ATTENTION ALL REPUBLICANS

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Wave goodbye...







The exit is down your hall to the left.

[Vladd44]

How? Politics is about power and authority. Both are enhanced by cooperation and coordination of various individuals with convergent goals. That is the essence of party politics.

I will pray that the lord opens your eyes to other ways of doing things.

Seriously though, What you describe is a perfect example of what I don't like about political parties.

What I want to see is a shift away from government as a whole. It is time that we put governmental powers in perspective by weakening our federal union. I do not simply wish to see the fat cut from government, I want to see the muscle cut.

I would much rather a weak ineffective government over an overbearing behemoth.

Yes, politics is about power and political parties help consolidate that power, that is why I would like to see their demise. Weaken the march towards consolidation and a refocus into the responsibility of the individual.

The US constitution provides us with a way to legally and without blood replace it. The authors understood the danger it represented to the people, and with great foresight left us that gift. If we fail to use it, and allow ourselves to continue in the direction of national insolvency and dictatorship, we will have failed not only our posterity but our ancestors as well.

[Vladd44]

I voted for Bush both times. First against Gore (what a joke) and second against Kerry (need I explain that).

I still give my wife a hard time for voting for W in 2000. But at least she chose better in 2004. I have to confess that in 2000 I was glad our current dictator ended up as president, and not Gore. I had despised every moment of the Clinton/Gore years, and was thrilled to see them behind us.

But like you, I did not vote for Gore, I was also smart enough not to vote for Bush either. Harry Browne was my choice in 2000.

In 2004, I voted for Michael Badnarik, and hoped like hell that Kerry would topple the current regime. And yes, I would love to hear your explanation.

Personally I cannot imagine why anyone other than his wife, kids, mom, dad and siblings voted for W in 2004. He was a known quantity, and it stank of yesterdays diapers.

I am generally republican, but my vote is more on who is the most qualified.

I have asked several people about these qualifications. Are these what your talking about?

Clip 1 and Clip 2

But first off, how exactly is it that a female president is going to handle international affairs. Lets consider how many countries still subjugate women. Yea, female president, great idea.

I am in awe.

First, have you considered that a woman USA president could help women's rights across the globe? That she could be an example of competence in places that still hold antiquidated views on women.

Should we not elect an African-American because some parts of our own country have racist beliefs about them? Surely their opinion should matter more than those of people in another country.

I think it would do the women haters of the world to have no choice but to deal with a Woman Leader of the USA.

My only issue is, I happen to despise the candidate most likely chosen, Hillary. But I think it is beyond time for us to see a few presidents that aren't rich middle age or old white men.

You mention utopian views of Kerry, not sure what your talking about, I am not a Kerry fan. But How less removed from reality can it be than the Bush doctrine?

As far as idiot Gore, What did you expect him to do as VP? The US constitution doesn't provide the VP with very many duties in the first place. Other than being on standby in the event we need a replacement, about the only other duty is as president of the Senate, which has for as long as I have been around been largely ignored unless there was a tie vote.

[Confused]

I voted for Bush both times. First against Gore (what a joke) and second against Kerry (need I explain that).

I still give my wife a hard time for voting for W in 2000. But at least she chose better in 2004. I have to confess that in 2000 I was glad our current dictator ended up as president, and not Gore. I had despised every moment of the Clinton/Gore years, and was thrilled to see them behind us.

But like you, I did not vote for Gore, I was also smart enough not to vote for Bush either. Harry Browne was my choice in 2000.

In 2004, I voted for Michael Badnarik, and hoped like hell that Kerry would topple the current regime. And yes, I would love to hear your explanation.

Personally I cannot imagine why anyone other than his wife, kids, mom, dad and siblings voted for W in 2004. He was a known quantity, and it stank of yesterdays diapers.

I am generally republican, but my vote is more on who is the most qualified.

I have asked several people about these qualifications. Are these what your talking about?

Clip 1 and Clip 2

But first off, how exactly is it that a female president is going to handle international affairs. Lets consider how many countries still subjugate women. Yea, female president, great idea.

I am in awe.

First, have you considered that a woman USA president could help women's rights across the globe? That she could be an example of competence in places that still hold antiquidated views on women.

