Is it possible for a conservative Republican to be a true swinger...(I do know a few Republican swingers so obviously I'm not addressing the issue by speaking in absolutes)...However, it seems that the common thread of being conservative would seem to conflict with the extremely liberal lifestyle of a swinger or swinging couple...Not that there isn't more to being Republican or Democrat than this issue...Seems also the case when you have people who are openly gay or lesbian and are Republican...It's one thing to take sides on an issue and vote that way, it seems to be something totally different to vote in opposition to something that defines almost by literal definition who you are as a person...Many people in this country vote against their own interest without knowing so...In many states, what we do in our homes, parties, swing clubs, etc. is illegal and there are many out there who despise who we are...Remember the swing club raids in Ft. Lauderdale???  Trapeze was even burnt to the ground at one time!   I'm interested to hear how others feel politcally as swingers...If you are the twice a year type of swinger this may or may not be important to you...If you are someone that would be affected in someway if this lifestyle was outlawed tomorrow, what is your point of view?  Or, is this a silly issue and too "politically incorrect" to discuss?  

Remember...If it isn't fun, why do it?   Have fun always! 

AANDC,

i wont be offended if you post it....we may have traded jabs at each other but i dont take it personally...its usually to make a point or throw in some political humerous jabs....

therefore you have my permission...;)

I just got a great forward and wanted to share it with everybody.  Forgive me if I offend anybody.  :)  

Eh... wait... I know I'll definately offend people with this.  So I'm deleting it now.  If i can get approval from Funsun, Babysue, and that other dude with no pics, I'll post it. 

 A Message from the Ghost of General Patton....

Dude, what's your point?  Your whole post doesn't make any sense.  What should I get now, that I'm an asshole?  Because you say so?  You who isn't brave enough to put pictures on your profile? 

I don't speak five languages, I speak English and Spanish and am learning the others. 

What the hell does "to put things in perspective, consider the world like your neighborhood" mean?  Learn how to form a sensible sentence. 

 I'm not alone now, nor will I ever be.  I've got my girlfriend, our buddies and my dog.  That's all I'll ever need.  I also won't be all alone, cause the 61% people who voted Republican on this blog think mostly like me.  So I've got them and you've got the 20%.  What do I care if a bunch of foreigners don't like me or my country?  Big deal.  Its only important because libs like you make it important.  "Oh no!!! Better not make the French mad!!! They gave us a statue!!!  We have to care what they think!"  The bottom line is they'll still do business with us because its in their interest to do so. 

And what in God's name does your second paragraph mean?  I just can't figure it out. 

"Liberal" The meaning has been lost or twisted somehow. For the smart guy that says he "speaks 5, count them, 5 languages..." first off I think you're full of shit but that really doesn't matter (to me). But if you were so adept in language you would know the root of this word Liberal is Latin and it basically refere to "freedom". Liberal, liberation, etc...

So when you refer in such disparaging ways to"liberals" do you know what you're saying? I can tell you one thing. You so called conservatives are anything but "conservative". If the current administration was "conservative" they certainly would have been more careful about jumping into a war and plunging our nation into the worst national debt in the history of the world and humanity. What the hell is so conservative about that?

I can tell you one thing, all this back and forth with ideology will solve nothing. In fact radical ideology is what has gotten us and our adversaries to the point we are all at right now. What I mean is that the answer to the Islamic fundamentalist problem is not only brute force right back at them. It is also diplomacy with the rest of the modern world. So when Mr smart guy that speaks five ...count them 5 languages.. says things like "screw the Europeans" , well I wonder just how smart you really are. To put things in perspective, consider the world like your neighborhood. If you say "fuck all you neighbors if you do not see things exactly the way I see them" then you will be all alone eventually. And even when or if in the future you are right, you will still be all alone because you were an asshole. Do ya get it now?

Question here. For all the attacks and insults. What have you done to change the present condition that you believe in. Have any of you gone to any of the parties you support . To walk the talk, support your views,convince those that what your saying is right. Whether it be the republican party democratic party,the greeen party or whatever party best fits your description.Change comes from within.

My best guess that  it is much easier to  throw lame attacks either way instead of getting off the collective asses to make change.

 The question of can a conservative republican be a true swinger. Can a true Democrat be a true swinger.Who the hell knows. We can't even come up with who is a real true swinger. What constitutes a true swinger, is it the full swap ,full swap with a bifemale,full swpa both bi, soft swap no swapping of any sort. soft swap orally  playful.softswap fem to fem play. Can it be the s&mers,scat,  golden showers groups.

 The arguments in this blog depends greatly on who do you believe.Better yet what are your ethics and values . How far you can slide them to fit what you think is real.Each side has valid points to ponder. Each side needs to ponder on what the other has sad.

 You can argue that today is not Monday. Someone who reads this on Tuesday will argue that this was not Monday . Who is right who is wrong.It happened to be Monday that I wrote this.Not always black and white . Get used to the grey or gray area, thats where most things happen.

 Is the war right, yes. Is the war being fought right, no.Fighting the war right means being able to throw values ,morals out the door. You have to fight war  to win.

 Ask the Brits, we fought and won our right and rights  with them .It was thier Vietnam War. A war that could not be won.It will always be the perception of those standing on either side of the street

It is sad that Babysue and TexxSexx both defend leaders that had done genocide to their own people and critizen leaders that come to aid people whose human rights are being violated. Since the UN has lots of dictatorships in it, they will not come to their aid. To say Bush lied is wrong. To say the intelligence was wrong is correct. This is a classic case of shot the messenger. All major governments of the world said Saddam had WMDs and that he was trying to get nuclear weapons. Even Saddam said he had them and will use them. So I would guess Saddam lied. Can you say that? Did papers make a big deal about the mustard gas or the sarin gas found in Iraq? Even the UN was surprise to hear this even with all of their inspections. So you two can do all the personal attacks against "us" all you want. It doesn't help your arguements. Please use as much facts as you can to defend your statements or why Saddam should have be left in power. As of it being Bosnia or Serbia, take it up with the news. They use both names and mainly use Bosnia. Please let me know when the Army had bombers. I always thought it was the Air Force. If you meant the Air Force, then it was a honest mistake. No one is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes.

As far as Iraq being a breeding ground for terrorist. It's true that more terrorist are heading to Iraq. Better there were we can kill them, then here were Liberals want to give them more rights then a US citizen and put them on trail.

TexxSexx, I'm glad you live somewhere you are happy and proud to call home.

I know it is pointless insanity - but Aggiedude is just another example of "them" vs "us" and of course - "they" are the one's with FACTS and reason and we're just a bunch of terrorist-loving hippy liberals.... I'd laugh if it wasn't at its very core&heart sad and sickening to the stomach!

The "facts" you mention, my dear misguided Aggiedude, are wrong from the get-go: It was SERBIA (aka rest Yugoslavia) that Clinton (in alliance with the rest of Europe) attacked back in the early/mid 90's... Yes, they carpetbombed parts of Serbia (and serbian parts of Bosnia), yes, since it was the US Army, it was done in a sickening way and yes, they used ammo that makes cigarettes apear  nutritinal  (leadfilled and halway glowing - it had effects both on the US troops and the civil population. So before you claim toknow anything and instead just again use half-assed facts to play the us vs them game...

Guess what? I opposed the war on Yugosslavia just as I opposed the war on Iraq. All part of the American Empire and dispicable from start to finish. I am one of the sad few who check the either column and choose not to choose a side of this formerly democratic system. When are y'all going to realize that what once was a free country is in the process of being transformed into something quite different from that... the writings have been and currently are clearly on the walls...

