• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

How can you be a democrat?

wut

Member
Democratically
 

Grimfang

Well-Known Member
I think it would be kinda cool too have Obama for pres.

.. although, probably just cus I'm imagining Sameul L Jackson in office...

"I AM TIRED OF THESE MOTHERF***IN REPUBLICANS IN THIS MOTHERF***IN OVAL OFFICE!"
 

Sylvine

Member
Hmh. I'm aware that all this is only tangent to me, as America is a long way away from where I live ( and yet, so remarkably close... hm. Worth a thought or two. ), but there's a thing that bugs me here - the comment about Obama.

We~ell... he sounds okay. Sure. But with the progressing tendency in politics to "just win the elections, and we'll see about everything else later", I find it hard to put faith in any of the politicians here in my country - so I'd apply that to american politics too, if not even more so. With that in mind, we really can't tell whether a politician will do a good job or not a priori. And since along with that public-relations-trend, the trend to mix up politics amongst the parties is on the rise as well ( After all, those elections have to be won! We have to put some compromise in our programs, otherwise people won't vote for us because they don't like what we want to do! [/irony] ), I sometimes think it makes little to no difference where we place our votes. I'm probably wrong about that, it's just... sometimes, I just feel that way about all this. At least here in Germany, it's a case of "Whatever", since the parties will form coallitions, anyway, so whomever You vote for, YOu almost certainly get a Party You don't agree with in the end as well; the way I see it, it's similar in America - the republicans tend to be a bit on the extreme side, whereas the democrats seem to lack backbone to actually do anything...

Okay, I notice I'm getting rather pessimistic here. Maybe I should get into politics and try doing a better job instead of complaining =)

~Sylv
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
I may have views that align myself with conservatives/libertarian/republican, however, I don't really consider myself a Party Line girl. Reason being, is that once you do, you fall in the pitfalls of guilt by association.

So for example... saying I'm a Republican, then it's like playing school sports where everyone talks a bunch of dirty shit about the other team to see who is winning >.<;;;; "Oh yeah your player did this!" To be honest there quite a few f'ups on both parties.

I believe in less laws except where needed like new technology causing infringements on people's rights. ex - people posting upskirt shots through camera phones etc. I also believe in fiscal responsibility and accountability. Neither party seem to adhere to at the moment.

Most of the laws passed are starting to conflict with old laws, and they really do need to do a cleanup sometimes.

Right now we elect the same officials over and over for their experience, yet it's their experience that also brings corruption, that doesn't mean there aren't some good guys out there, but come on now, Bush Clinton, Bush...and now we might elect another Clinton. NEW BLOOD PLEASE. No More Bush, no more Kennedy, no more Clinton.

I always love how Pro Choice/Life seems to be the major factor to decide what party to be in. What the hell people, there is a reason for the Supreme court decision. Vote for a party or person that respects your tax dollars. Not one or two issues that are more likely to be decided by our judicial system o_O;;;
 

rowanwand

Member
Grimfang said:
I think it would be kinda cool too have Obama for pres.

.. although, probably just cus I'm imagining Sameul L Jackson in office...

"I AM TIRED OF THESE MOTHERF***IN REPUBLICANS IN THIS MOTHERF***IN OVAL OFFICE!"

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha*gigglesnort*hahahahahahahahahahaha.

Best post I've read in ages. Thank you.
 

skunktoy

Member
I have to be Democrat, we only have a 2 party system and I don't like the republicans.
Besides the Democrats have the best joke.

"I belong to no organized politcal party, I'm a Democrat!" W.R.
 

Mega Wolf

Member
I'm a moderate, some what of an independent but I see the good points in both parties and get annoyed by the bad. I just tend to find myself agreeing with republicans more often though there are a lot of things that they stand for that I don’t. I DO support the idea of cloning, I DO support the idea of stem cell research, I DO support pro-choice, and I agree on a few other things.