Should we not elect an African-American because some parts of our own country have racist beliefs about them? Surely their opinion should matter more than those of people in another country.

I think it would do the women haters of the world to have no choice but to deal with a Woman Leader of the USA.

My only issue is, I happen to despise the candidate most likely chosen, Hillary. But I think it is beyond time for us to see a few presidents that aren't rich middle age or old white men.

You mention utopian views of Kerry, not sure what your talking about, I am not a Kerry fan. But How less removed from reality can it be than the Bush doctrine?

As far as idiot Gore, What did you expect him to do as VP? The US constitution doesn't provide the VP with very many duties in the first place. Other than being on standby in the event we need a replacement, about the only other duty is as president of the Senate, which has for as long as I have been around been largely ignored unless there was a tie vote.

Kerrys platform was utopian at best. His concept of social reform could only have been done in a lighter version of socialism. He had no grasp of foreign affairs, instead, he spoke of "peace" but not how this would happen. Had he been in office for 9/11, he would likely have done just as Clinton did to all other terrorist attacks during his rule: slap them on the hand and say bad boy. Bush may be practicing for utopia now, but he didn't run his platform for election on utopian concepts.

As far as a female president, yes, I have a major bias against Hiliary. But my issues aren't with her national affairs, but her international affairs. Still, too many other nations are still in the male dominated female subjugated way of life. How can she expect to negotiate international affairs with these countries who won't even recognize her as their equal. These countries aren't interested in adopting the Womens Rights movements we hold in the U.S. We aren't there to change their views of women, that is for the women in their countries to do just as those in America had to do in turn. In regards to an african american president, I don't know to many countries that would have a major issue with this unless it was some idiot like Jesse Jackson.

[Vladd44]

Kerrys platform was utopian at best. His concept of social reform could only have been done in a lighter version of socialism.

Exactly what do you call socialism? I am no Kerry Defender, but when compared Bush with his social engineering ideas I don't see how there could be much legitimacy to claim you voted for Bush to avoid Socialism.

Bush's "No Child Left Behind" with a cost ranging from $1.9 to $5.3 billion is just one example of his efforts to consolidate control in Washington. Unfortunately for ( I guess Sun Hudson I guess No Child left behind doesn't include poor minority children with no healthcare. After all Sun Hudson was murdered in Houston (legally due to a law signed by George Bush when he was governor of TX) just a few weeks before the Terri Schiavo insanity.

The Medicare Drug Program is the largest increase in entitlements since Lyndon Johnson's Social experimentation of the "Great Society". Other social welfare programs under George W. Bush grew by $96 billion in just his first two years in office , versus $51 billion under 8 years of Clinton.

The current Iraq fiasco we are embroiled in can only be described as a dubious utopian effort for a social change into the Middle East. Not only is he helping socialist causes in the USA, but now he is exporting them as well.

This doesn't even consider other actions of the president with the country's credit card in hand.

Scholarships for Cuban students and professionals via the Initiative for a New Cuba, Increased budget for National Health Service Corps by $44 million to $191.5 million, Increased farm subsidies by $180 billion over 10 years via the Farm Security Act, $3.5 million for SuperBowl anti-drug ads, Faith-based subsidies that continue to mount in costs, $20 million annually for "Strategic Milk Reserve." Was phased out in 1999 by the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act. Congress extended it temporarily, and then made it permanent again in the farm bill that President Bush signed into law, $752 million in drought aid to livestock farmers, and $1.1 billion for federal reading programs just to name a few.

How are these not the work of socialism? This president has actually caused me to look back upon the Clinton years (which i had loathed) with kind reminencence.

I only hope that the National Institute of Health $24 million on a retirement facility for chimpanzees is built in Crawford, TX so Bush can have a proper place to retire. It could even double as his Presidential Library.

He [Kerry] had no grasp of foreign affairs, instead, he spoke of "peace" but not how this would happen.

ROFLMGDAAO. To me it is ludicrous that one could claim to vote for Bush over Kerry due to a lack of understanding of foreign affairs. Sorry, but "Stay the Course" was not a policy. Nor was it an explanation of "how it would happen".

