Chad,
Unless you're living in Section 8 housing, rent is NOT based on income, so your story makes absolutely no sense.
The Dems are NOT Robin Hoods. They are not taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Your facts are seriously distorted, and if you think the Republicans are going to let you keep your money when you ARE rich, then you'll be sorely disappointed.
Furthermore.... Do you like having Police, or a Fire Department? What about Streets & Sanitation, or Park Services? Do you realize those are SOCIAL agencies - services paid for by YOUR tax dollars designed to serve the common good. There is no difference between those things and any other kind of social program the Dems want to institute. It's there to protect us - not to give deadbeats a free ride.
Your views are exactly the point of my entire post. People like you have a completely distorted view of what's actually happening in this country because some red-neck politician tries to tell you that they want to keep you richer. They are liars and hypocrites.
Nobody is asking for a free ride. We're just asking for the government to stop taking our money and using it to kill people, or screw us up the ass. If you were and "educated man" - you'd research where your tax dollars are going and tell me whether you think that money is being wisely spent.

I simply don't like the idea of building a country on "hope." I'd rather build a country through work. I see it as Dems seem to always want to take money from the rich and give it to the poor. With all their programs and government funded assistance agencies, it sounds nice, and the right thing to do in some Eutopian fantasyland, though I don't think it's fair to tax the rich, just because they have more than others.
Now, I'm not rich (yet), but when I get there, I don't want to be required to help others. Maybe I will, but it should be my choice as to who I give it to.
A couple years ago I wanted to rent an apartment in a building my friend lived in. I made more money than her. It was going to cost me three times what she was paying because I made 3,000 more per year than her. Since then, and other experiences like that, I've taken a different look at how each party approaches spending.
I also think it's interesting how I've read a lot of women often times bring up the old, "if he were a woman doing that, he'd be called a b-," but I don't look at it that way, and I don't think most educated men would either. I think its a similar idea that women dress for women, amd not for men.

Chad, who are you referring to as "lazy" and where do you think your money is going?
This is one of those stupid things said by people who have no idea what is actually going on in the world. It sounds real nice from far away, but has absolutely no substance or basis in reality.

I was more of a "Democrat" when in college. I am now a "Republican" because I don't like my money going towards "hopes" & "dreams" of lazy people. I like reality, and I like rewarding success not failure.

blogversary: Hello. There are so many things wrong with being a Republican these days, I wouldn't even know where to begin, or how a person could possibly justify being a member of that party, or voting the way you do. How can a "compassionate" person stay party to politicians who vote away our civil liberties every day?
And, unless the Republicans passed some law that prohibits free speech while I was in class tonight, as far as I know I'm still allowed to say whatever I want. And seeing as how this is MY blog... which I pay for... out of the few dollars the Bush administration leaves me with after taxes... I think I ought to be able to say whatever I'm feeling.
And right now, I'm feeling that Republicans must be stupid. And from the comments above... I am not alone.

Sorry, but I've gotta post this. It's just way too fitting in regards with this post for me not to.
BOYCOTT OPRAH?
http://perezhilton.com/2008-09-10-boycott-oprah
"A group of Republican women from Florida is boycotting the Oprah Winfrey show.
Their reason?
Because Momma O won't have Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin on her show until after the elections are over.
Well, Oprah is not going to have ANYONE who's running for the White House on her show until the elections are over, including Barack Obama.
Oprah did have Obama on her show twice in the past, though that was before he was running for president.
Maybe if Palin was important enough, she would have been on the show before as well!
The vice president for the group organizing the boycott, Cindry Graves, says that that Palin "is an icon, and set her herself up to be such a women's rights and women's issues person. To have the first vice president of our lifetime on the Republican ticket being a woman and to sit it out regardless of what her personal political beliefs were was disingenuous, we felt."
That reasoning doesn't make any sense.
They're basically saying Palin should deserve special treatment and get on Oprah because she's the first female candidate running for VP.
People can easily argue that Obama should go on the show since he's the first African American candidate to make it this far.
Oprah is just trying to be fair.
In fact, Oprah even said, "I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over."
We agree with Oprah. If she said no one running in the election will go on her show now, then she shouldn't make an exception for Palin."