However, there are many things that the democrats do and continue to do that I utterly cannot stand. For one the democrats continue to launch attacks on, what is a sacred cow for me, Video games. They can all go to hell and burn for constantly trying to ban video games or censor them into next year and then some. And then there is the fact that while everyone considers democrats liberal they will fight for their right to remove yours. You can say whatever you want so long as it does not offend anyone, anywhere, at any time; otherwise they will keep you from saying it. Of course lets not forget gun control and further attempts to prevent people from having a 2nd admendment. And then there is the fact that I have a natural tendency not to like charismatic individuals, and many of the head members of the Democratic Party are just that. I consider Obama, Kennedy, and Clinton to fall into this category, they seem to be so 'pretty' that no matter what they do no one takes it seriously, so we tend to ignore it... except with the case of Clinton who messed up so badly that he cannot sweep it under the couch... but then again for some reason that seems to make him more popular then he was before. Their leaders, like Clinton, are just the kind that could kick you in the teeth, screw your wife, and shoot your dog, and the only thing you could think to say would be 'Wow, they should change the constitution to allow him to run for a 3rd term.'

Also unless you are listening to talk radio constantly or watch only Fox news, you will notice that the democrats are the 'can do no wrong' party while the republicans are always shown as the 'For their interests only' party, which is why we always see them as 'we support the rich and love war' party when everyone seems to forget they are the 'less big government, less taxes, more spending' party. Of course, everything is subject to change and that may change in the next few years as it is.
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
Don't forget how Democrats, at least in our state are trying to bring in what I call "nanny" taxes. Taxes on your lifestyle because it's not the way to live.

One good one is the Soda tax, sure someone thinks "soda is bad and we shouldn't be drinking it!" but that's reading those bills on their face. What they don't tell you is that they mean juice drinks too. If a product didn't contain a certain amount of juice, or had a certain additive in it, TAX.

I'm sorry to say but my eating habits, and daily habits getting taxed weighs much heavier on who is going to stay in their offices than pro choice/pro life because it's not a decision that affects me on a daily basis.
 

Grimfang

Well-Known Member
Pro choice/life doesn't really affect me at all, but you're right. It's sad how this becomes the hinge of many elections.

I wish we had a system where the people could vote on issues and such, instead of voting on the candidate that most well represents your views. And I guess we do have that power... but democracy isn't working as beautifully as it is made out to be.
 

rowanwand

Member
Arshes Nei said:
Don't forget how Democrats, at least in our state are trying to bring in what I call "nanny" taxes. Taxes on your lifestyle because it's not the way to live.

One good one is the Soda tax, sure someone thinks "soda is bad and we shouldn't be drinking it!" but that's reading those bills on their face. What they don't tell you is that they mean juice drinks too. If a product didn't contain a certain amount of juice, or had a certain additive in it, TAX.

I'm sorry to say but my eating habits, and daily habits getting taxed weighs much heavier on who is going to stay in their offices than pro choice/pro life because it's not a decision that affects me on a daily basis.

It's all well and good to try and lower taxes but don't forget that taxes help to support the country. I for one have no problem letting the Dems raise taxes if it means better school systems, a country headed out of debt, a better place to live, etc.

Taxing sodas and juice drinks is a good way to raise taxes without a majority of people realizing that it's happening. If you went and tried to raise income taxes, sure, lots of people would complain. But these so-called "nanny taxes" are a good way of raising some extra money that the government would not otherwise be able to raise.

I also say we raise taxes on cigarettes and legalize/regulate the use of marijuana, and of course put taxes on that as well. Like it or not, money makes the world go round, and the government can always use some more money.
 

Wolf-Bone

Banned
Banned
What the hell?! So Democrats over all don't want to mess with a woman's right to have an abortion, but they want to discourage people from drinking anything but Ital beverages?
 

Mega Wolf

Member
Arshes Nei said:
Don't forget how Democrats, at least in our state are trying to bring in what I call "nanny" taxes. Taxes on your lifestyle because it's not the way to live.

Oh yeh, they are bringing them in in bunches down here. They are calling them 'Luxury' Taxes. But they are taxing snack foods, soft drinks, and video games (VIDEO GAMES!!!).
 

Grimfang

Well-Known Member
I don't think it's necessarily a discouragement to drink soda. Otherwise, the taxing would be poinltess when everyone decides they shouldn't buy soda. Rather, it's a way to grab a little loose change from people.