Bush may be practicing for utopia now, but he didn't run his platform for election on utopian concepts.

Bush's incompetence was clear for anyone who wasn't overdosing on sleeping pills by 2004. He has never had a real policy for Iraq beyond the point of taking Baghdad. It is his lack of foresight that has made a uncertain and dangerous decision to go into Iraq become a scenario in which there is NO GOOD solution.

Bush lacked the intestinal fortitude to put in the number of troops securing the country would have required, allowing a revolt by the Iraqi people to gain ground. What we are dealing with in Iraq has less to do with foreign fighters and terrorism than it has to do with people resenting an occupying force. We do ourselves a disservice when we refuse to admit it. If an occupying force had occupied Austin, TX (where I currently live) I wouldn't be typing this post. I would be too busy planting IEDs along a road somewhere.

Had he been in office for 9/11, he would likely have done just as Clinton did to all other terrorist attacks during his rule: slap them on the hand and say bad boy.

I recall when CLinton sent cruise missiles to attack Osama Bases in 1998 leading republicans condemned it as a ploy to distract attention from their $50 million investigation into White House oral sex habits.

When Janet Reno had asked for "multi-point" tapping of suspected terrorists, who may be using advanced technology to outpace authorities good conservatives in the Senate were not interested. I guess it's Clinton's failing that he didn't choose to simply bypass our laws and do it anyway.

But since we are on the subject of what clinton, kerry or any other person did or didn't do. Exactly when did we capture Bin Laden? Oh wait, instead of focusing on Afganistan and where Bin Laden was, Bush chose to half ass the job and spend our resources on Iraq instead. Good job!!!!!!!!!!!!

As far as a female president, yes, I have a major bias against Hiliary.

The two don't have to be synonymous. I do not like Hillary, and would expect her to be the weakest candidate the Dems have at the moment.

Still, too many other nations are still in the male dominated female subjugated way of life. How can she expect to negotiate international affairs with these countries who won't even recognize her as their equal.

When talking of a female president, I am not talking of a specific person, simply questioning your view which seems to come from a low opinion of women. It is sad to see such absurdities coming from a woman.

The UK, Germany and other industrialized nations have done just fine with female leaders. But honestly its a moot point. Are you saying that you think Backwards repressive regimes should have some indirect say in who we elect?

Who cares what some Religious Zealot in some third world country thinks about a woman president?

These countries aren't interested in adopting the Womens Rights movements we hold in the U.S. We aren't there to change their views of women, that is for the women in their countries to do just as those in America had to do in turn.

So the USA should not make any effort to promote equality? What about efforts to protect children from the sex industry? Or should the children do it themselves too?

In regards to an african american president, I don't know to many countries that would have a major issue with this unless it was some idiot like Jesse Jackson.

However I noticed you ignored my comment regarding race and answered one I did not ask. I asked you if we should not elect an African American because there are US CITIZENS who hold racist beliefs. Surely if the opinion of an anti-woman bigot halfway around the world is important, the racist opinions of some American citizens should be of even greater importance.

[Confused]

Vladd:

I am no Kerry Defender, but when compared Bush with his social engineering ideas I don't see how there could be much legitimacy to claim you voted for Bush to avoid Socialism

Ok, where did you get the idea that this was the only reason I voted for bush????

Vladd:

Bush's "No Child Left Behind" with a cost ranging from $1.9 to $5.3 billion is just one example of his efforts to consolidate control in Washington. Unfortunately for ( I guess Sun Hudson I guess No Child left behind doesn't include poor minority children with no healthcare. After all Sun Hudson was murdered in Houston (legally due to a law signed by George Bush when he was governor of TX) just a few weeks before the Terri Schiavo insanity

Oh yes, the big bad government wants to control everything, they invade so much. I am guessing you were also a critic of how the government was so slow in responding to the Katrina disaster. "Keep big brother out of our lives but lets blame him when they don't get involved."

I never claimed Bush was great, I only said that in my opinion (which you don't have to agree with), he was the better choice over Kerry.

Vladd:

Bush's incompetence was clear for anyone who wasn't overdosing on sleeping pills by 2004. He has never had a real policy for Iraq beyond the point of taking Baghdad. It is his lack of foresight that has made a uncertain and dangerous decision to go into Iraq become a scenario in which there is NO GOOD solution.

