Perhaps it is just a forgone conclusion that left equals unethical.

It is not so much that the left is inherently less ethical...it is just that they get a pass by their supporters...making their supporters equally unethical...it seems the end always justifies the means for liberals...

What would you know about rational people?

Very lame, I thought this thread was about Dr House with the cane.

I'm really getting a kick out of all these replies. :D

a kick is no butt dart

+2

+1

Anyone who actually expects ethical behavior on the part of politicians is either a starry-eyed idealist or a complete fool.

Politics is like a compost heap. You know that whatever "fresh" material you put into it is eventually going to turn into rotten crap. All you can do is keep turning it over once in a while and (hopefully) try to use the remnants/byproducts to grow some good things once in a while.

This liberal/conservative left/right crap is so divisive and so old it's worse than a broken record or skipping CD. If that's all you got, you've got a pretty empty barrel upstairs. . . How 'bout some ways to actually UNITE the country?

It is interesting to see that liberals actually admit that they do not expect ethical behavior on the part of those they vote for. That explains an awful lot. I was wondering why none could find it in them to condemn the unethical behavior of Conyers....or most any liberal...but as always; just change the subject.
They are the same ones who whine about uniting the country, but rabidly attacked the President, Vice President, SecDef, etc continually for the last 5 years. If they really wanted to unite the country as they say, they would back the war effort that their elected President and representatives determined we should enter....but to them, uniting the country is code for surrendering to whatever liberal agenda is put forth.

LOL!

Sometimes your stuff cracks me up. So anyone that disagrees with you is a "liberal"? C'mon man, you can do better than that. . . I own a dictionary - you're welcome to borrow it any time you want to look up the definition of that word and then explain to me how exactly I (or anyone else) fits that definition.

Anyway (back on subject), "uniting the country" is a concept that involves a lot more than empty and mindless embrace of the hollow platitudes spewed forth by EITHER party. Our system of government only works when people hold the government accountable for its actions. The best way to "unite the country" would be for people to get off their collective asses and elect people that will actually do the will of the people and stop putting themselves and their private interests first - or those of a very limited number of wealthy campaign backers.

Oh wait, they just did that a couple months ago. Maybe there's some hope after all. . .

But I'm sure it's easier to just go back to slinging labels around. Simplification makes things easier for the simple. Just call everyone a "liberal" or a "commie" or whatever and then blame all the world's problems on them. That's a good solution. :rolleyes:

Someone needs to be continually whispering in the collective ears of the Democrat leadership in the House and Senate, "you have two years to make good on leaving Iraq, and holding the neocons accountable". If they do not do that, citizens must throw them out in 2008.

Oh...I get it! Uniting the country means that either the person that is elected does exactly as you would-regardless of what is right, regardless of the fact that you are unelected-or else you do everything you can to thwart their actions...regardless of the damage to our nation.
Other than when they break the law...like the democrats noted above (whom the liberals all elected or reelected), the way politicians are "held accountable" for their actions is not to reelect them...Supporting our nation's enemies or misrepresenting what our leaders say or do that are members of another party is not the best way...although it seems to be effective for you.

thwart

what a great word...

If only we could thwart those cock-knockers. You wish......

thwart thwart thwart

??? It seems to be the appropriate word. You know that Kerry and other liberals (maybe you too) consider folks like me to have a limiteed vocabulary and have to join the military because we are stoopid and cannot afford an edjumacation....so what did you expect? Chaucer?

i said i like the word. don't get so pissy...


ooohh....I like that one too. pissy pissy pissy

methinks he doth protest too much

I thought that was tongue-in-cheek...ewww...where has that tongue been?

Translation:

Waaaaaahhhhh. "We" no longer have a majority. Waaaaaaahhhh. I'll just blame the system and say "majority rules" is stupid. Except when I agree with it. Waaaaahhhh.

I'm gonna' save this post for if/when the Republicans (supposedly "your" party, whatever that means) get a majority again, or for if/when "your" party happens to do something you like and you bash the dissenting minority opinion for being the minority. Don't worry - I'll remember. It'll be fun to see what convenient rationalization you come up with at the time when confronted to say "oh, well, this is different because _________". Always amusing.

Dude, the 'cons got outvoted. Face it. Bush has a 30% approval rating. Suck it up and deal with it. Yes, it matters. You're elected to do the will of your constituency - not rationalize reasons about why you're so intellectually superior and "above" the opinions of those you supposedly "serve". It's supposed to be a REPRESENTATIVE democracy, man. That's what it means.

FWIW, "my" opinion doesn't matter in any case. However when "my" opinion happens to coincide with that of 70% of the rest of country, it does matter.

You're outvoted. Deal with it.

in some very moist liberals...

Translation:

We were outvoted for the last 8 years and have done our best to destroy the country in order to gain the majority.
Unfortunately we were still outvoted for the Presidency...but a lot more whining and lying can keep him from doing what he was elected to do...and we can win that office too..because our constituency is stupid...who really cares what is good for the country anyways? The end always justifies the means.

What is good for the country may not reside totally with the Republican party. That is why, fint, some of us have a difficult time taking you seriously. As a registered independent, I think there are individuals with both talent and good will on both sides of the aisle, as there are scoundrels and crooks. I refuse to paint either side with the broad brush of demonization, since I would not be able to defend that view. No one can defend it because it is opinion and not fact. The same for canonization of favored political leaders. 'Aint gonna do it. They ALL have warts; they are all human, not saints. Anyone can take isolated incidents, warp and strech them to fit a point of view. "Taint honest, and is, in fact, destructive and divisive.

I prefer to think that rational people generally agree on the basics, despite political affiliation when the rubber has to meet the road.