Thread: Dems, Reps sitting side by side in State of Union

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

I believe this is an excellent idea.
As you prob know I am no fan of Obama,,
but I am a devoted fan of USA.

Separating the two parties across "the isle", is devisive, non-productive and
actually childish.
Let them sit in alternating seats, mix and make, cheer for the USA, not for the political agenda, whatever it is ,whoever it is from.

Obama is a political animal,,, but, as president,he deserves respect from both sides (unlike the treatment of George Bush, whose policies, altho sometimes misdirected, came from his heart and true beliefs,IMO).

Hopefully ..Obama will tone down the polarizing political rheteric during the State of the Union speach, direct his comments away from politics and toward what we can all can agree will help bring our union together as one nation. Hell, anything is possible!

I think it is an excellent idea to intergrate 'em. Then when the next Repub hollers out and calls the Pres. a liar, someone might box his ears for him. Or slap some sense into the guy to remind him this sort of behavior belongs in the taverns of this Nation and not at the State of the Union Address.


While Pres Bush was in office, some of his policy decisons infuriated me. Yet, I never personally attacked the man. I attacked his policy. I don't agree with much that Pres. Obama has done, but I won't attack him personally either. To me, to do so seems like more of an act of desperation than anything else. Or just hatred coming to the surface. These personal attacks, regardless of who is being attacked, is the stuff of juveniles in the school yards of America. It sets wonderful examples for the young folks. I swear, some of what I have heard really does belong on Jerry Springer, with the rest of the trash they call guests. Yet this shit comes from supposedly well educated and civilized men and women. Coulda fooled me!

I got news for some folks. Pres. Bush did not bring down the Twin Towers, and Pres. Obama does not want to destroy this great Nation of ours. When anyone has to sink down to the level of attacking either man, personally, you really have to wonder about those people. Would they be the kind of folks you would like living next door? I think I already know that answer. I reckon that's the reason I chose not to have neighbors. Too many of those personal attack folks running round loose these days. And these attacks have become almost an art form, a vile art form in many cases.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I think it is an excellent idea to intergrate 'em. Then when the next Repub hollers out and calls the Pres. a liar, someone might box his ears for him. Or slap some sense into the guy to remind him this sort of behavior belongs in the taverns of this Nation and not at the State of the Union Address.


While Pres Bush was in office, some of his policy decisons infuriated me. Yet, I never personally attacked the man. I attacked his policy. I don't agree with much that Pres. Obama has done, but I won't attack him personally either. To me, to do so seems like more of an act of desperation than anything else. Or just hatred coming to the surface. These personal attacks, regardless of who is being attacked, is the stuff of juveniles in the school yards of America. It sets wonderful examples for the young folks. I swear, some of what I have heard really does belong on Jerry Springer, with the rest of the trash they call guests. Yet this shit comes from supposedly well educated and civilized men and women. Coulda fooled me!

I got news for some folks. Pres. Bush did not bring down the Twin Towers, and Pres. Obama does not want to destroy this great Nation of ours. When anyone has to sink down to the level of attacking either man, personally, you really have to wonder about those people. Would they be the kind of folks you would like living next door? I think I already know that answer. I reckon that's the reason I chose not to have neighbors. Too many of those personal attack folks running round loose these days. And these attacks have become almost an art form, a vile art form in many cases.

I agree entirely with the tone and tenor of your comments.

But can politicians ,world wide, change their spots or stripes??

The actual motivations for "public service " of polititions is always suspect.

Some may start with honorable intentions,

but human nature takes over and then who knows.

I dont even know if I ,if I were elected, would be able to resist the many temptations and wrong turns.
.And I am a friekin saint!!!!

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

Separating the two parties across "the isle", is devisive, non-productive and
actually childish.

Uh, that would be "aisle," unless you're talking Hawaii or some South Sea place. I do seem to recall a demo lawmaker thinking an island would tilt and sink if too many people were placed on it.

How about doing away with the two-party system, let proportional seats go to every party according to State totals, then seat all the greens and libertarians etc miixed in with Dems and Pubs alphabetically?

Why not just seat them by state, in alphabetical order?

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I think it is an excellent idea to intergrate 'em. Then when the next Repub hollers out and calls the Pres. a liar, someone might box his ears for him. Or slap some sense into the guy to remind him this sort of behavior belongs in the taverns of this Nation and not at the State of the Union Address.


While Pres Bush was in office, some of his policy decisons infuriated me. Yet, I never personally attacked the man. I attacked his policy. I don't agree with much that Pres. Obama has done, but I won't attack him personally either. To me, to do so seems like more of an act of desperation than anything else. Or just hatred coming to the surface. These personal attacks, regardless of who is being attacked, is the stuff of juveniles in the school yards of America. It sets wonderful examples for the young folks. I swear, some of what I have heard really does belong on Jerry Springer, with the rest of the trash they call guests. Yet this shit comes from supposedly well educated and civilized men and women. Coulda fooled me!

I got news for some folks. Pres. Bush did not bring down the Twin Towers, and Pres. Obama does not want to destroy this great Nation of ours. When anyone has to sink down to the level of attacking either man, personally, you really have to wonder about those people. Would they be the kind of folks you would like living next door? I think I already know that answer. I reckon that's the reason I chose not to have neighbors. Too many of those personal attack folks running round loose these days. And these attacks have become almost an art form, a vile art form in many cases.