Bush lacked the intestinal fortitude to put in the number of troops securing the country would have required, allowing a revolt by the Iraqi people to gain ground. What we are dealing with in Iraq has less to do with foreign fighters and terrorism than it has to do with people resenting an occupying force. We do ourselves a disservice when we refuse to admit it. If an occupying force had occupied Austin, TX (where I currently live) I wouldn't be typing this post. I would be too busy planting IEDs along a road somewhere

.

Thanks for sharing, but not impressive to me. I think Kerry would have done worse. Once again, my Opinion
[/b]. You don't have to agree. And since this is the general chat forum, I am under no requirements to justify my opinion. In responst to all the other comments about Bush, I will state this yet again, at the time of election, I thought he was the better of the two. For every republican attack you can throw (ie Clinton oral affair, the embarassment and cost) there is a democratic attack to follow (ie. How many recounts did Gore deserve, the embarassment and cost), so save the comparisons. I can only vote on what I see at the time.

Vladd:

When talking of a female president, I am not talking of a specific person, simply questioning your view which seems to come from a low opinion of women. It is sad to see such absurdities coming from a woman.

I won't even dignify that with a response.

In regards to what other nations say about who we elect, no they shouldn't dictate it. However, we still need to consider the ramifications of those we elect. Do you not think that each party does exactly that when they decide who to nominate to represent their party (or is it the conspiracy theory where whoever gets the largest donations gets the nomination?)

In regards to the USA promoting equality, within the US, yes. But what right do we have to force it on other countries. Wouldn't that once again be the big bad government dictating by force?

Vladd:

However I noticed you ignored my comment regarding race and answered one I did not ask. I asked you if we should not elect an African American because there are US CITIZENS who hold

racist

beliefs. Surely if the opinion of an anti-woman bigot halfway around the world is important, the racist opinions of some American citizens should be of even greater importance

No I didn't ignore it. I never once made any claim we shouldn't elect an African American because of US opinion. You did. So it really doenst' require a response from me.

As you have obviously decided I am some anti-feminist, ignorant, republican who obviously has no clue what she is talking about, I will say this: you are entitled to your opinion. I will also say that you are so far wrong it isn't even funny. I will also say that since this is general chat, I am under no obligation to do anything other than give my opinion. You don't like, don't respond to it. That is your right.

[Vladd44]

Ok, where did you get the idea that this was the only reason I voted for bush????

I didn't say it was, but it is the charge you seem to enjoy directing to those running against him. But since you mentioned it, Why did you vote for him? Specifically. Not just he was better than the utopian Kerry.

I am guessing you were also a critic of how the government was so slow in responding to the Katrina disaster.

I spent two days in an attic and got out due to No help from the federal govt. I was in New Orleans due to a family member having surgery, and made a choice to stay, I did not expect anyone to come for me.

But since you mentioned it, yes Bush did show his level of incompetence in the disaster. I do happen to think natural disasters, roads, and a few basic services are necessary. It is why I am an minimalist and not an anarchist.

I never claimed Bush was great

Did I say you thought he was great? Don't recall that. But I would like to know what makes him even tolerable.

For every republican attack you can throw (ie Clinton oral affair, the embarassment and cost) there is a democratic attack to follow

As I said earlier, I am no fan of Dems, I am a libertarian. I have voted for one Rep President candidate in my life, and no Dems. I have no love for them either. I consider them as incompetent as I do your president.

However, we still need to consider the ramifications of those we elect.

Now that is something we agree on. Of course we would apply it differently. I honestly Don't know how anyone who voted for bush can sleep at night.

In regards to the USA promoting equality, within the US, yes. But what right do we have to force it on other countries.

You seem unwilling to actually read what I have said. I never said force. Thats what we have done in Iraq. Democracy at the point of a gun.

But I do think as people we should work towards breaking down barriers. Not at the end of a barrel, but by example. And the antiquidated idea that a woman should not be president is not in the right direction.

I would hope that you could agree that leading by example is hardly forcing others to agree with us, but experience has taught me that when people are around what they fear, they tend to moderate their opinion. They learn its not the big bad wolf they expected.

