Sheep in Sheep's Clothing

Reagan and Bushie are the 2 biggest fiscally irresponsible spenders in American history and together they drove the national debt into the stratosphere.

Oh comon... Reagan had to do that to rebuild America after the four years of absolute failure that was Carter (what an idiot). And Bush is a liberal. You should be able to figure that out.

Re: Sheep in Sheep's Clothing


wow. just wow. not even worth commenting.

Reagan had a Democratic congress that spent all that they could, in spite of their pledge to match the Reagan tax cuts with spending cuts.

Bush had to buy off the sissies in congress (Dems and Reps) by allowing them to spend so that he could gain enough support to clean out the rat's nest known as the Middle East.

Dag, you seem to be really good at missing the point. I've come to expect it from you.

Re: Sheep in Sheep's Clothing


No, go ahead. Would love to hear your defense of big government liberalism.

Why should America fall in love with the idea of everything being run from Washington?

cjhsa, from what i posted you can not have the slightest idea what i got or did not get from the article, since i purposely did not comment. kindly save your remarks on my personna for yourself. good day.

Your lipstick is too red.

Re: Sheep in Sheep's Clothing


Then why nother posting?

I believe there are two main groups of liberals. There are the youngish, educated, that might believe it is their role to steer society to a more caring format. Then there are those that are the have-nots, or marginal have-nots, possibly washouts in finding a niche in productive society, and might like to redistribute the wealth in society, they getting a bigger share. And, those who for some reason, identify with the have-nots/marginal have-nots, based on whatever.

And then there are the conservatives that seem to understand that the proverbial pie is not big enough for everyone to get a large slice. And, one should earn one's slice of pie.

The problem is, in my opinion, liberals might show a holier-than-thou attitude (condescending perhaps) towards conservatives, as individuals that show atavistic traits of not caring for the world, its people, etc.. Oddly, I believe, there is sometimes a perception that conservatives are not really educated, or educated incorrectly?

O.K., I believe conservatives, to counter any intellectual snobbery of liberals should do that which liberals think is their exclusive turf: read good books; read the classic novels; stop watching liberal propaganda on tv; spend the time reading a book.

There is nothing better to put a liberal, educated individual in an uncomfortable position than to ask, "Have you read any good books lately?" and then be able to mention the good books that you (the conservative) have read. In other words, reading a "good" book, I believe, is supposed to be the domain of the educated liberal. Meeting him or her on his/her own turf, of reading a best seller, unnerves them, I believe.

I believe, reading can make conservatives a force that will take the proverbial "wind out of the sails" of many a liberal that might think a conservative is some atavistic individual with archaic notions. Being "well read" is a goal, I believe, of many an educated liberal. I think conservatives should show that this is not the exclusive domain of liberals.

Read any good books lately?

Yes. I am in the middle of a biography of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy.

"No Bad Dogs - The Woodhouse Way".