Saturday, November 11, 2006

Another Argument with a Union Guy

Never ceases to amaze me how redneck union guys who claim to be independents or even Democrats are the first to take the side of the Rethugs. This is a recent exchange in my union news group. The righties have been pretty quiet, but after posting a link to get people to go freep an MSNBC poll about impeachment, I got this response to Bush treason:
So basically instead of making suggestions to MSNBC on how the newly elected Democrats could change policy and define their platform for the reshaping of American presense in the world— we get a vote on a political lynching. I guess it’s the Dems turn to do what the Reps did to Clinton when he was President and they had the power. Thus proving my point that their all alike.
Ugh. Yeah, they're all alike. Typical crap from a guy who not only watches, but enjoys, Bill O'Lielly. Here's my response:
Lynching? Or is it oversight? Is it justice? Let's see, a lynching was when KKK people tied black guys up to trees and went to town. Impeaching GW Bush for his numerous crimes would be JUSTICE.

The Democrats will pass legislation in the first hundred hours raising the minimum wage, implementing all the 9-11 commission recommendations, allowing the government to negotiate with drug companies for medicare, break the link between lobbyists and legislators (drain the swamp), cut the interest rate on student loans in half, and allow federal funding of stem-cell research, hopefully with a veto proof majority on the stem cells. After the first 100 hours, it's pass a pay as you go rule, so the
deficit gets under control, and allow the tax cuts for those over 250K per year to lapse (start rewarding work over wealth). That's the plan they've been pushing for over a year now. But you wouldn't know that. You've been too busy saying they don't have a plan to bother to listen to the plan.

So, no, they're not the same. And you know it.

Besides, Clinton lied about a blow job. Bush violated the 4th amendment with warrantless spying on American citizens, he lied to congress to get us into war (I can't think of a bigger crime, considering all the death, maiming, and destruction that's resulted), and he has allowed torture in direct violation of many laws and treaties. Not to mention all his "signing statements" where he says this law applies to everyone but me. All blatant violations of numerous laws that are a HELL OF A LOT WORSE THAN LYING ABOUT A BLOW JOB, at least to those of us whose heads are outside of the lower end of our digestive tract.

So, do you really think the two are anywhere near comparable, or are you just parroting the O'Liely line of crap again?

No comments: