>
>Then you don't know me very well. Yes, I usually vote for Democrats, but not always. (For president, I'm reasonably sure that I have always voted for the Democrat, though, but frankly, neither side has offered up much in my voting lifetime.) I'd say my ballot is split more often than not, since I try to evaluate the individual candidates, while talking their party affiliation into consideration as one factor. (Who do they choose to affiliate with?)
>
>And how often have you voted for a Democrat?
>

Not only have I voted for a democrat, I've worked for them. I helped US Congressman Steve Cohen in his race two years ago, doing data analysis and creating call sheets. I wrote most of the Democrat candidate for Sheriff's platform in 2000. The candidate was a friend for 25 years, who also happened to be a black guy. Randy Wade, is now the Field Rep for Congressman Cohen. He was the best candidate for Sheriff at the time, and the Republican is still the Sheriff. He is also still an idiot, who has never been a cop, only a jailer.

>>Your positions have been far left on almost every discussion I've seen.
>
>That's funny. My family (parents and sibs) despair of how conservative I've become.
>
>>I know mine seem far right, but when confronted by facts, not emotion, I can change my positions. You and my other liberal friends take whatever dogfood the dems serve up.
>
>That's incredibly insulting, while very amusing at the same time. I'll happily grant that our view are influenced by our life experiences and no doubt, your years in the police have given you a much darker view of society than I have. My sense is that, on the whole, people who see humanity more darkly tend to be more conservative while those who have a more positive view of people tend to be more liberal. Certainly matches much of the discussion here.
>
>>I think you should take a look at the facts, and weight that against the emotion. Case in point, and I think I've cited this before: Dems/liberals want to feel good about themselves, so they come up with systems they think will help. They don't care about the outcomes, so long as they "tried". HOV lanes would be a great example. They waste gas, they restrict highway access, during the times it is most needed. The end result is, they don't force anyone to join the carpool, they actually have an outcome that is 180 degrees off what was "intended."
>
>Got a cite for that? One that actually includes data? It's the first I've heard of it. IAC, my take on HOV lanes is that if they save fuel and encourage people to ride-share, they're a good thing. If not, who needs 'em?
>
Only anecdotal. I see long congested lines of cars scrunched together while the HOV lanes are realatively clear. Also, many people avoid them during times they could be legally accessed because it has become a conditioned response. I don't have any data supporting my assertion, but I'd almost be willing to bet the libs who came up with that insanity have "cooked the books" and can produce documentation that proves HOV lanes even helps save the whales.<s>

>
>>In a nutshell, from my perspective, that is the difference. with the exception of the libs who will cling to a lie, even when they know it isn't true.
>
>I'm not even sure how to parse that sentence. I also think it's interesting that you and others here feel a need to demonize liberals as a group. My view on conservatives is that they vary widely, and many of them want the same ends I do, but differ in the means.
>
>Do I think there are some really nasty people who are conservatives? Sure. Do I think all conservatives should be tarred with the same brush? No.
>

You know, they make small brushes and large brushes. You think maybe sometimes a broad brush should be used? My point is I've yet to hear any of my liberal friends tell the truth about Obama's experience. He has none, and nobody will admit that. What do you have to say about Obama's experience? Or are you of the opinion, like the others, that since he has no experience in running anything other than his mouth, it is not something that is necessary?

I can't say ALL dems are evil, but dang I'd like to see just a few stand up for the truth, rather than see them snickering about all this. One of the things I do best is read people. I learned that from the streets. Like most other cops, I assess and reassess people - constantly. I knew when Clinton was lying under oath that he was lying because I could read it in his answers and his non verbal communications. Now, all of a sudden, many of the same people who knew he was lying and doing all the stuff he denied, are coming out of the woodwork. They are only telling the truth now, because it suits their agenda, which is to get right back in those positions of oversight. That is the CHANGE Obama is really talking about. He wants to change the people who are running things back to the Clintonistas.


Bush had experience as a governor of one of the largest states in the US.
Clinton had experience as a governor - even if it was only Arkansas<s>.
Bush Sr, had experience as director of the CIA, and other entities.
Reagan had experience as governor of one of the largest states, and he helped turn their economy around.

Obama has experience running his mouth, and nothing else. He talks of change, but doesn't say what that change is, in specific terms. The media has given him a pass on most subjects, except his reverends, and ties to Farrakhan (who passionately hates Jews, btw) etc.

Here is another example of liberal v conservative thinking. You may recall my comment a few years ago, when I railed against the Israeli leadership giving the Palestinians the Golan Heights. I said it was insane to give someone, who had been an enemy for thousands of years, the high ground above you. I think you said it was a good move. What do you thing now? The rockets come raining down on Israel from where?

The Israelis have attempted to buy peace through appeasement and the more they give back to the Arabs, the worse it gets. Israel should throw the Palestinians out of Gaza, and keep going until they are dispersed into the four corners of the world again.

Kindness is often mistaken for weakness, and a weak country will not stand.