Reply to Wasn't it Reagan who first gave "amnesty"?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Wasn't it Reagan who first gave "amnesty"? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]OP here. This is really the first thing that Obama has done that angers me. This will make me think about voting Republican. I voted Republican in MD because of the passage of the "dream" tuition deal, and to me, this is no different. [/quote]

I'm a liberal, but the fact that this is the first thing Obama has done that angers you makes you sound totally unbelievable.  Please, go vote Republican.  [/quote]

I'm a liberal-leaning independent, and while this action doesn't bother me for a lot of reasons (mostly that I think it's an economically rational choice regardless of the politics - my economic analysis is here http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/425423.page at 21:25), there are a number of other things Obama has (or hasn't) done that have bothered me, including a number of policies of the Bush Administration that he continued. However, I won't let those actions influence my voting in 2016 because [b]Obama isn't running in 2016[/b].

When I vote I will look at the totality of the results and, so far, the policies/ideas floated by the Republican party, particularly as they are influenced by the far right Tea Party voters, are not something I want to support and certainly don't want implemented (or continued if they are the things Obama has continued from the Bush Administration).

When I look at what Sam Brownback has done to the Kansas economy as a "model" of implementing Republican fiscal ideas, I see an economic catastrophe.

When I look at what Republican legislatures and governors have done regarding women's health and birth control, I see policies I vehemently disagree with.

When I look at what Republican-dominated school boards have done regarding science education and the way they are attempting to revise history to suit their political and theological leanings, I have no desire to have people like that influencing our textbooks and how our children learn. And when Republican presidential and Congressional candidates pander to their base by denying accepted science regarding evolution and global warming, I see a party that is more interested in denying science for political (and economic) gain rather than governing based on science. (If Inhofe said, for example, that he accepts that human activity is causing global warming, but that he thinks the economic cost to our country of dealing with it would be too damaging, we could disagree, but that would enable a science-based discussion. Instead, he and others like him follow the model created by the tobacco industry of sowing doubt at every stage of the process, fighting a rearguard action against the science to protect the economic interests of their major donors.)

When I look at Republican resistance to gay marriage, I see a party that is tied to a vision of exclusion.

So no one issue is going to cause me to vote for Republicans, in general, and the overall prospect of Republicans enacting the policies they have implemented at all levels of government is going to cause me to think twice before voting for any Republican.

That doesn't mean in a particular race I wouldn't vote for a particular Republican over a particular Democrat, but the Republican has a bigger hurdle to get over because he or she carries the baggage of so much of the whole current party platform that I disagree with.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics