• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rally to Restore Sanity attendance estimated at 215,000

To both sides, why is this stuff in this thread?

It has nothing to do with the topic of the OP.

Restore Sanity. Stop the Rhetoric. Stop the divisions, remember that the vast majority of people don't think along such dogmatic lines.

Absolutely correct, my error in responding to posters who put that subject on this thread. My apology. I will not respond to off topic posts on this thread
 
I'm loving this thread. Conservative admitted there was no WMDs and that several Bush policies didn't work. Rev Hell Man is admitting he can get facts wrong too sometimes. Ockahm admits Bush was way off trying to put a federal ban on gay marriage. Who said liberals and conservatives can't agree on things?

Is there a reason you are butchering my username? oh wait, nevermind. :ssst:
 
Last edited:
It was put through the hardest process, and I'm glad it was overturned.
'


I am as a well, I don't support amendments that restrict the people, that's not what the constitution is about. I think he may have felt the same way, why else would he go such a no win route?
 
Wow. With #'s like that, this sanity rally really exposes the pulse of the nation. I bet these viewpoints will be reflected in the Tuesday elections. That'll show everyone just what America really thinks. :2dancing:

You are an optimist....
me, I am not so sure that America thinks..:(
 
You are an optimist....
me, I am not so sure that America thinks..:(

From what I saw I am concerned that many of these people at that rally actually are voters. Notice the signs about Keynesian=Obama and these people were talking about his birthplace and not economics? There were many signs there that told me all I needed to know about the attendees and I posted many of them on this thread. Just goes to show how out of touch and radical some of those attendees actually are. One guy says "What is wrong with Communism?" Oh, I don't know, hundreds of millions killed by Communists must be ok.
 
I have to agree that honor was lost in this country, but it wasn't just recently. It happened over a series of decades when we started wars, interfered with existing governments, even democracies, and in general made a royal mess of things. We need to stop trying to export democracy at the point of a bayonet.
 
I am as a well, I don't support amendments that restrict the people, that's not what the constitution is about. I think he may have felt the same way, why else would he go such a no win route?
I'm sure President Bush also understood that if an amendment were to pass that it would be next to impossible to pass another amendment that rendered a gay marriage ban null and void. Given that the Constitution has only been changed 27 times since 1788, with 10 of those coming within the first 5 years, it would take quite a while to pass another amendment.
 
I'm sure President Bush also understood that if an amendment were to pass that it would be next to impossible to pass another amendment that rendered a gay marriage ban null and void. Given that the Constitution has only been changed 27 times since 1788, with 10 of those coming within the first 5 years, it would take quite a while to pass another amendment.



what was the congressional make up at the time? It was a no win, everyone knew it.
 
what was the congressional make up at the time? It was a no win, everyone knew it.
Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress at the time, though both of their majorities were rather small.

Even if President Bush knew it had no chance of passing I think it would have disappointed his social conservative base if he did not support it in some manner. Given that the 2004 Election was around the corner this was not a group that he could lose support from and still manage to win the upcoming election.
 
Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress at the time, though both of their majorities were rather small.

Even if President Bush knew it had no chance of passing I think it would have disappointed his social conservative base if he did not support it in some manner. Given that the 2004 Election was around the corner this was not a group that he could lose support from and still manage to win the upcoming election.

Actually the Senate was under Democrat control thanks to a couple indpendents. Republicans took control of Congress in 2003 elections
 
Actually the Senate was under Democrat control thanks to a couple indpendents. Republicans took control of Congress in 2003 elections

Yep. What's this guy gonna say next, the Bush ruined the economy? Lol. Haven't heard that garbage before either.
 
Actually the Senate was under Democrat control thanks to a couple indpendents. Republicans took control of Congress in 2003 elections
Actually in the 108th Congress the Republicans held 51 seats, enough to give them control of the Senate regardless of who Senator Jeffords chose to caucus with.

By the way, the United States does not regularly hold federal elections in odd numbered years.
 
Yep. What's this guy gonna say next, the Bush ruined the economy? Lol. Haven't heard that garbage before either.

Yep, said over and over again by the liberal robots that ignore the actual results. I posted the actual results from 2003-2007 but liberals don't want to read those results. They prefer to spout the rhetoric and show how brainwashed they really are.
 
Actually in the 108th Congress the Republicans held 51 seats, enough to give them control of the Senate regardless of who Senator Jeffords chose to caucus with.