I never once made any claim we shouldn't elect an African American because of US opinion. You did.

I am struggling to reply without coming across as a total ass. I was carrying your shortsighted rationale about women to a racial comparison. And my point still stands, if we shouldn't elect a woman because it might offend some ignorant mullah in a third world country, surely we should at least have the same consideration for our citizens who hold absurd racist views.

I am some anti-feminist, ignorant, republican who obviously has no clue what she is talking about, I will say this: you are entitled to your opinion. I will also say that you are so far wrong it isn't even funny.

Your words in the previous post helped solidify my opinion of you, but you said it, not me.

You have not given one specific reason you voted for bush. I made an effort to point out your hypocrisy, yet you did not even attempt to show me where I was in error. You simply regurgitated republican talking points.

[Confused]

Ok, where did you get the idea that this was the only reason I voted for bush????

I didn't say it was, but it is the charge you seem to enjoy directing to those running against him. But since you mentioned it, Why did you vote for him? Specifically. Not just he was better than the utopian Kerry.

I am guessing you were also a critic of how the government was so slow in responding to the Katrina disaster.

I spent two days in an attic and got out due to No help from the federal govt. I was in New Orleans due to a family member having surgery, and made a choice to stay, I did not expect anyone to come for me.

But since you mentioned it, yes Bush did show his level of incompetence in the disaster. I do happen to think natural disasters, roads, and a few basic services are necessary. It is why I am an minimalist and not an anarchist.

I never claimed Bush was great

Did I say you thought he was great? Don't recall that. But I would like to know what makes him even tolerable.

For every republican attack you can throw (ie Clinton oral affair, the embarassment and cost) there is a democratic attack to follow

As I said earlier, I am no fan of Dems, I am a libertarian. I have voted for one Rep President candidate in my life, and no Dems. I have no love for them either. I consider them as incompetent as I do your president.

However, we still need to consider the ramifications of those we elect.

Now that is something we agree on. Of course we would apply it differently. I honestly Don't know how anyone who voted for bush can sleep at night.

In regards to the USA promoting equality, within the US, yes. But what right do we have to force it on other countries.

You seem unwilling to actually read what I have said. I never said force. Thats what we have done in Iraq. Democracy at the point of a gun.

But I do think as people we should work towards breaking down barriers. Not at the end of a barrel, but by example. And the antiquidated idea that a woman should not be president is not in the right direction.

I would hope that you could agree that leading by example is hardly forcing others to agree with us, but experience has taught me that when people are around what they fear, they tend to moderate their opinion. They learn its not the big bad wolf they expected.

I never once made any claim we shouldn't elect an African American because of US opinion. You did.

I am struggling to reply without coming across as a total ass. I was carrying your shortsighted rationale about women to a racial comparison. And my point still stands, if we shouldn't elect a woman because it might offend some ignorant mullah in a third world country, surely we should at least have the same consideration for our citizens who hold absurd racist views.

I am some anti-feminist, ignorant, republican who obviously has no clue what she is talking about, I will say this: you are entitled to your opinion. I will also say that you are so far wrong it isn't even funny.

Your words in the previous post helped solidify my opinion of you, but you said it, not me.

You have not given one specific reason you voted for bush. I made an effort to point out your hypocrisy, yet you did not even attempt to show me where I was in error. You simply regurgitated republican talking points.

