67% is the total of voters in good ole Daviess county who seen through Obama's deception way to go!!!

That's over 7000 votes for Mccain in our county.

The other 33% was JB's cronies that he shuttled to the polls and told them how to vote.


BTW!!! Way to go Mitch & Messmer!!! Dave Crooks' / Larry Haag's corrupt machine has failed locally.

Nationally, Obama will show his colors and will be ousted in 2012.

Mitch Daniels 2012!

YAY! We're less progressive than Martin County.

I'm just wondering how Jill Long Thompson outperformed Obama and how Ellsworth whipped Goode?

By the by, I think the Right ceded the moral high ground with the hundreds upon hundreds of unfounded rumors about Obama and spreading fear. Even policy disagreements were based on seriously slanted readings of issues or comments (see our discussion of the "radical Constitutional interview" in another thread).

In any event, I'll sleep soundly tonight.

Yeah, your welfare check is safe for another 4 years.

Even though Obama has won, it is nice to see that the margin is very small in the popular vote. No sweeping mandate here. He will have to govern from the middle if he is to win in '12.

Like he was going to be a hardcore leftist anyway. I don't care how many Democrats are in the Congress, Dem doesn't equal liberal. A lot of the Dems (included Ellsworth) are not liberal and can't afford to be if they want to keep their jobs.

And the welfare comment is exactly what I'm talking about. The "welfare queen" epidemic was a myth. We have workfare now anyway. Obama's top rates are going to be markedly lower than many administrations through the 20th century. But people have this assumption that their taxes are going to such low class people.

The ironic thing is the people above them on the ladder probably say the same thing about the middle class. When a college educated professional says a high school educated person is dumb or lazy because they didn't get a better job from schooling they're an elitist. When a middle class person says a working or lower class person is stupid or lazy for not doing better for themselves, they're being "salt of the earth" type people.

Give me a break. Obama is not creating a socialist state. Nor a communist state. Nor is he going to steal your wallet. His unfortunate choice of words with "spread the wealth around" and the fact that he is a Democrat just works against him with people who refuse to accept that they could be wrong and have a huge chip on their shoulder because it's SO hard being a white, midwestern male these days.

When the democrats card check plan that will eliminate the secret ballot for union votes becomes reality, then watch even more companies send our jobs overseas.

I don't believe that Obama wants my wallet. It's the democratic controlled congress that will now have no check (veto) to stop the socialist agenda of the Nancy Pelosi / Harry Reid axis.


Funny how all you liberals that whined about one party having control for congress and the presidency now believe it's ok when it's "your guys" in control. Hypocrisy.

I am an independent that wants checks and balances in government, regardless of party.

I am glad I am not a "midwestern male" since you say it is so hard.

However, I might get in line for my welfare check and free "butt wiping".

quote:

Originally posted by wwn1:
When the democrats card check plan that will eliminate the secret ballot for union votes becomes reality, then watch even more companies send our jobs overseas.

I don't believe that Obama wants my wallet. It's the democratic controlled congress that will now have no check (veto) to stop the socialist agenda of the Nancy Pelosi / Harry Reid axis.

Funny how all you liberals that whined about one party having control for congress and the presidency now believe it's ok when it's "your guys" in control. Hypocrisy.

I am an independent that wants checks and balances in government, regardless of party.

I am glad I am not a "midwestern male" since you say it is so hard.

However, I might get in line for my welfare check and free "butt wiping".

It's easy knocking over straw men.

-I'm not really all that pro-union but I do know that "secret ballot" voting often lends itself to worker intimidation by the employer in the name of union prevention or union busting. I'll grant that signing cards only can lead to fraud by the union, but it's not a black and white issue.

-There is NO WAY Pelosi and Reid can put forward a socialist agenda. As I've stated repeatedly, they have many in their caucus that can't afford to go hard left. Furthermore, if Obama goes along with whatever they pass, then he will guarantee a loss for himself in 4 years. Logically, Pelosi won't be Speaker for very long if she pushes too hard and she knows that.

-I didn't whine about single party control, I call it democracy. Did I think they handled it well, no. But that's the will of the electorate and that's the world we live in.

-Checks and balances will still exist, but in terms of each representative's constituency's interests. It's a big country, and painting all Democrats or all Republicans with a roller shows a serious lack of critical thinking.

-The last part is just ignorance manifested.

quote:

Originally posted by Eric Stratton:
-The last part is just ignorance manifested.

Typical elitist statement.

If we can garner anything from this election, it's that this country is still very closely divided and will remain so for a long time. That's too bad.

It is a good thing to be less "progressive". Progressive used to mean something, but only alludes to liberalism these days. I am happy to be less "progressive", but I know that won't be tolerated because the left only preaches tolerance for those they agree with.

I only hope Obama recognizes the civil rights laws pushed through by republicans that gave him the opportunity he now has.

May God help us!

quote:

Originally posted by wwn1:
The other 33% was JB's cronies that he shuttled to the polls and told them how to vote.


BTW!!! Way to go Mitch & Messmer!!! Dave Crooks' / Larry Haag's corrupt machine has failed locally.

Nationally, Obama will show his colors and will be ousted in 2012.

Mitch Daniels 2012!