How far we've come. It seems like just yesterday when the POTUS said the republicans could come along but they'd have to ride in the back. Well slap our hienies and call us Rosa Parks!

This is ridiculous.

This is what the right-wing does.

This is why I don't even participate anymore. It's boring.

Come on.

Someone has to do something.

I mean, I'm no fan of Obama ... but really? This is what is to be discussed?

Wow.

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

I agree entirely with the tone and tenor of your comments.

But can politicians ,world wide, change their spots or stripes??

The actual motivations for "public service " of polititions is always suspect.

Some may start with honorable intentions,

but human nature takes over and then who knows.

I dont even know if I ,if I were elected, would be able to resist the many temptations and wrong turns.
.And I am a friekin saint!!!!

You would never be elected. It's pretty simple. You're too partisan.

Hey, if it makes you feel better, I would never be elected too. No biggy.

But, I think they'd elect me before someone as hateful as you ... just sayin' ...?

Originally Posted by mahayana

How about doing away with the two-party system, let proportional seats go to every party according to State totals, then seat all the greens and libertarians etc miixed in with Dems and Pubs alphabetically?

Um, we can't have that. That would give too much power to the people (and we don't want that).

Well, I do.

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

I believe this is an excellent idea.
As you prob know I am no fan of Obama,,
but I am a devoted fan of USA.

Separating the two parties across "the isle", is devisive, non-productive and
actually childish.
Let them sit in alternating seats, mix and make, cheer for the USA, not for the political agenda, whatever it is ,whoever it is from.

Obama is a political animal,,, but, as president,he deserves respect from both sides (unlike the treatment of George Bush, whose policies, altho sometimes misdirected, came from his heart and true beliefs,IMO).

Hopefully ..Obama will tone down the polarizing political rheteric during the State of the Union speach, direct his comments away from politics and toward what we can all can agree will help bring our union together as one nation. Hell, anything is possible!

George W. Bush, to be clear here, revolutionized what it meant to be a political animal in America. The Willie Horton ad was something his father was uncomfortable with, but W knew it would stick, and it did. W is a political street-fighter who willed his way into a second term that hardly any other President would have been able to accomplish because W understood his persona very well.

I think Obama's decisions come from his heart and many of his true beliefs as well, but just like Bush, they were forced to make compromises because, alas, they are not the President of just the people who support them, but they are President to the entire nation, even if you don't vote.

Did you see the President's speech the other night? It was apolitical and "beyond inspiring", just to paraphrase a very popular conservative speech writer for Reagan. Tone down the political rhetoric? He not only did that, but he managed to challenge the entire country, and he even put people like me in their place the other night by reminding us that the 6 dead people are at least owed by us a discourse about how to manage this and other crises in a way that would reflect what they were trying to do last Saturday, peacefully, both Republican and Democratic citizens alike.

I like the sitting next to each other thing, or by state. That would be real neat as well as a safeguard against all those old white guys in the Republican party from falling asleep, what with all those gay homosexual pinkos sitting on either side of them all night trying to pick their pockets and forcing them to eat what Obama said they must eat from that food bill.

Originally Posted by mahayana

How about doing away with the two-party system, let proportional seats go to every party according to State totals, then seat all the greens and libertarians etc miixed in with Dems and Pubs alphabetically?

Sounds like Dr Zeus.

Green eggs and ham anybody?

Beuler?

Beuler?

If someone doesn't put a whoopee cushion on their neighbors seat when they stand to applaud, I'm going to be very disappointed.

Originally Posted by mahayana

How about doing away with the two-party system, let proportional seats go to every party according to State totals, then seat all the greens and libertarians etc miixed in with Dems and Pubs alphabetically?

Personally, I think that the very entrenched two party system does not serve this Nation very well at all. I think we at least need one more party that is represenative of the American People, the average folks, who by and large make up this Nation. This Party would put average people first, and reject any policy that would weaken this group economically.

Traditionally the Democratic Party was the party of the working bloke. Yet, that has indeed changed in a really larger manner. Like the Pubs, instead of creating policy that benefits this huge group of Americans, the Dems too have been influenced by the lure of financial sector and corporate money, to the point that they have made the lives of regular Americans uncertain as to their own economic futures. In the place of good jobs for working Americans the Dems have replaced that with taxpayer supported welfare. Making the folks that used to work for a living, dependent upon this socialistic vision of some in the Democratic Party. As the Repubs blame the Dems for gov't handouts, necesitated by the loss of traditional American working class jobs, that the Pubs had a large hand in allowing to go overseas.

Seems like the Dems want to replace factory jobs with welfare, while doing nothing to stop the bleeding of jobs, and the Pubs just want to help maximize profits for corporatons with cheap labor while not giving a fuck about what happens to the displaced American worker. To me, that is it in a nutshell, and I believe fully that this is the reality of the matter. Only a 3rd or 4th Party can break this deadlock of the status quot that is committing crimes against the American People, as money once again is calling all of the policy shots in D.C.