Republicans In the District

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an independent, and definitely many conservatives do not feel comfortable sharing their views at work or with strangers, because they are worried to be labeled "racist", or something else equally silly. I never see that with liberals.

Agreed. Why is that?

But have you talked to liberals who live in very conservative areas? When I lived in a conservative area, I was careful about what I said to people.

True. I am moderately conservative, and I was taught that in formal environments such as your workplace there was no place for political talk, that it was self-limiting particularly if people in a position to advance you disagree with you. Not so much the Democrats in my workplace - some even have Obama picture and Hope and Change literature tacked up in their cubes. One has a photo of Obama as a screen saver. It is any wonder they think everyone agrees with them; those of us who don't keep our mouths shut!

So I'm probably not taking this comment as it was intended, but this gets me thinking. If we could all discuss our political views in an emotionally detached way such that its a discussion about philosophies and not perceived as personal attacks, would politics still be a taboo subject in polite company?

For example, I personally do not agree with the direction that President Obama is trying to take our government, but if I were to try to express that, I'm pretty sure I would be accused of being a racist. So, I keep my mouth shut. I wonder if by doing so, i'm giving tacit approval to his policies and doing myself, and others who think like I do, a disservice? I'm not about to yell at my elected official in a town hall (not that Eleanor Holmes Norton cares what I have to say), but I sympathize with the Tea Parties.

I do not think that most people who disagree with the president are being labeled racist. I think there is a small group of pretty vicious people who have been labeled as such. I don't agree with the label in most cases, BTW. But it is not the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I do not think that most people who disagree with the president are being labeled racist. I think there is a small group of pretty vicious people who have been labeled as such. I don't agree with the label in most cases, BTW. But it is not the norm.

Really? News flash - tell that to Jimmy Carter - not once but twice! Does anyone stop to think how offensive that label is to those who have legitimate POLICY differences with the administration. Honestly, the name throwers are doing a disservice to President Obama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that Romney is very handsome I just don't get why so many people bag on the Mormons. I am not a mormon but I have known many through business and life and I can say that every mormon I have met is beyond nice and soooooooooooooooo honest. Gosh these are people who are so healthy they don't even have cafeine. All there kids also seem to be so nice and police. Anyway-I like honest for a change.

If he's so honest, why did he switch from being Mr. "pro-choice universal healthcare" governor of a liberal state into Mr. "I'm the true Conservative" presidential candidate?

Barney Frank once called Mitt Romney "the most intellectually dishonest human being in the history of politics". OK, yeah, it's Barney Frank, but hey, the guy's seen a lot of dishonest politicians

Barney Frank is such a drama queen. And anybody who's worked with Chuck Rangel has no business criticizing anyone else for intellectual dishonesty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that Romney is very handsome I just don't get why so many people bag on the Mormons. I am not a mormon but I have known many through business and life and I can say that every mormon I have met is beyond nice and soooooooooooooooo honest. Gosh these are people who are so healthy they don't even have cafeine. All there kids also seem to be so nice and police. Anyway-I like honest for a change.

If he's so honest, why did he switch from being Mr. "pro-choice universal healthcare" governor of a liberal state into Mr. "I'm the true Conservative" presidential candidate?

Barney Frank once called Mitt Romney "the most intellectually dishonest human being in the history of politics". OK, yeah, it's Barney Frank, but hey, the guy's seen a lot of dishonest politicians

Barney Frank is such a drama queen. And anybody who's worked with Chuck Rangel has no business criticizing anyone else for intellectual dishonesty.

Like I said, it's Barney Frank. Still, he singled out Romney. And those flip-flops of Romney's are on bread and butter issues. So aside from hating on Frank, what do you have to say about the substance of the issues Romney flipped on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that Romney is very handsome I just don't get why so many people bag on the Mormons. I am not a mormon but I have known many through business and life and I can say that every mormon I have met is beyond nice and soooooooooooooooo honest. Gosh these are people who are so healthy they don't even have cafeine. All there kids also seem to be so nice and police. Anyway-I like honest for a change.