Well, I am happy you have formed an opinion. I apologize if I offended you, but I still don't think the world is ready for a female president. I will stand by that regardless. I don't have to give a single reason why I voted for Bush, reason: until now, you haven't asked. If I regurgitated republican talking points, then I am unaware of it, because I don't even know what those would be. Where was my hypocracy? Because I disliked Kerry or thought at the time Bush was the best candidate or because I don't think the world is ready for a female president or because I can't stand Hiliary Clinton or because I don't think there would be an issue with an african american president (nationally or internationally) unless it was some idiot like Jesse Jackson or because I think that people are so quick to say the government is invading their privacy in one breath and then turn around and criticize them for their lack of assistance with the next breath or because I don't believe there is a govenment conspiracy against the minority or underpriviliged or because I don't agree with your views? Where is my hypocracy? You think just because a person is born to a poor family, the government should owe them something or they have no chance of getting out? I was raised by my mom w/8 other kids living in Alaska. We lived in a shack, never knew where our next meal was going to come from. My mom worked 2 full time jobs and one part time (all as bartenders) just to keep us all together. We were the typical american white trash. Not a single one of us ended up in jail, we all ended up relatively ok. I got student loans to put myself through college, loans I am still paying off. No one gave us handouts. We earned everything we got. So sit to judge what you don't know. Don't tell me I am a hypocrite because of my beliefs when my beliefs are the same things I practice. Don't tell my I am a hypocrite because my opinions differ from yours when my opinions reflect my beliefs. I am sorry about your experience in Katrina, but I lived through Ivan and you know what we got????? Nothing.... I am not trying to compare the devastation of Katrina with Ivan. But I have lived in Florida for a while and lived through many hurricanes. Never once did we ever hear about a FEMA card to help us while we tried to rebuild our home. Never once did I hear my neighbors or myself blame the government for not protecting us or rebuilding our lives for us.

Overall, I will say this. Politics isn't my strong suit obviously. Thats why I work in medicine. But I stand by what have said and if you think that make me a hypocrite, then more power to you.

[Goat]

Ok, so I know I am going to get so much grief for this, but hear me out. I voted for Bush both times. First against Gore (what a joke) and second against Kerry (need I explain that). I am generally republican, but my vote is more on who is the most qualified. Now, yes I am a female. No I don't think women are affected any more by PMS than men. Mens testosterone levels fluctuate at certain times during the month just as womens do. But first off, how exactly is it that a female president is going to handle international affairs. Lets consider how many countries still subjugate women. Yea, female president, great idea. Now Hilary Clinton, come on. She is married to Bill Clinton.....ew...... She supported her husbands lies, has thus far remained neutral on most topics so one couldn't feel her out to begin with. And once again, ewwww........

I don't know who I will vote for. But it will be the candidate I feel is best capable and qualified. Not one who stands on a utopian platform (Kerry) or one who did absolutely nothing as a vice president (Gore).

Ok, you all can tar and feather me now.

Well, you do have to explain about voting for Bush when it comes to the criteria of
'Most qualified'. I mean, 2000 you can be forgiven, since Bush did not show how much of an incompetent he was,.. but come on.. after seeing his stupidity, corruption, and his lies for 4 years??

I mean, you bring up Clinton's lies.. How about the "Saddam has weapons of mass destruction that can be launched in 45 minutes'. I KNEW that was false when he uttered that line. I could tell he was lying.

[Vladd44]

Confused,

I know I can come across very blunt and direct, this is my nature. I do not care to sugar coat my position. I apologize if I angered you, it was not my intention. My hangup is I have not been able to get a single Bush supporter (not your fault) to explain to me in rational terms why Bush shouldn't be sitting in a cell awaiting trial for crimes against humanity.

And relax on the offending part, you will never offend me. It is almost impossible to offend me.

I know there are others that share your view on a female president. 15 years ago, I was in the same position.

I seem to be unable to get across the understanding that I am not a democrat, nor am I a person who believes that government is the answer. In fact I am quite the opposite.

I am a libertarian, and I would implore you to check out their platform . While I do not agree with everything in it, It may give you a better idea where I come from.

The hypocrisy I spoke of stemmed from continual comments about Kerry and his utopian socialistic views, while not even considering (from my perspective) the reality that bush has increased entitlement spending more than any president since Johnson.

I don't like Hillary either, and I hope like hell the Democrats do not choose her to represent them in 2008. But on the other hand, I would applaud a qualified female candidate. Rather than allow the world to dictate to us who our leader should be by their own short sightedness, I would prefer to see us in a position of leadership. I think it could do our country, and the world some good to see a woman in such a position.

As far as an african american president goes, Barak Obama is one of the most compelling candidates to come out of the Dem party in years. He is still tainted by being a Dem, but I would not be trading my clothes for sackcloth if he were elected. Which I cannot say was at least an impulsive consideration on the last 4 presidential elections. The only solace i had in 1992 was I was convinced the country would not be stupid enough to re-elect clinton in 1996. In 96, it was that Bill couldn't run again. 2000, I was glad gore lost, unfortunately the outcome of bush's first term causes me to regret that viewpoint. In 2004, it took a lot of time and consideration to not leave the country.

