Let's name the Bush policies Democrats now support

Lol, that explains why seeing the pictures of him in a "man dress" doesn't seem to bother them.

If I may, I'll add one more.. Classifying people taken prisoner as "detainees" instead of POWs.

The only difference that I can see between President Obama and Senator McCain, is age and skin color.

I've been opposed to the Patriot Act from the beginning and I still am and I disagree with any kind of "suspicionless" checkpoints. I'm not really sure what you mean by "blackmailing of states" so I won't comment on that and I have mixed feelings about a standardized ID. I know it does have the potential to be rather dangerous but on the other hand we already all have a SS number from the day we're born. "...they don't seem to be enough to lose support for Obama or the current congress." I guess for me "lose support" hasn't been clearly defined. I mean, as I've said many times there's never been a politician with whom I've agreed 100% on everything. In that way I guess you could say I don't support anyone 100% but sometimes we have to compromise and decide which issue is the most important. That's something on which everyone will agree; for some issues like gay marriage or abortion is the most important for others it's all about the economy or taxes. Also, when you say "lose support" for Obama or the current Congress, as opposed to what or whom? In another discussion about a so-called "deal breaker" I committed the crime of not saying what the deal breaker would be for me. Well, I can say right now, and I know I'll get attacked for it but that's how it goes, I can think of nothing that would make me think we'd have been better off with McCain/Palin in office right now. I find it impossible to talk about throwing one group under the bus without considering the alternative. Annie

"I'm not really sure what you mean by "blackmailing of states" so I won't comment on that" It's along the lines of saying "If you don't make the libraries submit all checkout records to homeland security we'll withhold the funds needed to repair the biggest bridge in your state." That is a purely hypothetical example. "I committed the crime of not saying what the deal breaker would be for me. Well, I can say right now, and I know I'll get attacked for it but that's how it goes, I can think of nothing that would make me think we'd have been better off with McCain/Palin in office right now. I find it impossible to talk about throwing one group under the bus without considering the alternative." There were many alternatives. 12 on my ballot in Florida. It shouldn't be that hard to name the dealbreaker that would lead you to at least consider alternatives.

"I've been opposed to the Patriot Act from the beginning and I still am and I disagree with any kind of "suspicionless" checkpoints. I'm not really sure what you mean by "blackmailing of states" so I won't comment on that and I have mixed feelings about a standardized ID. I know it does have the potential to be rather dangerous but on the other hand we already all have a SS number from the day we're born. Blackmailing the states is a practice used by the federal government to gett them to pass certain laws, they threaten to with hold highway, welfare or other money (OUR OWN MONEY) if they do not pass certain laws or somethime bribe them with extra money. They are doing it to my state right now to try and get us to pass a seat belt law and it happens all the time. As far as the patriot act and suspicionless checkpoints, if you are oposed to them and many other policies that are being carried over from the last administration, why are you supporting the current one? they are doing the same things as the last one, there really is no difference. [i] "...they don't seem to be enough to lose support for Obama or the current congress." I guess for me "lose support" hasn't been clearly defined. I mean, as I've said many times there's never been a politician with whom I've agreed 100% on everything. In that way I guess you could say I don't support anyone 100% but sometimes we have to compromise and decide which issue is the most important. [/i] Constitutional issues are not important enough? I will define lose support in a nut shell, it means "ok, they should not be in office, next round of elections, I am voting for a different person, and while they are still in office, I will openely critisize them instead of remaining silent, time for a REAL change" [i] "That's something on which everyone will agree; for some issues like gay marriage or abortion is the most important for others it's all about the economy or taxes." [/i] gay marriage and abortion are not even federal jurisdiction, why would Obama's personal views on them even be relevent unless he was trying to make them a federal issue (which he can't because they AREN'T). Taxes are important, make sure you understand how they work and consider the questionable nature of the IRS in general when considering the tax issue. [i] Also, when you say "lose support" for Obama or the current Congress, as opposed to what or whom? [/i] as oposed to any one of the dozen parties and individuals out there who ran [i] In another discussion about a so-called "deal breaker" I committed the crime of not saying what the deal breaker would be for me. Well, I can say right now, and I know I'll get attacked for it but that's how it goes, I can think of nothing that would make me think we'd have been better off with McCain/Palin in office right now. I find it impossible to talk about throwing one group under the bus without considering the alternative. [/i] Are you truly so married to the democratic party that you cannot consider another no matter what the democrats do? And I agrea, we would have been just as bad off under McCain, but I never even mentioned his name, how did he even get in to this discussion???? what's McCain got to do with this?

