|09-15-2005, 11:19 AM||#1|
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2003
Local Time: 02:52 AM
America's two-party system after Katrina
The Democratic Party
Quite frankly, I'm not sure they even have a future. The way I see it, they've made many devastating mistakes since Bush's re-election in 2004. To name few of many for instance, giving the DNC chair to Howard Dean, racially politicizing one of the worst NATURAL disasters in American history, undermining the efforts of American troops to a vicious extent. Why aren't they offering any solutions, and where is the leadership in this party? They want to play "Limbaugh Style" - which I define as republicans verses democrats.
The Republican Party
They have the power, but are they going to put it to good use? I'm sure a lot of liberals are scratching their heads at this question, but at least allow me to analyze it. Before I do, let me clarify a few things. I'm an environmentalist in conservative terms. I like clean water. I like clean air. I wouldn't criticize environmentalists without a legitimate reason, as many conservatives do. But for whatever reason, radical left-wing environmentalists have a staunch opposition to building oil refineries in our own homeland. A solution to Hurricane Katrina is to clean up all the devastation, and open up ANWR for drilling. Why aren't we drilling in Alaska this very second? While private jet types like Arianna Huffington will hypocritically tell American consumers to stop driving their SUVs and trucks, they fall short of understanding the logic behind supply and demand.
In my opinion, George W. Bush's policy on illegal immigration is horribly flawed. His offering to give all illegal aliens legal citizenship just isn't very... conservative. In order to rack up money to aid Katrina victims, the first thing he should've done is cut all social services for illegal aliens, on top of giving their jobs to Katrina victims. Instead, he's rewarding them for breaking a federal law, which will only encourage more illegals to cross the borders. Why is it that New Mexico's governor, Bill Richardson, a liberal, stepped up to the plate on this issue before our "conservative" president?
I'm not sure that many conservatives feel the same way I do about the president - that they elected a republican, but they got a democrat. Far-fetched? Not exactly. Just look at one of Bush's first shifts of policy after his re-election. You would expect him to be more conservative for the second term, but consider his swerve to the far-left as he assaulted America's avocado industry. You might expect Hillary Clinton & Co. to pull these kinds of antics on America's farmers, but a "compaaassionate conservative" president? I realize this went widely unreported, but in the case that you would rather not be an ignorant rant rocket, here is the link to an article: http://www.cfbf.com/agalert/2002/aa-013002b.htm. Why am I becoming increasingly convinced that "Bush Country" equals Mexico? I'm not surprised that the American people have lost faith in both parties - after all, neither of them have any leadership. Too many conservatives fall under the syndrome believing that their president is above criticism. He's not. Nobody is. I'm more than happy to grill him on illegal immigration and this socio-fascist assault on American farmers.
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|