For one in the tone at which war opponents, freedom-lovers and everybody who diasgrees with this ugly empire is presented, insulted, mocked and spat at. Dissident voices are being muffled, ridiculed and blocked out. You find more "news" and political interna on this country in pretty much every foreign newspaper and media outlet than in the domestic media corporations..Boy, don't get me started, I have a list of endless examples!!

Let me use a metaphor that every US citizen, regardless of their educational or socio-economic background, should understand: THOSE OF YOU WHO STILL SUPPORT ALL THIS - you are basically Darth Vader's cheerleaders. Get it?? Empire? Why don't you try to join the rest of the world, what makes yo think you are soo much better and freer than everybody else?? But coming out of A&M?? Boy, we are talking about a major crashcourse in brainwashing here...

I find life in Europe considerably less invasive, less police state like and yes- much more free. Why am I her, lemme answer that before giving y'all a cheap shot: personal reasons and yes, i once was thankful for what this country meant, what it stood for. It is sad that a foreigner must bring it to your attention that this here stinks from the head as well as from the bottom...I have seen opressive systems firsthand and I know when I see the symptoms in a society.

One last thing: If it really isn't below your dignity (if you care to have some) to make fun of my writing, my syntax or my spelling: I am operating in my third language here. So, lil "oh-so-worldly" Dallas kid: If you have to say someting, lemme hear it in a language of your choice..(sorry, Klingon won't be accepted!!)

Dear Aggie,

Sadam did not bomb the world trade center.....the terrorist were not in Iraq...there were no wmd....we INVADED A COUNTRY WITH NO TIES TO TERRORIST. (NOW its a breeding ground for terrorist.)

we only have 20,000 troups in a country that DID bomb the world trade center....His administration is a liar....and it still seems to convince people like you that we did the right thing....

We should have gone after Al Queda in afganistan and spent the money there..not in Iraq and not doing Irans work by getting rid of Sadam. (Iran must be loving the stupidity of your president.....we did his dirty work...)

obviously you have not read a single newspaper since 05...if you had then you would know that there were no terrorist links to Sadam...There has been a full report released by the CIA.

Crawl out from under the rock you must have been in for the last 2yrs. Open your eyes...ears....and educate yourself....please!

It is funny to see who is calling names here and posting false facts and to which party they belong. This party is suppose to be the intelligent, tolerant party. The ones that are not calling names and posting facts are suppose to belong to the narrow minded, stupid party.

If you look at the history of the terrorist's attacks against the US around the world, you will find that all the administrations have failed to response with force...till now. That was because of the attacks of 9/11. Now you will have some people claiming that it was a setup to go to war. Those same people will also say that Bush did nothing before 9/11 to find Bin Laden or that he didn't take terrorist seriously. So if he didn't take terrorist seriously, why blow up the trade center? To attack a country where the leader committed genocide against his own people? Clinton did it to Bosnia defying the UN. (Bush criticize him for it, just as Clinton criticize Bush for Iraq and defying the UN.) One difference is that Clinton carpet bomb that country, killing more citizens in the process then we are killing in Iraq. There was no outcry from the news or the world about civilian population being killed in Bosnia by the US.

Also Clinton said that the people critizing him now are the same ones that would not let him - the President, the commander in chief - go after Bin Laden, even though the federal courts had a warrant out for Bin Laden and Bin Laden declared war on the US. This means that Clinton could use whatever means necessary to bring Bin Laden to justice or ask Congress to declare war on Bin Laden and his terrorists. Well, if the Republicians were the ones that didn't want to go after Bin Laden before 9/11, then why is it that the Democrats do not want to support the Republicians and Bush now that they are "on board" with fighting terrorisms?

We are in Iraq whether you like it or not. Do we set a timetable for withdraw like we did with Vietnam? Do you remember the Fall of Saigon? The Democrats warn of this being another Vietnam, well they are doing their best to make it so. Just like the 60s they are protesting the war even if it was the right thing to do (stop the spread of communism and put in a democratic governement in South Vietnam). Communism didn't spread to the neighboring conutries. North Vietnam did conquer the South despite a peace agreement. The North only wanted peace by conquer just as the extremist Islamic terrorist believe. We lost the Vietnam war because we were not united as a country. We could lose the war against terrorist if we do not unite. We can lose the Iraq conflict if we do not unite as a country. We have taken the fight to the terrorist, on their on ground. No one said war was easy. It is an ugly thing. We have the best military in the world. We have fought wars with less then what we have now and won. We live in the greatest country in the world. We are free to speak our political differences despite our sex, race, etc. If we lived in the Middle East, would we be free to speak our mind? Would we have this swinging lifestyle? We can disagree on how to solve our country's problems...we should agree that we have to fight terrorisms wherever they are.

"Favor is spelled without a "u" by the way.  Atleast in places where it matters."

You give yourself away with that line.   2 words for you: Ugly American

Come to the think of it - that pretty aptly describes Bush and company as well.

Dear Callie,

Thank you for the compliment...(exasperating) however i must say you are as well....

How can you be ok with an administration that lied us into war? How can you be ok with record debt (8.37 trillion)? How can you be ok with a bill that ok's torture and where almost every general has claimed it would put our soldiers in jeopardy? How can you be ok with tax cuts to the super wealthy while the poor gets squeezed at every turn. How can you support an administration that has failed at every turn and has not put forth a single piece of legislation that helps the adverage Joe?

Health care is a joke.....

We have a military that is out dated and spread too thin. We can't take care of any real threats because we are bogged down in a war we cannot win and we were brought there for personal gain of the Bush administration.
The polls out this weekend show Bush at his lowest point to date 33%.

He has put us in a black hole of debt and issolated us from other European countries. We need their support. We need to be taken seriously as a leader and not a joke...if you were to watch the news overseas and see what we have done to the Iraqi civilians you would be horrified! We have killed over 100,000 innocent people...! NOW we have their family members out for our heads and they in turn have become insurgents.

THERE ARE NO WMD IN IRAQ AND THE ADMINITRATION LIED US INTO BELIEVEING THERE WERE.....There was no link to 911 yet we are in Iraq and now the Taliban is reorganizing in Afganistan because we never finished the job! He used it as an excuse and now pulled us AWAY from the real terrorist and put us in a battle over oil and a personal vendetta...How can you be ok with this...????

i am exasperated with you!!! hahaha...

Speaking of a nude debate..i already have a bet at my office. Loser has to run down Copans Rd. in their underwear or bikinni (thats me if i lose)

we might need a police interference if we debate on the beach.....we may end up throwing sunscreen at each other...! hahahha

whew...this wore me out...i am taking my exasperated self to bed...

good night to all my bible thumping conservative republican (queers) and my 'make love not war liberals...'

sweet dreams,

Babysue

"Oh, right, we only count those parts of history that favor our less than narrowminded view. Only one favour please, since talking to you will remain pointless: Change that line anout being "openminded" in your profile - you have aptly demonstrated the opposite in this blog. And since even that comment from that sweet former republican lady did not make reevalue things...bye."

The current European countries do owe their existence to us by American Actions from 1941-1945.  That's a fact.  We may have been a European colony 230 years ago, but I'm talking more recently.  America is older as a nation than Germany, Italy, Poland, Greece, and several other European nations, by the way. 

I'm totally openminded.  I've listened to personal one insult after another on this blog, and taken them with a smile.  I listen to all the negative things said about my country and my people; I just don't agree with them.  Being openminded means you're willing to listen to and analyze the opinions of others.  It doesn't mean you have to be influenced by them.  I listened to FUNSUN and Babysue and everyone else, but that doesn't mean I agree with them.  Maybe you're the one who's not openminded, by not taking the time to listen to and analyze me. 

We're totally open to a naked debate with everyone from this blog.  Haulover anyone?  We'll bring the umbrella and our young, naked selves.  :)

Favor is spelled without a "u" by the way.  Atleast in places where it matters.

AAwhatevercrypt: Baby you've been brainwashed too....No point in talking to you. Europe owns it's existence to the US??  How about vice versa??

Oh, right, we only count those parts of history that favor our less than narrowminded view. Only one favour please, since talking to you will remain pointless: Change that line anout being "openminded" in your profile - you have aptly demonstrated the opposite in this blog. And since even that comment from that sweet former republican lady did not make reevalue things...bye.

"I think you have a very bright mind but you do need to open it up.  If you are fluent in 5 (count'em FIVE) languages, you need to study the history associated with them and read the newspapers published in those languages." 

I have studied the history associated with them, extensively.  I'm not fluent in five, just two, and learning the others.  And believe me, I get enough world perspective from CNN. 

Wow ANDC1521!  I posted the second comment on this blog and have been following it every few hours to keep up with it ever since.  I have indulged your youthful ideaology having been a young die hard Republican myself.  I would love to talk to you in another 25 years to see what path your journey has taken.

"WHY SHOULD I READ THE INTERNATIONAL PAPERS.  SCREW THOSE SOBS - THOSE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES OWE THEIR EXISTENCE TO THE USA.  IF NOT FOR US THEY'D BE SPEAKING GERMAN OR RUSSIAN."

Why should I read international papers?  Because the WORLD is not America! Those European Countries have far more history than the United States.  The NEWS as reported by credible news agencies around the world can cast a very different slant on a single story.  IF you read international papers, you may learn that the rest of the world does not hold us in the high esteem we hold ourselves.  They may offer a politically incorrect (but quite accurate!) assessment of our involvement in world affairs. 

I think you have a very bright mind but you do need to open it up.  If you are fluent in 5 (count'em FIVE) languages, you need to study the history associated with them and read the newspapers published in those languages. 

To reiterate a post on a different blog... "What the world needs now is love, sweet love."

"oh yeah: that young kiddo from Dallas (AAwhatever): Why dontcha spend some weeks in Gitmo?? Estimates put the number of perfectly INNOCENT inmates at somewhere between 60-85%...bet you didn't hear that on FAUXnews or your conservative blogs. Rolling Stone had an excellent report on it some issues ago...well worth checking out. As well as reading some international papers, especially since pretty much every European country had some of its citizens disappear into Gitmo, only to have them released later as proven 100%innocent. But tortured they were nevertheless...

But then, what do ya know? You weren't even allowed to drink or vote when that sick joke of a frat boy loser turned pres became King George II... What a pity. "

You know who's innocent?  The American construction contractor who's head they sawed off with a kitchen knife on video tape.  He was innoncent. 

Why should I go to Gitmo?  I didn't plan to blow up any buildings.  Estimates, eh?  What estimates... who's estimates?  Rollingstone's?  Please.  Why should I trust Rollingstone over anyone?  Is it 60% or 85% that are innocent?  Don't quote any rediculous editorials when you want to debate with me.  I do you the favor of not quoting Limbaugh or Hannity, or O'Reiley. 

What does Torture mean to you?  Did they receive permanent damage?  Like having their head cut off?  I don't think so. 

Why should I read international papers?  Screw those sons of bitches.  Those European countries owe their existence to the United States.  If not for us, they'd be speaking German or Russian. 

Speaking of which, it's completely absurd to make comparisons about our government in relation to Bolsheviks.  You libs would be shot for saying what you say if our government was in any way like the dictatorships of this past century. 

Yeah, I wasn't old enough the first time, but I was the second and I did vote for him, as did 51% of the country.  What's 51%?  A majority, which is something Clinton never won.  During both his elections, the majority of people who voted, voted for someone else. 

oh yeah: that young kiddo from Dallas (AAwhatever): Why dontcha spend some weeks in Gitmo?? Estimates put the number of perfectly INNOCENT inmates at somewhere between 60-85%...bet you didn't hear that on FAUXnews or your conservative blogs. Rolling Stone had an excellent report on it some issues ago...well worth checking out. As well as reading some international papers, especially since pretty much every European country had some of its citizens disappear into Gitmo, only to have them released later as proven 100%innocent. But tortured they were nevertheless...

But then, what do ya know? You weren't even allowed to drink or vote when that sick joke of a frat boy loser turned pres became King George II... What a pity.

"or, drive to Starbucks in your SUV while listening to the Best Of Sting. Grab a Latte and head to Best Buy for that plasma. Stop off at your contractor's office to see how the addition to your already vast residence is progressing. Head home, plug in that plasma and find everything that you can to reinforce you that your life is just fine. "

That sounds like a marvelous idea.  Funsun... why don't you go jump off a bridge?  I don't mean that in a mean way, but if I "knew" all the things you "know", I'd either do that or move to Paris where it's safe.

Parlez-vous Francais?  Based on your post, you clearly don't speak english that well.  hyppocrats, wistle... dah duh dah.  Also, your math skills are a little faulty.  Might want to check that relative ratio again.

No, not Gay... I've never really had a problem with gay people, even though most of the people I grew up with in Michigan did.

BABYSUE... I certainly did read this entire blog. And mostly what I read was ridicule and insults from the liberals. I prefer to debate facts and ideas. But that takes a little READING doesn't it? 

But I'm done here. I'll go ahead and give you your one last insult at me since that's what you seem to enjoy.

Barbara

Dear AANDC.....where have you been??? i've missed you????

This blog is not the same without your 'young' thoughts and 'bogus' ideas...(wink)

(you know i am kidding when i say that......)

Rumor has it that there are many more gay republicans on the hill than anywhere else in washington...humm.....

AANDC are you gay???? I'm gay....maybe we could be gay together.....lol

Dear CBL2718,

Darling you are getting into this debate a little late. Myself and few others have been on this blog at its beginning and plenty of 'facts' were shared by both sides. READ THE BLOG FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. (i know it doesnt have pictures but i am sure you can do it!.....) You will see myself, funsun, AANDC, and a few others who were battleing it out till late in the evening. Some sober...some drunk...but we were there....

YOU are coming to the party with nothing to share...and whats worth is you are too lazy to read the entire blog. You just decide to bust in like Mrs Asshole and you have no idea what you are talking about...so unless you want to read the ENTIRE blog i suggest you find another topic to play with....you are Clueless!

"WE SWING FOR MORE GITMO - GOP 06"?

I would definately wear one of those shirts.  Can you get me one?

Wow..not that I really care but 66% on here are STILL rebublican after 6 ( S I X ) years of constant lying, bs, getting caught with both greedy hands in the cookie jar Bushregime and you ARE STILL BUYING INTO that???

Wow, that's somewhere between scary and amazing, like looking at a trainwreck. That beats even the worst approval rating that FAUXnews could come up with. Who would have thought that?? It is obviously NOT the  biblethumping "christian" fundamentalists who are Bush's most devoted disciples but suburban swingers....

And I thought we were among open-minded people and all that...

Could you please print T-shirts "Cocksuckers for Bush" or "WE SWING FOR MORE GITMO - GOP 06"?

Print those shirts, wear'em at the next GOP convention and identify yourselves in public...nahh, I didn't think you'd had in in ya...

66%....phewww. NOW I need a drink...

BABYSUE...It's been my experience that when someone's only debate is ridicule and insult it usually means that person has not read enough on that subject to offer anything but ridicule and insult.

You sound like such a person.

Barbara

• So what!  Life is full of irony and conflict.  Many people strive for balance of some sort, but conflict still exists.  Does this conflict affect their skills as a lover?  Do political beliefs make them a better swinger?  Maybe, who knows and who really cares.  In my experience, newly freed sexually repressed people make the most intense lovers...much like a kid in a candy store.  They have come from both sides of the fence, liberal and conservative.  Does their new sexual freedom change their core belief system?  Not usually.  In some instances it opens their mind to other possibilities, but in the grand scheme of things they still remain liberal or conservative in their beliefs...no matter which party they subscribe to.
  
  You want irony.  Here is a liberal blog trying to label, pigeon-hole and categorize who will and/or should be considered a true swinger based upon political beliefs.  Now isn't that just like the liberal pot calling the conservative kettle black.

In our mind, this is typically an US question that would not even come to the mind of European people. The problem in US is that the present conservative republican US President is just an instrument in the hand of religious extremists, fighting again other religious extremists.  We do not make it a personal case. It is a fact that religious extremists have a strong influence in US and are openly and deeply rooted in the Republican Party. This is not so much the case in Europe - at least we do all what we can to limit that influence (to be honest, Poland is probably an exception). For instance, no Head of State, either conservative (such as our president in France) or social democrat (such as the prime Minister in Spain) commented here the recent pseudo-conflict between the Pope and the Muslim radical leaders. Both political sides were right.

Let US Rebuplicans swing if thay are swingers! Political life has laws of its own - much more like theater than like acual life. Who can seriously pretend that election campaigns are anything other than big fairs? Too much money and too much power challenges are at stake to make them honest philosophical debates.  Just as sport competiton  have much more to do with money than with sport.

The sea was angry that day, my friend.  Like and old man trying to return soup at a deli.

Many of the Bushevicks cannot understand dry, sophisticated humor.  Quite frankly there are not a lot of clever people in this country.  

We all know the the least common denominator appeals to the masses.  That is why George Bush and the my way or the highway, cowboy personna is so popular.

Bushevicks think that they are open to a wide range of thought and ideas; however, they don't realize that they are not.  For instance they believe that their right is Rick Santorum and their left is Arlen Spector.  In the grand sceme that is like the famous line from the Blues Brothers movie, "We got country and western."

Wake up Bushevicks.  You were lied to.  Your government coordinated a sceme to make you afraid of a man that posed no threat you.  As a result his administration broke internation law, attacked a soverign nation, killed countless people, destabalized an entire region of the world and made us the most hated country on the face of the earth.

Dear CBL2718,

I think you might be a bit mixed-up...most of my insults were actually intended to be humorous. (the conservative bible thumpers give me a TON of  material) if you took it personal I am sorry.....But you gotta admit. No one could make this shit up....the administration is completely inept and Bush couldn't think his way out of a paper bag!

That group of idiots couldnt get out of bed without screwing up! read sweetie...read...you will be amazed at what you could learn.

Nobody from the right can dispute the Downing Street memo.  Tony Blair said that it was authentic.  The Downiung Street memo is kryptonite to Bushekivks.  They have to run and hide.  They cannot dispute it.

Also, what happened to the Republican party.  If I was a Republican I would be ashamed that my party had been stolen out from under me by a group of religious fanatics.

Hi!

I am not one to blog too often, but I find it interesting that 61% of the people that voted on this site (one that I would by nature consider to be liberal) believe themselves to be republican. I continue to hear the same 6-7 people denounce Bush and republicans in general, while upholding democrat beliefs and Clinton. To speak from a conservative/libertarian perspective:

Bush has made some mistakes. He has done some things right. However, during his presidency he has dealt with a major terrorist attack, the market "decline" following that, a tsunami that killed more then the attack and war put together, and a natural disaster of epic proportions (Katrina). Throughout this he has remained in general favor of the public, the stock market has rebounded to record levels, interest rates have fallen, the unemployment rate is low, and the debt to income ratio of Americans has reduced. The average Joe American's life has bettered. That, we do need to give him credit for.

Clinton has screwed up (literally). He has also done some amazing things given a divided house, senate, and scandal. He did increase spending on the military when it was needed. He began a nation-wide initiative to have all students reading, writing, and analyzing in English, no matter their background. He funded higher education and began the idea of all students being college bound. The nation was prosperous under him; however that was because of what previous presidents did.

To answer the original blog exactly: Is it possible for a conservative Republican to be a true swinger? The answer to that: what is the definition of a "conservative Republican?" If it is someone who believes exactly what the Republican party believes, and doesn't divert from those thoughts, then the answer is no. However, as all people are allowed to believe in what they damn well want, you will be hard pressed to find anyone who fits that definition. The chair of the Republican Party probably diverts from the set beliefs as well. Speaking in general terms, republicans believe in smaller, localized government with less federal regulations, lower taxes and less spending (I know the president now diverts from this, you don't need to remind me), a strong family unit as the basis for society, and self-sufficiency. Given these general terms I see no reason why someone cannot claim to be a republican and a swinger.

As I do not blog too often, I will probably not respond to anyone dissecting my thoughts. You too, are allowed your ideas on this matter. Cheers!

Dear Serbastian,

I think our friends from the right have run for cover! your last post was wonderful. This administration is on its last leg...and if we dont get them this year we will get them in 08. What a complete group of thieves and at least one molester....the republican party is finally showing their true colors and America is beginning see it for themselves.

Condelesa Rice is the next head to roll.....she was told in advance about the threat to America and she has been caught in a HUGE lie and its all spelled out Woodwards book.

thanks for an awesome topic....!

Sue

The blogs are great, but:

I would like to codially invite all you patriots who believe we can do better than a GOP world, a GOP government, GOP morality and paying all the GOP's bills for them with tax money to come to SWINGERS TALK, CURRENT EVENTS and police the boards there.

In SWINGERS TALK there are a few repetitive, insulting, simple-minded champions of  closet pervs who take great pride in insult as a way of discussing.

LET'S NOT LET THEM CLAIM GOD, HARD WORK, THE AMERICAN TREASURY, YOUR MILITARY, MORAL CHOICES AND THE WORLD OF SWINGING, TOO.

Enough popular sentiment will shut these fuckers up.  You will have to take the gloves off with them, as they act like lawyers, and come out dirty with their first moves.  On the other hand, some people just need to be confronted on the terms they think are acceptible........

He,he!  It will be fun, too.  It is very easy to get them pissed, and use them as examples of why people shouldn't be like that.

Finally the family values tour is over...Hey Christian Right, still wanna be Republican!

No childleft behind...More like no child's behind left! 

Sorry, I know that was wrong... 

Personally I have no problem with someone wanting to have sex with a sixteen year old...In many countries and some states it's perfectly legal...Like Dave Chapell said...We can try em as adult criminals a young as age 12 but we can't fuck em till they're 18? (Maybe not verbatum but the concept is there)

Either way you view statatory rape laws, what Foley did is not only wrong for the context in which it was done but just stupid!  My concern is if Hasert had concerns about this behavior much earlier, why did he not bring it to light?  Even the FBI had the info yet no investigation insued...Was there a cover-up?  One must wonder to what lengths  politicians will go to protect their party, (Dems included). One would have to be very naive to think otherwise...This thing is going to blow up and right before the election!  No one likes to win by default but hey, a win is a win..I'll take it!

Don't forget to VOTE!Explicit image available, join sdc.com to view

Iraq is lost and we are losing Afghanistan. The U.S. Army is in shambles, and the entire military is in disarray. We are creating and nurturing more terrorists, and our nation is despised around the globe. The president's "war time consigliere" is a war criminal.

Our most fundamental constitutional rights are under assault as a spineless Congress gives the president the authority to jail anyone he wants for as long as he wants without even bringing charges.

George W. Bush has brought us to our most serious national identity crisis since the Civil War, and too few in civic life and the "watchdogs" in the corporate media are willing to challenge this mad and increasingly dangerous man. The Busheviks are using fear and propaganda to reshape our national values to serve their craven political purposes and addiction to power.

This morning Brit Hume compared Mark Foley's behavior toward underage boys, sophomores and Juniors in High School, to President Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. It might be redundant to say that this delegitimizes Fox as a serious news network, but I'll say it anyway.

The faulty logic is obvious, there is no comparison between consensual, legal sex between adults, and the stalking and victimizing of children by an adult in a position of authority over them.

"This Monday marked the third anniversary of President Bush's speech on the flight deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln," Harkin said. "On that occasion, the President proclaimed our 'mission accomplished,' stating triumphantly that 'major combat operations in Iraq have ended.' But three years later, 133,000 troops remain on the ground, and the President has signaled that the U.S. military occupation in Iraq is open-ended and of indefinite duration. President Bush's call to 'stay the course' is a slogan, not a strategy for success. Indeed, I fear that 'stay the course' really means 'stay forever,' and this sends exactly the wrong message. It stokes the insurgents, who believe that the U.S. wants a permanent military presence in Iraq. And it takes away any incentive for the Iraqi government to resolve its internal divisions and stand on its own feet."

Can a conservative republican be swinger?

SURE, THEY ARE ALL A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES, and that would be very exciting for them to make something that they preach on their social political life, is incorrect.

One good question would be: Can these sw couples be bisexual?

Ohh...  holy shit what would they answer? "Mmmmm....?? We can fuck people of our same sex but we can not marry them, ITS AGAINST GODS LAW".

Republicans: Thank the liberals for providing cheap medicines to your disease treatement of schizophrenia.

Yes, i do not live in the U.S., i am latin, a minority fighting your oil war. Can you brave republicans tell me how many republican senators have their children in Irak?

Swingers Talk: "The real SWINGERS forum always POLITICALLY INCORRECT and full off the wall debate."

Politically incorrect, what irony, a forum to talk about all the things liberals talk. Well, im having so much fun reading posts from "liberal republicans".

Republican SWINGERS TALK: A forum where we teach you how to have the dirtiest (=best) sex and still tell others that they should not do what we do. No Gay, Gays in military, Lesbian, Bisexual, bicurious, immigrant, muslim, pacifist, black, latin, chinese, north korean, cambodian, vietnamese, syrian, iranian, canadian, algerian, native american, russian, philippine, lebanese, pakistan, somalian, yugoslavian, liberian, afghanistan, french, poor, single moms, civil libertarian, environmentalist, abortionist, free health care, war veteran or marijuana smoker people allowed.  We also hate the image you look in the mirror, so, GET RID OF THOSE STUPID MIRRORS. You have a great country, you deserve the truth.

Best wishes.

BRAVO NGHYTCOPL1 BRAVO!

beautifully written......and right on the mark!

Alright, enough beating around the Bush...it is time to beat him right over the frontal lobe. This guy is as stupid as the day is long. If you check Dick Cheney's right hand you'll see it is moving GW's mouth for him. And every one of you people out there that are repeating eveything they here on Hannity and Comb's and Bill O'Reilly should start thinking for yourselves instead.

What is killing me is that Bill Clinton's got nothing to do with what is going on in Iraq and that is where our soldiers are dying. Who gives a shit about what clinton did in the Oral Office?!!

I don't know about you but I have a real dilemna in 2008. I can't vote for anyone who has supported Bush and Cheney but I sure as hell aint voting for Billary either!

Just look at the conservative REPUBLICAN Congressman Foley from West Palm Beach Florida. He just quit because he got caught trying to dittle with little boys! What the Fuck!!! If that's not hypocritical enough for you then I don't know what is! Let's remember it was the Republican's that decided to get into the bedroom of the Clinton's and eventually everyone else in the country. It is the Republicans that have the agenda to legislate morals and not the Democrats. The Facts are what they are........we as a people need to recognize that the government and politicians need to stay out of the private lives of all Americans. The core of the Right Wing ... Reverand Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts, Jerry Fallwell and a slew of other preachers that supported and got Bush and Cheney elected aren't hypocrits? They are THE republican base!

I think we don't have enough good people in politics. I'll bet there is someone on SDC membership list right now that would make a great president but forget about it. That person we'll need to run our country wont want to do it or be able to do it because the media and the Republicans will smear him or her. The Republicans are the very best..............at the politics of personal destruction. I will give you that one.

Well folks i know there is one seat in Florida we are going to pick up!!! hahahaha

I guess Foley is into young boys.....what a sick fuck.

Shakespear said it best 'thou doest protest too much' (Kinda like Tom Cruise and the whole gay thing.....)

I think i remember Mr 'ultra conservative phedophile Folley ranting about the importance of protecting kids from 'predators'......well little did we know he was talking about HIMSELF.

This is just another example of this scandal ridden administration who has managed to do NOTHING except line their pockets...hide behind the bible....Lie us into war...pass legislation to APPROVE TORTURE....try to blame everything on Clinton to deflect attention from their list of falures...all .while ridding in on the backs of the middle class and the poor.

I have to keep this short. i am on my way to buy Bob Woodward's new book! hahahaha...i hear its caused Bush a few sleepless nights...and AANDC. Google Woodwards name..maybe you will understand why  Bush/Chennay are so upset! hahahaha

'Fee  FFii  Foe Fum....I SMELL THE BLOOD OF A REPUBLICAN!!!"

(I hear they taste like chicken!) now i am screaming with laughter........

Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.

 Bill Clinton detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries 

What 20 countries?  Can you list them?

Where do you get your information?

If you got it from Mr. Clarence, your info is not reliable.  He is a mouthpiece for the liberal movement in this country and is a completely politically biased.  His information cannot be counted as impartial.

I googled his name and came up with this article, written by him.

The Bush Lies: Putting GOP-Style Decency and Integrity Back in the White House

BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY
by Clarence Swinney

Here's the link.

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/03/13_lies.html

Although from how "simply" this article is written you might not notice; Clarence has an IQ of 202.

Please.  If I quoted Rush Limbaugh as a source for reliable facts, you libs would laugh at me.  Find some real facts.

"Bill Clinton is loved all around the world, except here in the US by people like you.  Bill Clinton is the most recognizeable person in the world. " 

Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Yao Ming, Adolf Hitler, George Washington, Tom Cruise, and countless others are more recognizeable than Bill Clinton.  I guarantee you Bush is more recognizable, just because he's in the headlines everyday. 