Great response. I like your #15 best.

"All over this place"? What, all three or four of us...lol? Some of us are still here but some of us choose not to try to argue when we're outnumbered by about 100 to 1 and are often called names and insulted for disagreeing with the rest of you. Lil, you're always respectful and so are a few others but I thought things got heated during the campaign but it turns out I had no idea. I'm a liberal and I'm not about to change or to apologize for it or feel I have to "defend myself" to anyone! I respect others for their views and would love to get the same in return but it seems I'm always told I'm stupid or some kind of a "sheep" or my words are taken out of context. Imagine that, someone taking someone out of context in politics...lol! I may be in the minority here but I'm not out in the "real" world; the percentage of people who feel we're on the right track is now 48% and for the first time in over 5 years more say we're on the right track than on the wrong track. That number was only 17% in October. Even Congress, which includes both the House and the Senate, has nearly doubled its approval rating from 21% to 39% - still not great, but it is a great improvement. It seems their overall rating may have been pulled down considerably by the party of "NO" AKA the GOP. It also seems people aren't really so worried about "small government" right now, they want a government that works for them and is on their side. They've still got a ways to go but maybe we are back on track. Annie

You're right. When you can't defend your candidate anymore you shouldn't be able to support him either. It's easier to hide from these discussions than it is to acknowledge the truth in them. I agree that this is really a chance for third party people. If the libertarians can put up solid candidates with money behind them they could really make a dent in the two party rule in 2010. A resurgence of the Reform Party could also work.

annie, most of us here have pretty much abandoned the GOP. And no, congresses aproval rating fell to a record 13% AFTER the democratic party won the majority in 2006, not that it was all that great before. You wait and see what their rating is a year from now. I read back through a good many discussions. I only noticed a few people actually insulting you, the rest were just attacking the position or trying to correct what they saw as in inacurate one or an opinion based on inacrurate information. I like to think I have been pretty decent to you, if not I would hope you would call me out on it. I realize you are a liberal, but why are you still using that to describe your political views? What does it have to do with anything? What I want to know, is are you for an authoritarian centralized federal government? Or are you for a reasonably restrained subserviant agent? That is the key to this whole debate facing us. This is the main truning point for many of us who have gievn up on the GOP. So, when are YOU going to look at what is going on and realize the party your still supporting is just as bad? It isn't very hard to see. Read the constitution, athen look at what those people are doing, it screams obvious.

I think the media forms public sentiment..

Both are completely true. McCain consistently told Obama he was being naive when criticizing some of those policies, and his backtracking has proven that. As you said in number 2, he's a politician and we expect them to lie to get into office. We also expect them to use buzzwords like "change". The comical/sad thing about all this, was the minions who believed him and continue to ignore his continuance of Bush's policies. Another person started a thread a few days ago asking Obama supporters what would be a dealbreaker for them. Only ONE supporter answered and she couldn't name anything that would stop her from supporting him.

I read something once that said the qualities needed to achieve an elected office are unfortunately totally different from those needed to be able to actually do the job. Seems that the cult of personality is the most important thing these days. I think the single most important reason why Obama won the presidential race wasn't his colour, his policies or anything like that. It was the fact that he wasn't a Republican.