"save the environment destroy a republiican"

That won't save the environment.....when a republican gets destroyed, they become a democrat.

"eradicate the conservative idealogy"

Then who's going to pay for all those entitlements democrats want?

Amber---

We know you're bitter, but do you really know anything about who is destroying the country's economy? Everyone needs a scapegoat. so go ahead and blame President Bush. He's an easy target (albeit, an unfair target).

Perhaps, if you want to have an intelligent discussion, then we can begin to disect the garbage that has been fed to you by whatever insane liberals you have been listening to. Otherwise, try refraining from butting into a conversation which you seem to have nothing insightful to contribute to.

Urban Conservative---
Excellent point. This is what we have to look forward to if Obama gets elected. Supreme idiocy. Hopefully, there are still enough intelligent Republicans left in this country to prevent stupid, maniacal, Democratic socialists from ruining it altogether.

Unfortunately, this country continues to flush its brain down the toilet when it comes to political ideology. Our Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves. Someone stop the bleeding, before it's too late!

amber - such thoughtful comments.  your public high school education has really served you well. thanks for giving me the ammo i need to write about liberal idiocy.

save the environment destroy a republiican

eradicate the conservative idealogy

stupid fucking republican destroyed our economy

Can someone explain to me why no one ever talks about phasing out Social Security altogether and give hard-working Americans back the 7.65% of their pay that comes out every pay period? Personally, I am sick and tired of hearing people whine about how to fix Social Security

There is NO WAY to fix Social Security. The program was not intended to last this long. It was a stop-gap measure created decades ago that should have been discontinued post-WW2.

Americans would be far better off having the extra money in their pockets now--to invest themselves. If there is one thing the Federal government proves time and time again, it is that it is good at wasting taxpayers money with ridiculous programs. I would feel much more at ease knowing that I planned for my OWN retirement years, instead of looking ahead for the government to rescue me.

Do away with Social Security altogether is what I say. Phase it out, so that our elderly population who depend on it right now will not be left out in the cold. But don't continue to waste our money trying to fix this broken Socialist system that doesn't work.

Conversely, this would also require Americans to plan their futures ALOT better. But at least the only person they could blame is themselves if they can't retire comfortably.

Blame Bush for the Social Security mess if you want to, but the fact is that this mess started decades ago and will not go away by taxing people more or dumping more money into it.

Naturally it is disheartening to watch the SOCIALIST PROGRAMS crumbling around us.  Gosh, how can they falter when they are so well administered by whom?  Thankfully, I will never need my social security 2% return stipend.  Of course the poor who have been screwed again by good intentions without economic logic (a Democratic party trait).  By the party which swears to protect them.  It's a big joke and the poor must suffer so a few may have power over their lives.

What's next?  Global warming using faulty data with carbon patterns skewed?  Oh wait, it's been done.


out.

It should be obvious why neither party wants to mention our fiscal difficulties. It is because there are no easy answers, just painful and  politically inconvenient ones.  There is no place for truth in an election year. Just ask Ron Paul.

^   self editing

"having found this not popular with his conservative republican votes HE wanted and needed- did an about face 180 degrees- and is now in full support of this."

"The brilliance of McCain's choice of Sarah Palin is that it allows him to stress his independence"

you have got to be kidding!  McCain has stepped away from what was popular at the time to come out against the Bush tax cuts- having found this not popular with his conservative republican votes we wanted and needed- did an about face 180 degrees- and is now in full support of this.

McCain took a stand on immigration reform- only to find that this also did not sit well with his need for conservative votes and promptly did an about face on this as well.  

McCain has proclaimed from the rooftops that he does not and will not support earmarks and pork- yet brings in as his VP choice a woman who
made a point of obtaining these without abandon.

please inform yourself before making such absurd statements, sir.

The Obama camp's change message has basically two components.

One is a call for "post partisanship", an end to "politics as usual", and a farewell to cronyism, special interests and corruption.

The other part of that change message is about *policy* change. Obama wants to take the US in a different direction. There's talk about nationalizing health care, tax changes, global warming initiatives, pulling out of Iraq asap and so on.

Lately Obama has been emphasizing the second kind of change, the policy change, and for good reason: His track record doesn't back up the post partisanship type of change. He's got the most inflexible liberal voting record of any member of the senate. He grew up in Chicago politics and yet his campaign cannot point to a single instance where he challenged the old corrupt Chicago ways. For all his talk about ending politics as usual, Obama has zero track record to back this up.

McCain is now starting to eat Obama's lunch and it could get interesting. Simply put, McCain has a real authentic claim to the first kind of change. McCain demonstrably fought earmarks (he's never requested a single one), corruption (he led the charge against Abramoff, a republican lobbyist who's now in jail), and he's reached across the isle and worked with democrats on numerous issues, often infuriating his own party: Campaign finance reform, immigration, global warming etc.

The brilliance of McCain's choice of Sarah Palin is that it allows him to stress his independence. Voters always knew that the Obama claim that McCain was just "more of the same" was a stretch, but with Palin securing the conservative base, McCain is free to remind voters of his track record. If anything, Palin reinforces the reformer image, herself a political maverick who threw out the incumbent governor from her own party.

There will be a ferocious fight now about who's the "real candidate" of change. Obama has, for the first time, been put on the defensive on this his most crucial message. Predictably, he's saying that the choice of Palin is just "more of the same", but that clearly won't fly: A woman governor, mother of five, with a strong reformer image and no Washington background, cannot credibly be relegated to "more of the same".

Obama knows this and that's why democrats are furiously trying to reign back the "change" mantel and put Palin back in the box. But the genie is out of the bottle and the wheels are starting to come off the Obama bandwagon. This will be a more exciting election than anyone had imagined.

http://scepticalrepublican.blogspot.com/