If he were so loved, why were there 4 terrorist attacks on American property during his presidency?

"AANDC has got to be the youngest poster I have heard speaking the wisdoms that are new to them but are the broken record of what people wished the Republican Party still stood for.  One wonders where he might grow to, spouting the wisdom of the most materially shifted adults in this country already -- unless a certain amount of re-thinking is in order, he will probably spend most of his life a brilliant government lobbyist getting what he deserves as he helps vested and monied interests get what they deserve, He,he!"

See, I told you.  Rediculed and made fun of.  No attempt to answer my question. 

"And the GUY4CPLS is still single, still reveling in the popular vote instead of the substance of the post, and still kneeling there with that little thing poking out. He,he!"

Have to admit that that was pretty funny.

Well this has degraded into the same-ol anecdotal recitations of right and left supporters sharing as if the other side was going to move based on facts.

My compliments to Sebastian for trying to address the ideology question on it's own merit, as it really is an entirely different subject than the sparring. 

Truth is, a conservative perv is more of a perv to more of this country than a liberal perv.  Fucking Bill Clinton just feels more wholesome to more people than fucking Jack Abramoff.  And even for an old woman fucking Jerry Falwell as an open, honest swing activity is something that would only be good after the second coming -- of Christ that is.  Jimmy Carter might have trouble getting it up but his hugs would at least be sincere.

Some new stars in the right/left battle emerge.

AANDC has got to be the youngest poster I have heard speaking the wisdoms that are new to them but are the broken record of what people wished the Republican Party still stood for.  One wonders where he might grow to, spouting the wisdom of the most materially shifted adults in this country already -- unless a certain amount of re-thinking is in order, he will probably spend most of his life a brilliant government lobbyist getting what he deserves as he helps vested and monied interests get what they deserve, He,he!

And the GUY4CPLS is still single, still reveling in the popular vote instead of the substance of the post, and still kneeling there with that little thing poking out. He,he!

Just kidding fellows.  There is always a good debate on this stuff going on in Swing Talk. Maybe some of you would like to come there and stir the pot.

This New Republican Party is like a Weird Cult.. Spreading the WORD.

Even using swinger blog to urge there twist views.

Just look at thid bullshit pole..Come on...

I just wish Anne Richards did not under estimate this movements motivation to cheat and Steal.

RIP  Anne we miss you!!!

Bill Clinton is loved all around the world, except here in the US by people like you.  Bill Clinton is the most recognizeable person in the world.  

By the way, did you see the fourth ammendment anywhere.  Oh, thats right, Congress wiped their ass with it and threw it in the trash last night.

I'm sticking with jerkstore! 

Wow ... Bill Clinton did all that!!!

I think Babysue overlooked a few of Bill Clinton's accomplishments:

  Bill Clinton was faster than a speeding bullet!

  Bill Clinton was more powerful than a locomotive!

  Bill Clinton was able to leap tall buildings in a single bound!

Just don't get Kryptonite (or Monica) near him!

Babysue:  I think you're great... please don't take this the wrong way.  This

"  Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to kill the Pope."

is perhaps the funniest thing I've ever heard.  Please... I must know where you got this information.  I hope its not the same spot you got his IQ from.

Another question I'd like to propose, though I'm fairly confident it won't be answered.  I'll just be rediculed and made fun of and called names, but why not? 

If I were an American liberal politician, I would know the following things:  The less educated a voter, the more likely they are to vote for me.  Also, the less wealthy a voter, the more likely they are to vote for me.  Logically, if I were intersted in keeping my office, wouldn't I want as many of my constituents to be as un-educated and poor as possible?

My stats come from http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:RZM5yrPevnAJ:www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/naes/2004_03_party-id_11-19_pr.pdf+Party+identification+based+on+income&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4 which of course you are free to check out. 

• "...It is the lack of pity the rich have for the poor that is hard to grasp...Who tip the best to waiters, the rich?  No, other waiters...Why?  They have been there!" 
  This is an overgeneralized and unfounded statement.  Rich (btw, what is "rich"?) are always giving back to the poor these days.  Volunteer for some local charities and you will see this in action and I am not just talking about $5 to wear jeans on Friday.  I also would not exactly call a waiter someone who is poor.  Depending on the restaurant, many are making more than average wage.  Plus, they get fringe benefits that often parallel a rock star...wild parties after work, sex, drugs and rock-n-roll baby!!!
  
  Where is the empirical data showing that waiters tip better than the rich?  Besides, how does that prove a lack of pity the rich have for the poor?  Are you saying that if I leave a 15% tip and a waiter leaves a 20% tip, that proves my lack of pity for the poor?  So if the waiter leaves the 15% and I leave the 20%, does the paradigm shift and now I have more pity for the poor?  I fail to see the correlation.
  
  If there is a correlation, I really took pity on that Hooter's waitress the other day when I left her a 100% tip.  Had nothing at all to do with her impeccable service or generous assets she brought to her work...just pity that she was poor I guess.
  

• "He understood that pay increases, company sales, and economic growth were related..."
  
  I agree.  The thing we disagree is on the reasoning.  The outcome is the same, the reasoning behind it is not.  Ford's attrition rate was something like 3 to 1, meaning they needed to hire 3 people for every 1 position they had in order to keep the factory going.  That is very inefficient and expensive.  Ford also saw the need to have a different business model than his competitors.  He needed a way to increase sales.  By doubling wages coupled with "profit sharing" (for well behaving employees as determined by his own staff) it would allow him to hire and keep the best employees.  This would solve his attrition problem and make his factory efficient.  The higher wage would also produce more sales with his loyal employees being a captured audience.  If the price point was such that his employees could afford a car, they would buy one, of the Ford variety.  Do you think anyone at Ford showed up in a Chevy?  I bet anyone who did was no longer considered a well-behaving employee and lost their "profit sharing").  This in turn would and did stimulate the economy.  His focus was first on efficiency and profit and he saw that by keeping the best employees the rest would fall into place.
  
  I must caution though, taking a $6 an hour employee and giving them $12 starting tomorrow does not automatically equate to increased productivity and sales.  In fact, it may lead to a reduction in force and putting extra work on current employees making them feel worse off than before.
  
  "...Minimum wage is the company saying to the employee, "If I could pay you less, I would!" 
  You left out an important part of this.  It should say, "If I could pay you less, I would, or in the alternative, if I could work you more I would."  Sure, I will pay you more, but you better work faster and produce twice the results.
  
  Think and Grow Rich is a great book and so is the underlying data, although it was compiled in the early 1900's.  The message is still strong "Whatever your mind can conceive and believe it can achieve."  It would be interesting to see an up to date study that was as indepth.  As a side bar, do you know how much Carnegie paid Hill to compile this research and come to a conclusion on the findings?  Nothing...nada...zero...zip.  Carnegie gave him letter's of recommendation in lieu of pay.  Carnegie and other's of the day did utilize Hill's research to further their own interests though and became weathier doing it.
  
  The wealthy, rich AND middle class stimulate the economy through starting new businesses and creating jobs and spending money in our consumer driven society.
  
  If a person does not want to be a Taxi Driver or Average Wage Earner, then they need to buy and read Think and Grow Rich.  Once they internalize that they are ultimately responsible of their own situation and start to conceive and believe what they themselves can achieve, they will be on their way to implimenting their own plan.  It is a sad day coming if they are waiting for any government or outside influence to pull them up by their bootstraps.