I hardly see picking people up off rooftops in a flooded area as invasion of privacy. Protecting the lives of it's citizens is one of the most basic requirements of a government.

The only thing I received from Katrina is a insurance payment for the loss of a car. But to bring up others in past hurricanes in the manner you have IMO is comparing. Simply including the words "Not comparing" doesn't make it not a comparison.

New Orleans was dealt a blow that no other modern city has ever taken. It wwasn'tsimply a flood of waters, it was the devastation of that water remaining for literally months after the fact, destroying much of what would have been salvaged in other areas (such as the mimississippiulf coast) where the water receded shortly after the storm.

For many of the people I know, returning wwasn'tan option for months. They could not even return to live there without electricty or basic services. 12-20 feet of water is quite an inhibitor.

Even now the situation is appalling. Large portions of the city and the surrounding area are still unoccupied. Streets I knew as a kids that were always congested with high levels of traffic sit literally empty. There are still areas of South-East Louisiana that are without basic services such as electricty or sewage.

Honestly, I do not think the depth of destruction can be fully appreciated without seeing it firsthand. When I returned to New Orleans for the first time 6 months after Katrina, I was shocked, when we had gotten out of the city I was unable to get a full picture of just how bad it had gotten. And sitting in an attic doesn't allow you to follow the news reports. It was not until we got out that we began to realize the full impact on our city.

As odd as it may sound, I am glad I was there for Katrina. In some way I feel that Katrina was the death knell for the city of my birth, and I am glad that at least I was there. My only regret is that I didn't leave Taki (my cat) in Austin, she was a great companion and unbelievable animal.

As far as being bailed out, I would rather the US govt let Louisiana secede from the union and become our own independent commonwealth. At least then, whatever got done would be ours, and not subject to the US govt. Of course this will never happen.

[Confused]

Confused,

I know I can come across very blunt and direct, this is my nature. I do not care to sugar coat my position. I apologize if I angered you, it was not my intention. My hangup is I have not been able to get a single Bush supporter (not your fault) to explain to me in rational terms why Bush shouldn't be sitting in a cell awaiting trial for crimes against humanity.

And relax on the offending part, you will never offend me. It is almost impossible to offend me.

I know there are others that share your view on a female president. 15 years ago, I was in the same position.

I seem to be unable to get across the understanding that I am not a democrat, nor am I a person who believes that government is the answer. In fact I am quite the opposite.

I am a libertarian, and I would implore you to check out their platform . While I do not agree with everything in it, It may give you a better idea where I come from.

The hypocrisy I spoke of stemmed from continual comments about Kerry and his utopian socialistic views, while not even considering (from my perspective) the reality that bush has increased entitlement spending more than any president since Johnson.

I don't like Hillary either, and I hope like hell the Democrats do not choose her to represent them in 2008. But on the other hand, I would applaud a qualified female candidate. Rather than allow the world to dictate to us who our leader should be by their own short sightedness, I would prefer to see us in a position of leadership. I think it could do our country, and the world some good to see a woman in such a position.

As far as an african american president goes, Barak Obama is one of the most compelling candidates to come out of the Dem party in years. He is still tainted by being a Dem, but I would not be trading my clothes for sackcloth if he were elected. Which I cannot say was at least an impulsive consideration on the last 4 presidential elections. The only solace i had in 1992 was I was convinced the country would not be stupid enough to re-elect clinton in 1996. In 96, it was that Bill couldn't run again. 2000, I was glad gore lost, unfortunately the outcome of bush's first term causes me to regret that viewpoint. In 2004, it took a lot of time and consideration to not leave the country.

I hardly see picking people up off rooftops in a flooded area as invasion of privacy. Protecting the lives of it's citizens is one of the most basic requirements of a government.

The only thing I received from Katrina is a insurance payment for the loss of a car. But to bring up others in past hurricanes in the manner you have IMO is comparing. Simply including the words "Not comparing" doesn't make it not a comparison.