1) If you know French well enough or had a job that the Canadian government saw as "valuable", such as a college professor, you could get Canadian citizenship pretty easily (supposedly).
2) Supposedly, McCain is now leading Obama which definitely scare me.
3) It definitely sucks that a vagina is so very precious to them despite the fact that the female vp canidate is a complete fucking waste of time. As my fiancee has said, the gov. of Alaska was not only a good choice for the republicans, but in many ways it was their ONLY choice as she does not have any major ties to the Bush administration/family. The connection between candidate and Bush could/would seriously hurt the republican party in the upcoming election.
4)Let's see... Republicans are (typically): pro-life, pro-gun, anti-gun control, pro-rich people tax cuts, pro-oil, pro-war, pro-Christian religion, pro-don't bash on the commander-in-chief during a war or anytime for that matter, anti-union, pro-large corporations, pro- Wal-Mart, pro-corporate and corrupt medical industry, etc.... and THIS IS ALL SAD!!! WHY DO PEOPLE BUY INTO THIS HORSE SHIT??? It's basically haviing them fuck over themselves, but WHY? AS MY DAD AND MY GRADFATHER (RIP) WOULD SAY, WHY WOULD A WORKING MAN EVER VOTE FOR A REPUBLICAN???

Hi Tanky!
Oh, I am SOO going to read that book. Thanks for the rec.

Read Thomas Frank's "What's The Matter With Kansas." It won't make you feel any better, but at least it'll explain how the Republican co-opted the very folks they're screwing over.

I realize that McCain's stance on the issues can be quite confusing, what with him being slippery and all.
So here's a list (76 items long) of things he has Flip-Flopped about. This is a running list..... I'm sure it will get long as the election goes on.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops
Enjoy!

McCain oftern differs from the base of the Republican party. Examples to note include the issues of amnesty/immegration, campaign finance reform, "climate change", ending judicial appointment filibusters, demanding the firing of Rumsfeld, supporting the surge before anyone else, etc, etc, etc. And that was just since 2000. If you want, you can go way back to when he was against the Reagan plan to send troops to Beruit.

Sure, two sided debates are far more fun that one sided.
And with that:
1. John McCain is no longer any sort of "maverick." As soon as it was no longer convenient to be a maverick, he ditched the persona to stand right along side Bush. I don't really consider that "bucking conservatives." He's a back peddler, and a hypocrite. Even still, if a woman did what he did, she'd be nowhere.
2: I didn't like Obama's "pig" comment either.... I've said before, I am not an Obama supporter (although this Palin pick has certainly forced my hand.) BUT, Palin did invite that when she made the "lipstick/pitbull" comment. If she can't take it she ought not to give it. She called Hillary Clinton a "whiner" - perhaps she should stop whining now?

Would you care to make this debate two sided? John McCain is the maverick because he often bucks conservatives in his Party. Republicans believe in personal responsibility and less government. If these beliefs are ever able to be actually implemented into law, the country would be so much better off.
Speaking of sexism, did you hear how Obama made a reference to Palin as a "pig"?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Obama_...

I'm so with you on everything you said above. I just want to scream some days (most days?).

Ditto... this whole thing is depressing the crap out of me too. I'm not even mad at McCain or Palin; I'm mad that other people can be so deluded by their own selfishness that they can't see the hand in front of their face.
Perhaps it's plausible denial. They figure: If I stick my fingers in my ears and refuse to believe the truth - then maybe I'm not responsible for the bad crap that happenbs.

I'm having the same thoughts. John McCain actually WAS a maverick 8 years ago. Hell, even in '04, he was one of the only Republicans who was civil (even friendly) towards John Kerry. Now, though, he's just an agent of status quo.
I've been so pissed by those who buy into their stolen change message. Change? From them? Are you out of your ever-loving minds? Through the GOP convention, I heard people describe Conservative values as "Common sense values." Where the hell is their common sense now?
It doesn't help that an old friend keeps sending out horrible racist messages about Obama. It makes me want to scream.
I've been feeling really depressed lately. Have we not sacrificed enough? WTF more do we have to do to make people open their eyes? I say this all the time, but to many people, politics is a game. It's more about promoting their religion than anything else. For us, politics directly affects our lives. With the economy the way it is, that's true for more and more people, yet many Americans remain firmly entrenched in cluelessness.