• Not sure exactly what you disagree with in my statement since it is essentially a recap of what you posted.
  
  Ford's primary concern with raising wages was employee retention and long-term loyalty since turn-over was his greatest expense.  That is what the excerpt you posted indicates as well. 
  
  The pricing of his automobiles was a different issue and he was trying to differentiate himself from his competitors.  The competititors of the day catered to the wealthier class and Ford needed a business model that catered to the masses, ie. his employees.  He capitalized on the fact that with the wage increases, spurred by attrition and turn-over costs, his employees could actually afford an automobile...a Ford automobile.  Nothing like making your employees shop at the company store.
  
  The comments regarding people spending more than they make are not unique to the lower and middle class sector.  Someone can be making well over $100,000 a year and still not be able to make ends meet.  You want to blame someone for our current state of negative savings rate...blame mainstream media and credit card companies.
  
  Lottery losing's are also not tied to socio-economic status the last time I checked.  A majority of lottery winners, rich and poor, spend all their winnings due to not having a plan in place to ensure they don't spend all their winnings.  It is just poor financial planning and poor planning can be done by Republicans, Democrats, the Rich and the Poor.  A large percentage lose their winning before 2 years is even up.

Going to have to disagree in part on the last comment:

Ford's labor philosophy

Henry Ford was a pioneer of "welfare capitalism" designed to improve the lot of his workers and especially to reduce the heavy turnover that had many departments hiring 300 men a year to fill 100 slots. Efficiency meant hiring and keeping the best workers. On January 5, 1914, Ford announced his five-dollar a day program. The revolutionary program called for a reduction in length of the workday from 9 to 8 hours, a 5 day work week, and a raise in minimum daily pay from $2.34 to $5 for qualifying workers.^[8]

Ford had been criticized by Wall Street for starting the 40 hour work week and a minimum wage. He proved, however, that paying people more would enable Ford workers to afford the cars they were producing, and therefore be good for the economy. Ford labeled the increased compensation as profit-sharing rather than wages. The wage was offered to men over age 22, who had worked at the company for 6 months or more, and, importantly, conducted their lives in a manner of which Ford's "Sociological Department" approved. They frowned on heavy drinking and gambling. The Sociological Department used 150 investigators and support staff to maintain employee standards; a large percentage of workers were able to qualify for the profit-sharing.

Ford was adamantly against labor unions in his plants. To forestall union activity, he promoted Harry Bennett, a former Navy boxer, to be the head of the Service Department. Bennett employed various intimidation tactics to squash union organizing. The most famous incident, in 1937, was a bloody brawl between company security men and organizers that became known as The Battle of the Overpass.

Ford was the last Detroit automaker to recognize the United Auto Workers union (UAW). A sit-down strike by the UAW union in April 1941 closed the River Rouge Plant. Under pressure from Edsel and his wife, Clara, Henry Ford finally agreed to collective bargaining at Ford plants, and the first contract with the UAW was signed in June 1941.

Thus the beginning of "Trickle Up Economics"...Still true today...No matter how much you pay the middle and lower classes, the mindset is to spend it all...That will never change...Why do you think so many middle class lotto winners are broke years later...It's the mindset!  But, even Ford was anti-union, that bastard!

• "Henry Ford Econ 101- Pay you're employees enough that they can buy your products" 
  
  Huh????  Henry Ford paid his employees twice the going rate to keep them from leaving and going to his competitors.  Attrition and turn-over was his greatest expense at the time.  The only way to reduce those costs was to pay his existing employees more...so he could realize a better profit.  It was just kind of convenient that everything worked out for the employees and it became a win win.  His decision on pay was never employee based.
  
  The decision to make the cars affordable for his employees was two fold and went to price point rather than wage amount.  1) he would have a customer base in his employees if they could actually afford the product and 2) by catering to the masses instead of the classes, he would sell more automobiles.  My favorite saying in this line of thinking is "cater to the masses instead of the classes and you will be swimming with the classes instead of the masses."  This is classic assembly line/walmart thinking.
  
  Based upon your descriptions of Republicans and Democrats...I am definitely Republican...but I was already pretty confident in my choice.

Meanwhile, the Republicans hypocrite swingers are outpolling the [sarcasm] tolerant, open-minded [/sarcasm] liberal Democrats 98 to 40 in this poll!   

Apparently, besides not being able to win National elections, the lib Dems can not even win a poll in a liberal lifestyle on a liberal website!!

Perhaps, the Republican swingers borrowed the Diebold Electronic Vote Stealing Machine from the GOP to manipulate this poll on SDC!

Dear Deviant2,

     Iraq was not a 'training ground for terrorist' until AFTER we invaded Iraq. Sadam's weapons were mostly destroyed during the first gulf war and Bush chose not to take into consideration what most of the intelligence was telling them....HE HAD NO WMD.

Lets review what most cadets learn their first two days at west point. When invading a country you must us extraordinary number of troops because there will always be a level/percentage of insurgents who will fight to stop occupation.

With that being said lets do the math....there are 80 million civilians in Iraq. If only 2 % become insurgents that equal 1.6 million! How many troops do we have in Iraq????135,000!!!! If we dont come up with an exit plan now...we are going to lose many more innocent soldiers who were hood winked into this mess....(there is no 'stay the course' we CANT WIN) we need an administration that can come up with a plan to release power to the people of Iraq ....move out slowly (a comprehensive exit plan) and whimper our asses home. 

What boogles the mind with this idiot administration is there 'plan' on invasion...

****They fired any general who told them we did not have enough troops.

**** Right after the invasion we FIRED THEIR ARMY (IRAQ'S) AND TOLD THEM TO TAKE THEIR WEAPONS WITH THEM! (of course i am being sarcastic with the last part...) but that is in essences of what happenned.  

**** Tried to go in on the 'cheap'. i.e. equipment...man power...etc...

the list is too long to type..

General Patton hired the NATZI ARMY DURING THE FALL OF BERLIN/GERMANY  BECAUSE HE KNEW WE NEEDED THEM. By putting them on the payroll there was a lesser chance of being insurgents and they could help support the Americans. They knew the area.....had knowledge of secret bunkers..etc....

We are in a war that we cannot win...we de-stabilized the middle east and we have a president that said he talks to God! (remember..God told him to invade Iraq....but its funny...God never seems to tell him to help the poor...sick...weak....ect...) Now we have not finished the job in Afganistan....and civil war has basically broken out in Iraq.

Speaking of George's conversations with God...

My father is a presbyterian minister. The joke in our home was if someone comes to the house to witness to you or claim to be so close to God....(and i dont mean being spiritual i mean in a way to make you trust them...) then you better hide the silverware!

George has masionic tendencies (Christ like) and a superior position with God. (thats what he thinks in that little fucked up brain of his...) All i can say is i would hate to be in his shoes when he dies...can you just imagine what may happen?! (if we are judged as the bible thumpers believe??) I would be a bit worried...

i am with you FUNSUN! right on! 

we are liberal republicans which means "we dont give a crap what you do as long as you dont spend our money foolishly".

conseravtive republicans are lead by the very few religous leaders.

a true republican is for a smaller government.

"In the present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."--Ronald Reagan

FEEL SECURE  that your profile info is secure on this site don't today discovered just how seriously sdc doesn't take discretion and our info

see our blog and sdc councillor reply our profile is on open view to anybody on the net

•  said: "This is a repost - skip if you must - but I'd actually like a response from some of those who identify themselves as conservatives."
  
