McCain VP: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin - Page 5

So Sen. McCaskill, Baucus, Tester, and Byrd should be lauded because they bucked the Democratic Party and voted against DREAM? That's an interesting litmus test for a politician's respect. I respect those who I agree with and who fights for the ideals I believe in like the Dream Act. I also respect those in the opposition who buck their own Republican Party and vote for the ideals I believe in like Sen. Hatch and Sen. Hagel (who is no longer in the Senate).

And you know what, you may not agree with Dems on other issues (although I certainly do like the environment, health care, and Social Security) but on immigration, most Repubs have shown themselves to be bad people while most Dems are demi-gods in my book.

I take it that you don't like being illegal, correct? Guess who opposes us time and time again and deny us a path to citizenship? It may pain you to realize this but the Democratic Party is right and the Republican Party is wrong on this issue.

That is not to say that compromise is bad. But I and other people believe that you only compromise when you have to in order to get legislation passed not because compromise is a virtuous goal all its own. If we have the numbers in the next Congress to pass the Durbin version of DREAM, then go for it and to heck with the Repubs. But if we don't, then we'll have to compromise again and trade away a path to citizenship for student visas. Compromise doesn't sound so great, now does it?

Also, guess why we even have to compromise in the first place and who will try to kill DREAM again the next time? Again, most will be Repubs. Don't forget DREAM may pass next time because there will be more Dems in the Senate not because enough Repubs saw the light. Give credit where credit is due.

As for party platforms, it is far more important than you care to admit because it shows where the base of each party stands. The fact that they were able to change to an anti-immigration platform shows Bush's grip on the party is loosening and that McCain's hold on the party is weak at best. If McCain can't even control what goes on in the Repub platform as leader of the Repub party, how is he going to convince his Repubs to vote for a pro-immigration bill?

Finally, don't blame TV for the thinning ranks of moderate Repubs. Blame the Repub rank and file who consistently vote for hard right anti-DREAM conservatives. But its their party and they vote people who represent their values; values that I vehemently disagree with especially on my support for the Dream Act. Certainly, you can disagree with someone without disliking them, but its also true that anti-DREAM conservative Repubs can be loathsome creatures like Sessions, DeMint, and Vitter.

baby momma drama

You're doing an excellent job of misinterpreting my posts. First of all, it speaks to a politician's character when he/she is willing to compromise to solve a substantial problem than stick to the party line. Our desire for passage of the DREAM Act is in line with the Democratic Party's platform which is why you've elevated the Democratic politicians to divine status.

The Democrats have it right on the immigration issue because they are not responding to the reactionary elements within the population and most importantly, they're listening to the people who actually know something about dealing with the issue such as border state governors, border state residents and mayors of high immigrant density cities. I have tremendous respect for the Democrats for taking the progressive position and showing great resolve to solve this problem. But I also have tremendous respect for the Republicans who are demonstrating real political courage for breaking with their party.

You may think its foolish but you're entitled to that opinion. However, you're underestimating the significance of these Republican actions considering the innate partisan paralysis that has gripped Congress in the last eight years. My belief is that politicians should take office to solve the nation's problems, as difficult as they may be. The notion is to benefit the greater good of the nation rather than cater to their constituents, whether they be progressive or conservative.

I despise a Republican who vehemently opposes a rise in the minimum wage just as much I despise a Democrat who won't budge on exempting small businesses from complying with minimum wage laws.

And party platforms are transitory issues that change with the demographics of the party's base. The political, social and economic conditions of the United States are ever changing which alters the party's platform from decade to decade. Forty years ago, the Democratic Party supported slavery and Jim Crow laws that segregated blacks. In fact, their national platforms had provisions that opposed any attempts to desegregate particular institutions of society. Eighty years ago, the Democratic Party was the party of nativists and immigration restrictionists.
So party platforms are incredibly temporary and transitive in nature.

Compromise should be the operating word for Congress, at least for the near future. The intense partisan gridlock isn't doing any of us any good. You may think that its okay to screw compromise but then you're just playing a numbers game against the other guy. Oh, lets see how many seats we can gain on the other guy...lets try to outnumber the other guy..we're going to beat them by sheer numbers. Thats exactly what both parties are doing right now, trying to outnumber the other guy in the next election cycle.