And poor smokers... taxes are always being raised on tobacco. And everyone thinks it's fine like "Ya, go tax those bastards!" but dammit! I'm a person too! xP

I say raise taxes on the rich if anything. It balances out, and then we don't have a serfdom driving the nation's economy. I mean, most of what I say is total nonsense, but it sounds good to me. :)
 

rowanwand

Member
Grimfang said:
And poor smokers... taxes are always being raised on tobacco. And everyone thinks it's fine like "Ya, go tax those bastards!" but dammit! I'm a person too! xP

I say raise taxes on the rich if anything. It balances out, and then we don't have a serfdom driving the nation's economy. I mean, most of what I say is total nonsense, but it sounds good to me. :)

I smoke. I don't mind that it's expensive because I'm not a chain smoker. (Gah, unlike most of my friends who can't go ten minutes without a cigarette...I limit myself to maybe one a week at most...but that's just me.)

And yes, taxes on the rich would be the way to go. But if I remember correctly, some of Bush's stances on taxes let the rich off a little easy...am I remembering that correctly?
 

Sylvine

Member
Problem is, if You raise taxes on the rich, they move their companies to a country which doesn't. Which is kinda conter-productive, then.

Taxes are a thing people have to mature for. Then again, they are also a thing that shouldn't be abused so that the people don't get the impression of being milked or controlled. We get those "nanny taxes" in Germany, too. They also try to ban violent video games. And as much as it isn't really an issue to fight it - I mean, okay, I can live without carmageddons and postals ( even if it's laughable that they don't try to ban horror movies, splatter films, thrillers in film and book form, etc etc.), and I can personally stop drinking cola, no problem - , it's the premise, the notion per se that is highly questionable. I mean, what's next? Taxes for staying home? Not doing enough sports? Being overweight? ( You'll laugh, but some people in germany plan on doing the latter o_O ) Taking a dump outside of the regular, perscribed hours?
Sheesh.

~Sylv
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
rowanwand said:
It's all well and good to try and lower taxes but don't forget that taxes help to support the country. I for one have no problem letting the Dems raise taxes if it means better school systems, a country headed out of debt, a better place to live, etc.

Taxing sodas and juice drinks is a good way to raise taxes without a majority of people realizing that it's happening. If you went and tried to raise income taxes, sure, lots of people would complain. But these so-called "nanny taxes" are a good way of raising some extra money that the government would not otherwise be able to raise.

I also say we raise taxes on cigarettes and legalize/regulate the use of marijuana, and of course put taxes on that as well. Like it or not, money makes the world go round, and the government can always use some more money.

No, actually spending wisely helps our government. 90% of these taxes get funneled to a program that it was never intended for. That's exactly what happened with the taxes on cigarettes. Many of these nanny taxes are done by states and governments who are not fiscally responsible.

We have a lot of money in our educational system, but our students still do poorly because it is not being spent properly. We have unions that lock down any kind of change to make it competitive. Now why make it competitive? If you know that there is more incentive for having kids educated properly instead of sitting on your fat ass as you get tenure I think the educational system will do well.

Taxes help bureaucracy - we get more people who are in position who do nothing.

Why do we punish a few people for their lifestyles to get a money grab. Budget properly.
 

imnohbody

Member
Sylvine said:
Problem is, if You raise taxes on the rich, they move their companies to a country which doesn't. Which is kinda conter-productive, then.

See the luxury yacht tax from the 1980s as Exhibit A. Yachts had taxes added onto already not-insignificant luxury taxes (which was supposed to only harm the "feeeelthy rich who stole their way to the top"... but that's another rant entirely), so what did rich people wanting to buy yachts do? They took their money to offshore boatmakers, not only depriving the government of the taxes it wants, but putting domestic boat makers out of business or forcing them to majorly reduce their employee rolls, sending many regular J. Random Bluecollarworkers whose skillsets were somewhat limited outside of yacht making to the unemployment line.

But, hey, only rich people were affected, right?