New Orleans was dealt a blow that no other modern city has ever taken. It wwasn'tsimply a flood of waters, it was the devastation of that water remaining for literally months after the fact, destroying much of what would have been salvaged in other areas (such as the mimississippiulf coast) where the water receded shortly after the storm.

For many of the people I know, returning wwasn'tan option for months. They could not even return to live there without electricty or basic services. 12-20 feet of water is quite an inhibitor.

Even now the situation is appalling. Large portions of the city and the surrounding area are still unoccupied. Streets I knew as a kids that were always congested with high levels of traffic sit literally empty. There are still areas of South-East Louisiana that are without basic services such as electricty or sewage.

Honestly, I do not think the depth of destruction can be fully appreciated without seeing it firsthand. When I returned to New Orleans for the first time 6 months after Katrina, I was shocked, when we had gotten out of the city I was unable to get a full picture of just how bad it had gotten. And sitting in an attic doesn't allow you to follow the news reports. It was not until we got out that we began to realize the full impact on our city.

As odd as it may sound, I am glad I was there for Katrina. In some way I feel that Katrina was the death knell for the city of my birth, and I am glad that at least I was there. My only regret is that I didn't leave Taki (my cat) in Austin, she was a great companion and unbelievable animal.

As far as being bailed out, I would rather the US govt let Louisiana secede from the union and become our own independent commonwealth. At least then, whatever got done would be ours, and not subject to the US govt. Of course this will never happen.

I fully admit, politics aren't my strong point. But in regards to Bush, it is easy to say things in hindsight, but at the time of the election, I found his platform more attainable. Now, I am not saying he actually did what he said he was going to do, nor am I saying he hasn't actually made things worse. I am only saying that at the time, what he said he wanted to do seemed possible.

In regards to Katrina. I really don't mean to make a comparison, though it comes across as such. My issues with Katrina don't lie against New Orleans per se. When I look at the whole picture, yes, it was catastrophic to New Orleans, yet of all the coverage given to Katrina, I think I heard Mississippi (which to the direct hit) mentioned less than 1/4 the amount that New Orleans was. I am sorry for what happened to you city, but disasters happen everywhere. The media portrayed an image of New Orleans deserving more than any other disaster. They played on the average income, the minority, the atrocities committed during and after, and the failure of the government to protect this city. Well, I am sorry, but at what point is New Orleans going to take responsibility for their own city. The failure starts at home. The solution starts at home. Yet the media places the blame at the governments feet. FEMA responded to Katrina quicker than they did to Ivan. FEMA isn't there to provide all the resources to rebuild everything. They are there to help with the intial process. At some point, the city needs to take the responsibility. And I think they have. But then once again, the media begins coverage of New Orleans Mayor (I think it was the mayor) saying he wanted it to be a "chocolate" city. That the government didn't care what happened to them because of racial and income factors. It just never seems to end. The idiot who said the govt blew up the levies intentionally, the abuse of the FEMA cards, the rapes, etc in the superdome. I mean, enough. Yet everyone lays the blame with Bush. Why???? I know this is one of those things that will never get resolved to everyones satisfaction. I just don't want to hear about it any more.

In regards to Iraq, Bin Laden, etc.... I can't comment on them. I think Bush may have gone the wrong way, but what is done is done. I am not in his shoes, so I can't judge. And thankfully, I don't have to. But at the time of elections, we didn't know what we know now. So to say "how could you vote for him, look at everything he has done over the past 3 years etc..." well, those years hadn't happened yet. So it really is irrelevant. His first term, he wasn't that great, but he hadn't screwed up as bad as he has now. And once again, I didn't believe the platform Kerry ran on was attainable. It was my opinion then. Hindsight is always 20/20.

I am glad to hear I didn't offend you. I am usually very difficult to rattle, yet you found the one way to do so: hypocrisy. I try very hard to practice what I beleive in and to apply the same standards when possible. Very few things have I ever don't that could lead one to call me a hypocrite and be justified in doing so.

Lets hope for more favorable candidates this election and though we know they will lie and not fulfill half of what they claim they will, lets hope the will at least fulfill 1/4 of it.

Michelle