By the way, the United States does not regularly hold federal elections in odd numbered years.

Sorry, absolutely correct, the elections were in 2002 that put the Republicans in power, my apology, too much coffee this morning. The results from 2003-2006 were quite different than liberals want to admit.
 
Haha, that reality thing of elitist snobs... I'll make my own reality!

You mean like the rich kid who became preisdent? Bush? :lamo
 
Sorry, absolutely correct, the elections were in 2002 that put the Republicans in power, my apology, too much coffee this morning. The results from 2003-2006 were quite different than liberals want to admit.

Liberals want to focus on the entire Bush term than instead of looking at the years that matter. 2003-2007 saw GDP growth and tax revenue growth. The fact that the deficit went out of control and tax revenues relative to GDP never increased has very little, if anything to do with the overall state of the economy. I think GWB is the most underated president. Decades from now people will realize how intelligent he really was.
 
Liberals want to focus on the entire Bush term than instead of looking at the years that matter. 2003-2007 saw GDP growth and tax revenue growth. The fact that the deficit went out of control and tax revenues relative to GDP never increased has very little, if anything to do with the overall state of the economy. I think GWB is the most underated president. Decades from now people will realize how intelligent he really was.

In my younger days I used to play the same game you are playing and did it quite well. I am now too old to play that game but not to old to understand the role of the Federal Govt. and it is obvious to me that those attending that rally in D.C. have a very poor understanding of history and civics. Most buy what they are told but never verify the rhetoric. There are some great non partisan sites that give actual data for anyone that really cares to get the facts. Most however don't. Even though in jest you don't realize how accurate you are when you say, "decades from now people will realize how intelligent he was." GW Bush has a Degree from Yale and a MBA from Harvard. More importantly GW Bush understood the role of the govt. and is more revered today that he was while in office. Polls show him more popular today than Obama and the question is why?
 
Liberals want to focus on the entire Bush term than instead of looking at the years that matter. 2003-2007 saw GDP growth and tax revenue growth. The fact that the deficit went out of control and tax revenues relative to GDP never increased has very little, if anything to do with the overall state of the economy. I think GWB is the most underated president. Decades from now people will realize how intelligent he really was.

Actually what liberals want to ignore is that Obama could not inherit what he helped create and that the Democrat Controlled Congress was more concerned about regaining the WH than they were in governing the nation.

The people at that rally are so out of touch with reality that they don't truly understand the role of the Federal Govt. but only on issues that they have no interest in but on others this liberal govt. is doing the right thing. The results are there for all to see but ignore.
 
IGW Bush has a Degree from Yale and a MBA from Harvard.

I agreed with everything you said except this. Education has nothing to do with how intelligent someone is. Libs try to say Obama is smart because he has degrees from Columbia and was president of the Harvard Law Review. In the '08 election they were trying to compare his academic credentials to John Mccains, who only has a bachelors degree and finished 2nd to last in his class, and Sarah Palin who only has a bachelors from an unranked shcool and took 6 years to get it after hopping around to many different schools. And what was the outcome? Well after 20 months in office I think we can all agree Hussein Obama is anything but intelligent.
 
I agreed with everything you said except this. Education has nothing to do with how intelligent someone is. Libs try to say Obama is smart because he has degrees from Columbia and was president of the Harvard Law Review. In the '08 election they were trying to compare his academic credentials to John Mccains, who only has a bachelors degree and finished 2nd to last in his class, and Sarah Palin who only has a bachelors from an unranked shcool and took 6 years to get it after hopping around to many different schools. And what was the outcome? Well after 20 months in office I think we can all agree Hussein Obama is anything but intelligent.

Some would say he has a smart teleprompter.
 
What's tragic to me is how much time and energy so many people put into these partisan circle-jerks, and how many people think these pep rallies are of any significance.

It will be really tough to explain to my daughter in twenty years why so many people fiddled while Rome burned. I think my generation deserves all the scorn we get from our kids in the decades to come.
 
The people at that rally are so out of touch with reality that they don't truly understand the role of the Federal Govt. but only on issues that they have no interest in but on others this liberal govt. is doing the right thing. The results are there for all to see but ignore.

Wow, so thats what all those signs while I was there really said. Or maybe it comes down to you don't understand them and they don't share your exact views and you reject them for this.
 
Back
Top Bottom