Greetings WWN1;
I can not respond personally to your above posting, for logical reasons, but I can say, speaking as an out-of-towner, your above posting goes far deeper than you, or a select few may think or realize.

And per the research I`ve already done on ole JB, since being here, I think JB can relate to the message I`m try`n to convey.

I`ll assure you though, JB is certainly no dummy! Nor is the Hillbilly. And yes, the ole Hillbilly still plans to partake in a good ole hot cup off coffee with JB over our chit chat.

Oh, (speak`n of dummies) I almost forgot, word finally got to me, Mr. L. Gray may have been related to the late Mr. Gray that was put out`a his misery not long ago.(?) I was told he was put out`a his misery for shoot`n off his mouth and mak`n one too many threats. Kind`a sad though to hear he was a wife beater to boot. Was just wonder`n if`n maybe they were related.(?)

Mind you now, theres a town full of the Grays in this area, some are good, and the others(?), well....that seem`s to be questionable.

Take care wwn1!

Elitist? You think saying you'll line up for a welfare check and butt wiping is an enlightened statement? I stand by my comment.

I agree progressive means liberal. It meant it in 1900 and it means it now. The country gets more liberal over time in absolute terms. i.e., most conservatives today would have had liberal views 100 years ago. But since the country has gotten more liberal as a whole at the same time, the relative size of the "liberal bloc" hasn't really changed.

I really can't believe that you think liberals are more intolerant than conservatives. Both sides are capable of vitriol, but flood of false rumors, innuendo, conjecture, and outright hate sent President-Elect Obama's way is indicative of something. For the record, I also thought it was reprehensible that many kids were wearing "not my President" buttons and stickers over the last 8 years in reference to President Bush.

And on the topic of Civil Rights, here's the breakdown of the vote on the 1964 Civil Rights Amendment.
HOUSE
So. Dems 7 yea 87 nay
So. Reps 0 yea 10 nay
No. Dems 145 yea 9 nay
No. Reps 138 yea 24 nay

Senate
So. Dems 1 yea 20 nay
So. Reps 0 yea 1 nay
No. Dems 45 yea 1 nay
No. Reps 27 yea 5 nay
So it appears that with an issue like civil rights, the problem was northern/southern and not party-line. Furthermore, civil rights aren't really ideological issues, they're issues of basic decency. Did Republicans and Democrats from the North work together to pass the CRA? Sure. But I'm not going to start giving "atta-boys" to people for doing the right thing to begin with.

quote:

I agree progressive means liberal. It meant it in 1900 and it means it now. The country gets more liberal over time in absolute terms. i.e., most conservatives today would have had liberal views 100 years ago. But since the country has gotten more liberal as a whole at the same time, the relative size of the "liberal bloc" hasn't really changed.

This, too, is elitism. The problem with you "enlightened" types is that your absolutes are always changing. If progressive meant liberal in 1900, then the meaning of liberal has changed. "Progressive" folks of 1900 would not be pushing the homosexual agenda down our throats, nor would they sanction the slaughter of unborn children or tell us it was not ok to pray in school, or teach biblical truth to the children therein. Maybe we should just go with the term "neo-liberal" to distinguish true progressives from today's knock-off versions.

By believing you are "progressive" and others are not, you have made yourself the ultimate elitist. That's ok, though. Us poor unwashed, uneducated masses will live our lives as though you don't exist, just don't try to come and take my guns.

quote:

Originally posted by wwn1:
This, too, is elitism.

Everything's elitism. Is this the Quibble Thread?

quote:

The problem with you "enlightened" types is that your absolutes are always changing. If progressive meant liberal in 1900, then the meaning of liberal has changed.

The world changes, wwn1. Darwin called it Evolution, a basic building block of Life.

If words are to mean anything, English-speakers should study Latin. The word "Liberal" means One Who Loves Liberty, Period. Us non-fussy types favor Freedom -- an Anglo-Saxon word -- over the Frenchified Liberte. But the words, in essence are the same. Freedom = Liberty. Why continue to quibble over the legacy left by seminal Founding Fathers Kinney & Hawkins, who fought for ours?

quote:

Maybe we should just go with the term "neo-liberal" to distinguish true progressives from today's knock-off versions.

The term Neo-Conservative, embraced by the Bush/Clinton/Bush dynasty, will quickly fall out of favor. I predict we will see John McCain as well as Obama divorce themselves from the old triumvirate's triangular ways of doing business-as-usual in DC.

Neo-liberal? Why not just call a spade a spade & stand up for good old-fashioned Freedom? An ever-encroaching government, whether in the form of federal contractors begging the County for corporate handouts or Illegal Employers getting a free ride w/ contraband workers, cannot be considered an advance of Freedom. The B&O Freedom Train rolling along the tracks to the White House is big enough to hold all of us, wwn1. I hope someday you'll hop aboard.

Hillbilly,
Since you seem confused as to where to add comments that relate to the topic at hand. I repsonded to your comment under the ATTN Mr. Keith Ellis thread. The last time I checked that was thread where we were having our discussions. I know you get confused easy and really don't like answering questions like the ones I asked you under that thread, therefore I'm just trying to help you out by leading you to the right thread.