What are the Democrats favorite shoes?

Flip flops.

What do Democrats like for breakfast?

Waffles.

What is a Democrats favorite dessert?

Turnovers.

Perhaps you dont understand how oppositions work in a democracy........ they gotta say everything the government does is wrong (or at least not as good as it would have been had they been in power) while the government has to focus on the positive aspects of their fuckups.

See what then happens is that people with a strong political affinity to the government see the opposition as negative while the people on the fence view the need for a change of direction, presuming the opposition are making a good stab at convincing them things are not as good as they could be.

The problem with the Democrats is that they have no firm position on any issue. They flip flop on any thing and everything. The war just seems to be the issue du'jour and a big election issue. The Democrats want to obtain the votes of those people who don't care about the war or are illiterate or ignorant of the whole thing. While I agree that the fighting overseas is a big isue, too many Democrats don't understand about it themselves since too many of them are too bent on social issues and not freedom and security of the U.S. and it's own people. They are more concerned about what the latest liberal polls say, thus their flip flopping. I just think that the Democrats have lost touch with TRUE reality on too many issues.

There's a distinction between flexibility and flip-flopping: and that neither of the two major American political parties has a firm monopoly on poll-pushed policy.

I think acornct_dad has a good point. Democrats, or more accurately, liberals, don't seem to live in the same world that I inhabit. Saying that they're stuck in the sixties is an oversimplification, but I don't think it's too far from the truth.

One example has been the way "quagmire" has been used in reference to Iraq. "Quagmire" was an excellent buzzword for the Vietnam War. Vietnam is a comparatively damp country, and the many rice fields there made the metaphor a powerful propaganda tool.

The term has already been used to describe America's "unilateral" involvement in Iraq - despite the fact that most of Iraq is a desert. And, in this election year, I'm pretty sure we'll hear it used again.

About "it’s almost as if they want us to fail across the board" - "almost as if?"

It's been out of fashion to want America to be a top-rank nation for decades. Unless, of course, it's a list of nations supporting the Kyoto Protocol or a ban on flatulent cows.

In fact, I've seen little indication that the 'save-the-world-from-America' attitude that I first noticed in the late sixties has changed.

It's my opinion that many liberals have no clue as to how big a threat everyone who is not 'sufficiently Islamic' faces.

Or, they are convinced that gentle reason and dialog will turn religious fanatics who firmly believe that their ticket to a celestial social club is suicide-attack martyrdom into tolerant citizens of the world.

I agree with Norski that both parties are influenced by public opinion and that even 180-degree shifts in policy happen.

However, I disagree with the theme of this thread, that Democrats are pessimistic. The Democratic majorities in Congress have worked to alter the government's and the administration's policies and actions, but have been blocked by the President's veto over and over. If the Democrats were truly pessimists, they wouldn't care about change because they wouldn't believe it would make any difference.

On a side-issue, I don't agree with what Norski says about liberals hating America. Conservatives have long accused liberals of lacking patriotism, as if wearing a flag lapel pin and having an "America, Love it or Leave It" bumper-sticker makes you patriotic. If liberals really did hate America, we'd leave. The fact that we campaign for change means we care deeply about our country, and are just as patriotic as anyone else.

Nobody even responds to this bd idiot anymore, lol!

First off would like to say BD is Gay! Democraps are losers and traitors!

IS THE VILLAGE AT FAULT?
Hillary Clinton’s book, It Takes a Village, gave the village the concern for everyone’s lives and choices. The Village cares when care is wanting. Members of the village need not care and should let the village do its job. This is what we are voting for in 2008. Listen to the candidates and their promises. Cradle to grave care and concern by government, the Village, in all our problems. This belief did not come out of a vacuum, however. The candidates did not create it. It is the answer to a growing feeling that individuals need not be mature in their own thoughts and deeds. Catering to immaturity comes from books, magazines, entertainment and news reporting, as well as schools and careless parenting. The Village created it and now must provide the answer.

This brings us to the question of the value of maturity. Maturity, for an individual, occurs when he or she is equipped emotionally and educationally to be responsible for personal behavior and the results of their behavior. Immaturity, as applied to children, is not being ready, willing and able to stand on their own two feet. Parents are, as a family, responsible for seeing to it their children mature before being sent into the world. The village can never be responsible for good or bad behavior. Civil societies, the Village, can only accept, reject or punish behaviors of its members, not form them.

This brings maturity into focus, whether individuals should be concerned for things more important than they are, i.e., other-centered as opposed to self-centered. The elections pivot on the value of maturity in life. We begin our lives as self-centered children who learn values, shape interests, skills, talents and aspirations, with the help of concerned parents. These are all outer-centered facets of a growing and meaningful life. The careless parents, to make their own lives easier, ignore the development of these outer-centered needs in their children when they leave it all to the Village. Children grow into sustained self-centeredness instead. They focus mainly on satisfying desires, drives and feelings for their own pleasure. They cannot cope easily with disappointment, which leads to alcohol, drugs, obesity, single parenting and suicide. The Village cannot cope with these growing numbers of social misfits. Political candidates simply offer choices of how the Village shall operate and who pays, even when it cannot work.

America grew prosperous because it took free individuals to make the nation grow. Those were the individuals taught by parents and schools to pursue their own outer-centered dreams and visions to make life better. Now, it is the spineless Village, and the few who care ruling the many that make up the Village. It’s a vote for decline and decay.

I agree with you Clay BUT...
Did you really read Hillary's book?
And you're still having coherent thoughts?
Come on...
Be honest.

As for that Harry Reid pic up top.
"I am but a humble Senate majority leader, Master Copperfield."
creepy.