LBJ was only carrying on in the tradition of JFK's New Frontier, Truman's Fair Deal, and FDR's New Deal.
You wanna talk about giveaways?
Look no further than McCain, who has lived high off the fat of land, enjoying a taxpayer subsidized salary and healthcare for most of his life.
What a dirty ratbag socialist!

squirt1 wrote:But I think I will choose who understands war instead of the guy that has visited the 58 states.

McCain has a hard enough time remembering which pills to take on which days.

More of his inimitable brand of "Straight Talk"- http://youtube.com/watch?v=D6IlGXhCUHo

Angiekay wrote:

I don't know if this has been posted or not.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0 ... com/27bstr

Yep! And just because of this retarded video!!

I have no idea now, id vote for friga if he would promise to stand while urinating. It is scarey at gas at 4$ a fucking gallon. they are all retards. My business is aweful,it is down 60 %. I dont know what im going to do.WTF is it goimg to be Cain and Cain this year ?

The_Noble_Cause wrote:LBJ was only carrying on in the tradition of JFK's New Frontier, Truman's Fair Deal, and FDR's New Deal.

Historically-speaking, I don't think you are giving LBJ enough credit here for 'being his own man'. While he certainly was a New Deal politician (from Texas, which was much more liberal then), he was arguably more committed to civil rights than JFK was. At first, JFK had been politically cautious when considering equal rights for blacks. When LBJ took over after the assassination, he wasted very little time in pushing through the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964. Some of LBJ's Great Society programs were built on groundwork done by JFK. While I do believe that JFK would have done more had he been given the time and the support of Republican-controlled Congress, I believe that LBJ deserves to be given credit for being so progressive on issues such as clean air, education, equal employment, etc. Of course, his mistakes regarding Vietnam will forever tarnish his presidential legacy, which is really too bad. This is similar to Truman, whose legacy was tarnished by his decision to use the Atomic bomb.

Saint John wrote:

7 Wishes wrote:Results of a national poll conducted by SSI in 2004:

The higher the education level, the more likely respondents were to be concerned about climate change. Among those with high school education or less, 39 percent are "very concerned," while 68 percent of those who have completed at least some graduate work are "very concerned."

The Wall Street Journal - a haven for neo-conservatives:

For those voters, especially ones without college degrees, the fact that Sen. Obama is black may not be as much a disqualifier as his background as a Democrat from the Frost Belt with no national security or executive experience and a voting record judged by the nonpartisan National Journal as the Senate’s most liberal during 2007

And perhaps the most damning of all:

http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1339


While these attitudes are linked to partisanship and ideology, there also are clear generational and educational differences. Younger and more educated white voters hold significantly more racially liberal beliefs than do older whites and those with less education.

On interracial dating, equal rights, and racial and ethnic diversity, younger white voters consistently hold more liberal views than white voters over 50. The same is true of voters who have attended college; more than three-quarters (77%) of whom believe that increasing ethnic variety is good for the country. By contrast, 61% of those who have not attended college hold the same view.

Canseco, I love ya, bud, but the truth is Democrats are more well-educated than Republicans.

lol...you can come up with all the fucking polls you want, dude. Inner cities are basically 100% democratic and government dependent. They do a few things...always vote democratic, hardly ever finish school, are responsible for virtually all crime nationwide and infest the prison system as well as the streets of all major cities with gangs. Go to any major shithole city in this country where's there's rampant drug use, gangs are out of control and the crime rate is higher than Amy Winehouse on a Saturday night and you can bet your ass that it's a staunchly democratic area. You'll never see Republican areas like this...ever. Dude, work your way out of your utopic fantasy land and go to the streets of Chicago, Philly, New York, LA, Detroit, or DC and you'll see some neighborhoods that make Fallujah seem like a nice place to live. And yup, you guessed it...they're democratic strongholds. Have you no pride? How can you affiliate yourself with the very maggots that have crippled this country's infrastructure by government dependence, a general refusal to work, being led by Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other race hustlers, and have flooded our biggest cities with gangs and drugs. Seriously, bow your head in shame, slap yourself and go stand in the fucking corner...right now.

OMG - you are a bigger idiot and a bigger douchebag than I ever gave you credit for.....WOW

Calbear94 wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:LBJ was only carrying on in the tradition of JFK's New Frontier, Truman's Fair Deal, and FDR's New Deal.

