- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Joe Lieberman is a Republican and Democrat, just like the rest of them. That's why you are finding it hard to classify him, because you're premise is that they are different. If you begin with the premise that they're the same, he's easily classified as a typical Demublican.
Congress controls the money in Washington, not Presidents. Every Federal dollar is ran through 2 committees. The Executive isn't on either. Like most Presidents, Bill Clinton got the credit for what his Congress did... his Republican Congress... or if you did a little deeper and stay on topic... his Demublican Congress. Again, they're all the same.
We keep hearing about taxes on the wealthy and other nonsense. They already pay the lion's share. How much do you want them to pay? 75%? 80? 95? Are you a capitalist or a socialist? Do you know how taxes originally worked in the Constitution? They added up government expenditure, then divided by the Census. EVERYONE paid the exact same amount. You know why that worked for so long? Because it makes sure EVERYONE has chips in the game. When you haven't ante'd up, you don't care how big government has gotten. Why should you? Someone else is paying for it.
They only differ on a handful of social issues. It's part of the scam where they pretend they're in opposition. Where are your clear differences on war? WWI. Democrat. WWII. 2 Democrats. Korea. Both. Vietnam. Both. Iraq I. Republican. Iraq II. Both. You can go further into small conflicts like Panama, Libya, Lebanon, Zaire, etc and you'll get the same result. Now, weigh in the actions of Congress during any of these military conflicts and the answer is always BOTH. Both parties LOVE war. Both parties LOVE trillion dollar military budgets. Now I ask you, given the examples above, who hasn't been "thinking" about the issues?
Major social issues? Not the silly ones like gay-rights and abortion? Which party has taken on the AARP? Neither. Social Security? Neither. Medicare? Neither. They talk a mean game, until it's time for a vote, then they miraculously all agree. It's crazy that any buys into the filthy lies that come out their mouths at this point. The only conclusion possible is that the average person is just too dull to care or understand.
Voting for the "lesser of two evils" is about the dumbest proposition ever conceived. After a handful of "lesser evils", you're left with hell. If you're "close" to any of these politicians on the substantive issues, you're a traitor to the ideals that were the foundation for this society. The best thing you can do is vote a 3rd party, or abstain altogether. Voting is a right, not a mandate. Read your Constitution again. Read the notes and correspondence of those who wrote it. They'd take up arms tomorrow if they were resurrected and saw a $3.5 trillion dollar budget and a progressive income tax that isn't even enough to pay it.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!
About CreateDebateThe CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Sharing ToolsInvite Your Friends
RSS & XML Feeds
Basic StuffUser Agreement