(The tax was quietly repealed later that decade, IIRC.)
 

nobuyuki

Member
Dirt on republicans? You got it. The following stuff rubs me just as bad as (possible moreso than) your dirt on various democrats. While I agree that some of those criticisms noted are disappointing, some downright annoying -- some of the criticisms seem pretty silly if you're actually using it to say "how can you be a democrat". -As-if- someone's drawl was ever a serious criteria for me to decide whether they should get my vote or not. lol

Lying about the WMD's and the true intentions on going to war with Iraq is just the latest one, and I believe the american public did pin that on this (Republican) administration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_document_leak_18_September_2004 is one of the more memorable incidents in my recent memory, but it wasn't "huge" news by the time it got to the US cause everyone already "knew" or believed it for a while anyway. Bush is doing a shitty job, and according to Gallup polls this opinion is held by over 60% of americans (if you've ever seen another poll that contradicts this, it was probably a straw poll)

Duke Cunningham -- corruption out the wazoo, and there's a bunch of ones like this, but it's not like there weren't any corrupt democrats either (see dan rostenkowski for example)

Let's not forget good old Ronnie and the Iran Contra affair. How the heck did he manage to slip out of that one?

Watergate. 'Nuff said.

Jack Abramoff should ring a bell in your recent memory. Dirty lobbyists with all the power, I need to find more left-wing parallels to the severe amount of astroturfing and shitty fake think tanks that exist in right wing politics. Big businesses have all this power and operate in a highly ethically-questionable manner. I suppose the closest analogue to it from the left are the crooked unions. From the wikipedia page:

Abramoff was a top lobbyist for the Preston Gates & Ellis and Greenberg Traurig firms and a director of the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative think tank, and Toward Tradition, a religious right organization, during his criminal enterprise. He was College Republican National Committee National Chairman from 1981 to 1985. He was a founding member of the International Freedom Foundation, an "anti-communist think tank" which operated from 1986 to 1993.

You don't have to be a democrat to be corrupt. Stay independant, if not free of party ties at least free of closed-minded ideology. Vote for who you think is the better candidate, or in a worst case scenario where you don't know your candidates, I suppose vote for the platform you think is going to screw you less. Tons of people do it, and I'd say that it's better than throwing your vote away and giving it to someone else who might have a less noble agenda than your own.

I'll have more to talk about later, after I read this thread or something.
 

SFox

Member
I honestly don't know how anyone could say, with a straight face, that Bush is doing a great job.
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
/me points to Nobu's post as the perfect example of her earlier statement of the "your guy my guy" team stuff :roll:
 

nobuyuki

Member
hey, he just asked for some counter-dirt, now that it's out there I don't really need to play mudslinger anymore. Though, I suppose I could have just as easily given an answer to "how can you be a democrat" stating that there's a whole lot of different types of democrats out there, so a lot to choose from that isn't mutually exlusive, etc. Lotta other people already did a great job talking those points up, and I'm glad to hear it, too.

Thanks for the thoughtful responses, everybody. :) They do help when it comes to formulating a political opinion, or to validate your existing ones by comparing your priorities in politics with everyone else's.
 
Thanks nobuyuki, I was wondering if anyone would come up with real people and examples. I don't know who Duke Cunningham is. Abramoff rings a bell. And of course Reagan, but I was looking for more recent stuff and figures higher up the chain. Seems like all the Democratic candidates are horrible.

Seems like most voted Democrats simply because they have those one or two issues that are really important to them that the Dems party line agrees with. But I can't vote for someone simply because one or two things. And I definately can't vote for someone who says one thing and does another.

The WMD thing appears to me to be just as much a fault for the Dems as the Reps. I wonder how much Bush actually knew.

I'm asked how can I believe Bush is doing a good job. I have to say the same reasons from the first post. He does what he says he'll do. He admits it when he makes a mistake. The economy is doing really great. But most importantly, he does what he says he's going to do. I can't see having someone representing me who is going to lie to my face. Every one makes mistakes but at least I know what mistake he's going to make... On top of all this, think of what he had to deal with as soon as he came into office (i.e. 9/11). Like I said, I have all this information that is bad about Dems, but nothing about Reps. So what do you think the person with 1/2 a brain should choose? Someone who lies to their face, or someone who screws up but you know exactly what they are going to do. If it were up to me, we'd do away with politicians completely and vote on everything. Theirs too much crap like 'pork' out there. I think they should be forced to keep things to single concepts to prevent this. Then we wouldn't need line item vetos.