Historically-speaking, I don't think you are giving LBJ enough credit here for 'being his own man'. While he certainly was a New Deal politician (from Texas, which was much more liberal then), he was arguably more committed to civil rights than JFK was. At first, JFK had been politically cautious when considering equal rights for blacks. When LBJ took over after the assassination, he wasted very little time in pushing through the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964. Some of LBJ's Great Society programs were built on groundwork done by JFK. While I do believe that JFK would have done more had he been given the time and the support of Republican-controlled Congress, I believe that LBJ deserves to be given credit for being so progressive on issues such as clean air, education, equal employment, etc. Of course, his mistakes regarding Vietnam will forever tarnish his presidential legacy, which is really too bad. This is similar to Truman, whose legacy was tarnished by his decision to use the Atomic bomb.

HOLY SHIT are you wrong here. LBJ wanted civil rights to happen about as much as the Grand Dragon of the KKK. It was the REPUBLICANS that made the historic civil rights acts happen...LBJ only signed because he had no choice as they would have overridden a veto.

The great society did nothing but gut our inner cities and kill off encentive for people to do for themselves, it REALLY created the welfare state as we have it now, and turned our african-american communities into slums for a large part.

Yeah THANKS LBJ!

RossValoryRocks wrote:

Calbear94 wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:LBJ was only carrying on in the tradition of JFK's New Frontier, Truman's Fair Deal, and FDR's New Deal.

Historically-speaking, I don't think you are giving LBJ enough credit here for 'being his own man'. While he certainly was a New Deal politician (from Texas, which was much more liberal then), he was arguably more committed to civil rights than JFK was. At first, JFK had been politically cautious when considering equal rights for blacks. When LBJ took over after the assassination, he wasted very little time in pushing through the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964. Some of LBJ's Great Society programs were built on groundwork done by JFK. While I do believe that JFK would have done more had he been given the time and the support of Republican-controlled Congress, I believe that LBJ deserves to be given credit for being so progressive on issues such as clean air, education, equal employment, etc. Of course, his mistakes regarding Vietnam will forever tarnish his presidential legacy, which is really too bad. This is similar to Truman, whose legacy was tarnished by his decision to use the Atomic bomb.

HOLY SHIT are you wrong here. LBJ wanted civil rights to happen about as much as the Grand Dragon of the KKK. It was the REPUBLICANS that made the historic civil rights acts happen...LBJ only signed because he had no choice as they would have overridden a veto.

The great society did nothing but gut our inner cities and kill off encentive for people to do for themselves, it REALLY created the welfare state as we have it now, and turned our african-american communities into slums for a large part.

Yeah THANKS LBJ!

Hey Stu, wasn't this for all intents and purposes the start of government dependence and the infant stages of welfare as we know it today?

Saint John wrote:Hey Stu, wasn't this for all intents and purposes the start of government dependence and the infant stages of welfare as we know it today?

Dan...If I may be so bold as to interject...FDR did his fair share of damage, 30 years before LBJ got within pissing distance of the oval orafice...

7 Wishes wrote:As usual, squirt1 enlightens us with a coherent, structured, and grammatically correct post.

Thank you for proving my point and validating the statistics without the need to cite further references. You did my job for me!

Let's face it...The best and brightest are no longer in the Republican party and certainly not in the Democratic party.

7 Wishes wrote:Also, the Washington Post conducted a national poll of over 4,000 individuals and came to the following conclusions:

[i]“Democratic areas are sopping up people with BA degrees; Republican areas are sopping up white people without degrees. Church membership is declining in Democratic areas and increasing in red counties,” said Bill Bishop, author of “The Big Sort.”

Oh this is rich. Consider the source....The Washington (com)Post!!

When these liberal papers do 'polls', I suggest you ask them for sample data including standard deviation determined and alphas used, before trying to 'quote' them on anything...and this is assuming they were truly 'scientific' in their sampling methods. (I'm going to guess that their sampling statistic was considerably less "random" than you might thing).


...really, you're not doing yourself any favors by quoting them.

7 Wishes wrote:Church membership is declining in Democratic areas and increasing in red counties,” said Bill Bishop, author of “The Big Sort.”

Sounds like an argument in FAVOR of "red counties" being more intelligent.

Look its simple

Well over three quarters of university professors in the humanities, economics, and social sciences fields are left of center.
A neutral thinking student goes to class wanting to learn and get good grades and gets bombarded with those theories

Now, he/she might have some conservative viewpoints, but because all the underpinning theory she has been taught is statist/socialist in nature, he/she therefore cant coherently defend or justify to himself what common sense tells them is true.

So basically he has been, like Rousseau years ago suggested, has been conditioned through education to think a certain "correct way" way. Rosseau called it being forced to be free. It is in fact being educated away from your common senses.