This creates a vicious cycle of postponing all significant legislation till the next election. It seems the country's political and economic health is dictated by the election cycles. So where does that leave us? Oh lets wait 2 more years for the next Congress or four more years for the next President. How long do you think we can go on like this? Thats exactly whats going on right now and we are still screwed; not just us immigrants for the lack of an immigration bill but for all Americans for the lack of a good health care legislation or economic legislation or whatever.

I respect the Democrats for demonstrating the resolve to solve the immigration crisis and for sticking to their guns when they know they're right. I am equally dismayed by the Republicans who are sticking to their party when they know they're wrong. But any immigration bill will pass due to the efforts of Democrats and those moderate Republicans who can carry weight with their party. You need to start giving some credit to those Republicans because without their influence, the Democratic party won't be able to convince its conservative members to support an immigration reform bill.

^ You wrote a lot of words but all your saying is we should compromise for the sake of compromise. Deride all you want, but there is the possibility we can get enough Dems and poach the few moderate Repubs to enact the Durbin version of DREAM. Why should we compromise when we may not have to? You really want to trade away a path to citizenship for student visas (or worse) just to say the Dems and Repubs compromised? Confusing deeply held values with partisan gridlock is a false analogy.

Compromise isn't the operative word; passing landmark legislation is. If that requires compromise then so be it but compromise shouldn't be a goal in it of itself.

This sounds familiar,lol.

Anyway,let's all just agree to disagree.We all want the Dream act to pass,right ?

Let's just wait until the 111th to see what we have to work with.

Ditto. I really just wanted to get a different opinion out there. Good for a short conversation, but lets not take it too far.

Oh yeah, me and Ianus argued over the same thing.

Its nothing personal and we were just debating, is all. We can disagree without disliking one another .

Woah, I just caught this whopper. I'm going to have to criticize you again, Rahman, and call you out on distorting Barack Obama and his Dem Party in order to look "balanced". You don’t have to smear the Dem Party just to make the Repub Party look better. The Repubs have some admirable members including Snowe, Collins, and Specter (see I just complimented the Repubs). Then again, some (if not most) of their members are awful especially Sessions, DeMint, and Vitter. Gosh dang, I’m floored by your comment.


Forty four years ago, it was the Dems and the moderate Repubs along with a Democratic President, LBJ, who passed the Civil Rights of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It was JFK who helped advance the cause of racial equality with his tenure as President which is why you saw Teddy Kennedy support Obama for President to continue the Kennedy's civil rights record. FDR along with Eleanor Roosevelt was the Democrat who helped convince African Americans to switch from Republican to Democrat.

What you're referring to was the old Dixiecrat and Southern wing of the Democratic Party; a wing that has long since left the Dem Party and joined the Republican Party with the help of Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy." Guess who has the South as an electoral stronghold (hint it’s the Republicans). Old Dixiecrat and segregationist Strom Thurmond (Trent Lott who made a gaffe and said the country would be better off had Thurmond won the Presidency – I think he was just humoring an old man at the time) switched from Democrat to Republican in 1964. LBJ even said the Dems would lose the South for at least a generation because he signed the Civil Rights bill.

And the modern Dem Party has never had a restrictionist platform. What you're thinking of is the bad 1996 immigration law, a law signed by President Clinton. What you're not saying is that it was passed by a right wing anti-immigration Republican Congress led by Newt Gingrich. The Republicans had a VETO PROOF majority and President Clinton negotiated out the most grievous portions of the bill like denying the children of undocumented immigrants a public school education.

It was Teddy Kennedy who helped change the national quote based system favoring European countries to the family based immigration system we have right now. It was the Republicans who’ve been anti-immigrant since the 90’s. Have you ever heard of Proposition 187 spearheaded by conservatives? Don’t believe me on the restrictionist Republicans? Here’s what a 2005 Congressional Quarterly Researcher article had to say:

This was the Dem Party Platform eight years ago.

2000 Democratic Party Platform

I can't let smears like in the other post go unchallenged.





Wikipedia on the Republican's Southern Strategy.

We have been indoctrinated by the media to think that every argument has two sides to it and that to think otherwise or to not recognize a certain "balance" inescapably shows our bias. I just saw a clip where Arianna Huffington makes this very point to Tucker Carlson (I know, of all people). The fact of the matter is that the Republican and Democratic party have very different views on immigration and the results of the election will be astoundingly different depending on who gets to the White House.

Now, why does everyone think that Palin is hot? She's a middle aged woman with too much junk in the trunk as far as I'm concerned. Plus she's going against Barack Obama who's like the hottest man on the US. Did anyone see the pictures of him surfing in Hawaii? I rest my case.