PS: I'm still not entirely convinced the War is a mistake. I truthfully can't decide. I think this is a question more for the soldiers who are on the front line. They are the ones making the sacrifice, and also the ones seeing first hand whether or not a difference is being made.
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
On the economy thing, it's doing well, however two things.

Someone please remind me the term for this but basically there is a percentage splitup (GP funding?)

The majority about I think in the 60's in percentage range went to the employees
Another percentage to the employer and company.

What happened now is while more money is coming in, less of it and the percentage went down for the employee, it went more for the employer.

The other problem is, while the economy "is doing great" inflation is also not being factored. Employees wages are not increasing to keep in line with inflation while inflation has risen dramatically. In some cases Employee wages have decreased.

Having said that, Bush really has nothing much to do with the economy. I said the same for Clinton too, the DotComs were helpful in a quick inflation but its crash has also affected the economy.

I do find it humorous though, when Gas prices go up, Bush's approval rating goes down, and the reverse happens too. XD Gas costs he has the least control over, but he can put into action a plan for weaning our dependency on foreign oil.
 

Moon-Baby

Transitional Lifeform
I registered Republican so I could Vote in a primary to vote against somebody I really didn't like.
So I'm technically not Democrat.

In my opinion, both parties can bite me. They spend so much time fighting each other that they don't actually get anything worthwhile done.

And rofl @ the potleaf canadian flag. I've been trying to make one of those for myself for forever.
 

Stitch

New Member
Oh, man, I am so sick of all the partisan wedge-driving that's going on these days. Seriously, it makes me want to vomit. "Republicans are all stooopid!" "No, Democrats are!" "No, Republicans are times infinity!" "Well, Democrats are stupid times infinity plus one!" And on and on and on.

Here's the deal, and it's really, really, reeeeeeally simple: both parties are corrupt. Both parties lie. Both parties stomp on civil liberties, small businesses, minorities, majorities, human dignity and the law in general whenever it suits their interests. Both parties are full of hypocritical, crass, cynical opportunists who toss blame around like napalm while simultaneously absolving themselves of the very same wrongdoing they're gleefully accusing others of doing. Both parties are beholden to money and power, and both parties would gladly rake you over flaming hot coals if it meant they'd save so much as a nickel for their re-election campaign funds.

This is not big news to anybody who's been paying attention for the last hundred years. This is, in every sense of the term, a no-brainer. The big question that ought to be asked is not "Why are Republicans so bad," or "Why are Democrats so bad," but rather "How did our political system devolve into the rancorous, corrupt sludge it is today?"

Answer: because you, the American people, have let it. Every single time you vote on a party line without thinking about the issues at hand, every time you toss rabid accusations at the 'other side' while turning a blind eye to the shortcomings of 'your side', every time you make excuses for your preferred candidates while they screw over the values you hold dear, every time you let some windbag political 'commentator' on tv tell you how you ought to think, every time you say something like "I can't even understand how you can support YOUR party, because everybody knows they're stupid and wrong about everything, whereas MY party is righteous and saintly and perfect," the politicians give themselves a pat on the back and a little piece of America dies.

It's your fault, people. You've traded objectivity and rationality for a big old pair of horse blinders. You've given a free pass to a mass body of corrupt officials who are entirely dependent on your willingness to look the other way when they do something wrong (and then blame someone else for it). They're counting on your faithful, unquestioning obedience, and they know they'll get it because they've figured out how to tell you what you want to hear. The very concept of 'Republican' versus 'Democrat' is a giant smokescreen, fueled by wedge issues and mindless party-line accusations, that serves only to keep you, the American people, riled up and unthinking when it comes time to vote the jerks back in for another term.

You don't listen. You don't think. You don't even pretend to be objective. You choose only to see what you want to see, and to hell with anything that doesn't fit into your preconceived notions. You dismiss those you don't agree with as fools and traitors while canonizing those on 'your side' as saints. Ultimately it isn't the politicians who are the problem - it's you.
 
Top