If he's so honest, why did he switch from being Mr. "pro-choice universal healthcare" governor of a liberal state into Mr. "I'm the true Conservative" presidential candidate?

Barney Frank once called Mitt Romney "the most intellectually dishonest human being in the history of politics". OK, yeah, it's Barney Frank, but hey, the guy's seen a lot of dishonest politicians

Barney Frank is such a drama queen. And anybody who's worked with Chuck Rangel has no business criticizing anyone else for intellectual dishonesty.

Like I said, it's Barney Frank. Still, he singled out Romney. And those flip-flops of Romney's are on bread and butter issues. So aside from hating on Frank, what do you have to say about the substance of the issues Romney flipped on?

I think he has a gimlet eye for political expediency because at the end of the day he's a businessman more than a politician, which I mean largely in the best sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that Romney is very handsome I just don't get why so many people bag on the Mormons. I am not a mormon but I have known many through business and life and I can say that every mormon I have met is beyond nice and soooooooooooooooo honest. Gosh these are people who are so healthy they don't even have cafeine. All there kids also seem to be so nice and police. Anyway-I like honest for a change.

If he's so honest, why did he switch from being Mr. "pro-choice universal healthcare" governor of a liberal state into Mr. "I'm the true Conservative" presidential candidate?

Barney Frank once called Mitt Romney "the most intellectually dishonest human being in the history of politics". OK, yeah, it's Barney Frank, but hey, the guy's seen a lot of dishonest politicians

Barney Frank is such a drama queen. And anybody who's worked with Chuck Rangel has no business criticizing anyone else for intellectual dishonesty.

Like I said, it's Barney Frank. Still, he singled out Romney. And those flip-flops of Romney's are on bread and butter issues. So aside from hating on Frank, what do you have to say about the substance of the issues Romney flipped on?

I think he has a gimlet eye for political expediency because at the end of the day he's a businessman more than a politician, which I mean largely in the best sense.

Well you can call it political expediency. But then what is the definition of honesty? It's not like he comes out and says "I'm going to go with whatever is popular to my constituency at the time". He is claiming to be the "true conservative" (his words). But before he was anything but that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We do not put political stickers on our cars because they would be vandalized, nor do we put campaign signs in our yard so that our house won't be vandalized. I am surprised to hear Democrats on this list saying they have felt attacked because in the many places I have lived in addition to DC (some much more right than left), it is always the Republicans who have to be careful and take precautions and not the Democrats. I have always found that ironic.

Try living in Mississippi as a white Democrat. I was one of about 12 in the whole state. Fortunately I did not live there during an election year, but I guarantee you it would have gotten ugly if I had lived there and had an Obama sticker on my car last year. I probably would not have had a sticker because I would have been afraid for my safety. Dirty looks and getting honked at ain't nothin'. As it is, I had a nasty old white guy in an ancient pickup truck with a Jesus sticker on it almost run us off the road in NoVa on I-66. I am positive this was because of our Obama sticker.

It goes both ways. Personally I would not live somewhere I was that greatly outnumbered again. Civility is on the wane, and it just seems too dangerous as well as being socially unpleasant.

[Anonymous]

You are not alone. I'm married to one of the few registered Republicans in the District. (I may have just given away my identity!!) I've voted for Republicans and for Democrats in five presidential elections. I side with different parties on different issues.

As for political discourse with friends on different sides of the political fence, it can be done. And it should be done!

I think it helps when the discussion is centered on specific policies or problems, and not on an individual (even though s/he may be the sponsor of said policy).

The Tea Party folks got such a bad rap because so many of them more SO poorly informed. They couldn't articulate WHY they were against the current administration. They repeated rumors from the internet that have no basis in fact. And some of my inlaws side with them, which scares me.

Property taxes are higher in VA and MD than in DC, too.