  I have not ignored this Kamasutra...nice handle by the way...I have been formulating a response.  I fear I am way too close to all of this to really comment.  I have very tight ties as a conservative and know way too much inside information and many of the players personally.
  
  The truth is, you will never know all of the details or really have all the information you would like or that is available.  There are always going to be things withheld as priviledged and/or confidential.  Unfortunately, State Secrets need to remain State Secrets to preserve the integrity of the continued efforts underway to combat the War on Terror.  Pretty much everyone was on board after 9/11, but nobody knew how far reaching the support would extend.  Most agreed that at some point it would become a quagmire and support would drop, but time was of the essence.  Clinton actually wanted to make something happen, but did not have the needed support.  This is nothing new.  Many of the underlying problems began to manifest themselves during the Carter administration.  It just finally came to a head and popped during W's term.
  
  Clinton, Bush, Sr. and Baker are all on the same page.  W is also now on the same page, although he was resistent.  Rumsfeld, well, he will come along.  There is a plan in the works for the quickest and most stable pull out.  With Baker involved, it will hopefully happen with the best possible turnout.
  
  My continued support of the party and the administration is based upon my close ties.  Granted, my position is somewhat biased due to my access to information, but I continue to believe even stronger as more of the puzzle is revealed to me.
  
  I wish I could give you more specifics or share more information.  The people in my party and especially those in charge, really do care.  We all wish there were easy answers and quick fixes for everything.  Unfortunately, the world is a very complicated place and that complication seems to be increasing with the rate of technological advances.  No one person or administration is causing this complication.  It is more along the lines of growing pains for everyone, Worldwide.
  
  The declassified intelligence report will be interesting to some and infuriate others.  Keep in mind, this is still not all the information.  Also, keep in mind, that everyone will have a spin on it.  Read the report yourself and form your own conclusions, but realize those conclusions are still based on incomplete information.
  
  For what it is worth, I like Clinton.  Always have.  He is one of the most personable and intelligent people you will ever meet.  Down to earth and just really cares.  His hands were tied by many in his own party when it came to progressive ideals.  I'm glad to see him continually involved these days.

Dear FUNSUN,

When Bush stood up on Sept 12^th and said "..if you aid, or harbor terrorist, we will make no distinction."  The world cheered and was behind us 100% until it was time to pull the trigger.  Left and Right agree that Afghanistan was a good thing.  Iraq. well it took a majority vote in Washington to initiate that.  I was there in the fist Gulf War. Saddam had buried his best fighter planes in the middle of the desert, along with HUGE caches of weapons and ammunition.  I know because I saw them.  I fought the Republican Guard. and by their own admission, they had and routinely used chemical and biological weapons ON THEIR OWN PEOPLE.  If for no other reasons, Saddam needed to be removed from power because of the terrorist training camps, his crimes against humanity and his use of chemical weapons.  I agree that it has turned into an ugly ugly mess.  No one wants our boys home more than I do.  BUT, to leave now would be a bigger mistake than going in, in the first place.

Can we talk about sex now?

Republicans are the big tent.  As long as you exclude blacks, jews, gays, intellectuals or the poor. 

How many Italians ever made it to Walker's point?  Only the ones carrying the mail or a bucket of paint.  Why do you people support this cabal.  They could care less about you.

Even war mongers like Brent Scowcroft and Jim Baker think that the current administration has fucked up the middle east.  Baker is trying to put together a plan to get us out of there.  Scowcroft thinks that Cheney has gone mad.

Andy Card.  Gimmie a break.  I used to drink with him when all his responsibilities were to make sure that our bags got on the plane.

Clinton went into eastern Europe because he was attempting to stop the ethnic cleansing.  He attacked a country for just cause.  The world applauded.

Don't change or forget the fact that the current administration refused to pursue Bin Laden, gave money to the Taliban, fixed the intelligence, attacked a soverign nation based on a lie, created a generation of terrorists and alienated the world against us.  Oh and I forgot, what about the dead people.  They died for no just cause.

Lets keep our eye on the ball.  The ball is we are fighting an unjust war and everyone continues to die on a daily basis; and, until we say enough, nothing will change.

This is a repost - skip if you must - but I'd actually like a response from some of those who identify themselves as conservatives. 

Someone downthread mentioned that this unencumbered Republican party in control of all branches of government - house, senate, white house, supreme court, most state legislatures, and most governorships - have managed to spend more than the Democratic party has in the history of the United States.  They have also made the government much larger and more intrusive than ever before, with the intention to this day of making it even more so (gay marriage ban, NSA's illegal wiretapping and data collection, etc).  The National Intelligence Estimate just came out and basically said that the War on Terror (what a concept!) is now much harder to fight because of our ill advised adventure in Iraq (no WMD's were ever found - the intelligence was cherry picked to make a case for war and info to the contrary was blatantly ignored).  Islamic jihadists are actually using our blunder in Iraq and subsequent disregard for International law (against torture) as a recruiting tool for more terrorists.  Our government's policies have made us much less safe - exactly the opposite of what they are supposed to do.  How can anyone still support this government and these policies?  What justification can there possibly be?  How are Republicans still considered better for national security if they have demonstrably shown that their policies have made the world more dangerous?  Where is the disconnect? 

Every time the conservatives are in power, jobs go down, pay goes down, homelessness rises, deficits go way up.  When was the last time you heard about "Balancing the budget" out of the mouth of any Republican - isn't it common sense that we keep our house in check, and act responsibly with our children's money?  Why are we buying all of this stuff on credit and leaving our kids to foot the bill - isn't this the height of selfishness? - Especially since the social security system is also under attack.  Money and Security - supposedly the Republican's strong points - if they're that bad at these, then how are they at everything else?

I'm not trying to attack anyone or put anyone on the defensive - I just want people to consider things rationally.  I think there's a study out there that shows that if people were given just the platform and policy positions of both parties to choose from without their knowing the names of the political parties in question - the Democrats would win in a landslide almost every time and on almost every issue.  Is it the name?  Is it the spin?  Is it the corporate media consolidation?  Is it the dumbing down of America with "reality" TV?  What in the heck is going on when people are convinced to actually vote against their own interests?

Forgive the musing however after reading all the comments and tit for tat, it reminds me of a verse... "Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one" (first heard as a 2nd LT of U.S Marines in Viet Nam).  I, as a Republican, am proud  of all the thoughtful cohort responses to some inane comments from the so-called "other side".  I served with both parties throughout the years, came back from a conflict and found we had lost a war, only because we as a country had lost heart, not gained one. Cowardice is seen clearly in both parties.  The strong and clear thinkers are evident...Lieberman, Rice, Rumsfeld, Card, Anouye.  We do best when as countrymen, look to our strengths not our weaknesses.  Believe me the politics should be left out of the bedroom or all the other places we enjoy ourselves.  Religion is a separate subject and I respect all who have committed thoughts on the matter.  Loving is certainly in both topics.

I presently hold a BS in Biology with a very enjoyable Minor in Human Sexuality.  Also, a BS in Business and an MBA.  Ignorance can be improved however stupidity is a bit harder to uplift without energy being consistently applied.   I did enjoy the repartee.

Best Regards,

MICMICHAEL

• Oh, groovy, smashing! Yea capitalism!

• But, the good news is we just finished paying off the Spanish American War!

Well it seems that it is either left or right, black or white, and so on. Heaven forbid someone be in the middle! But that said, I have just a few comments for the right wing zealots.

Mentioning the weapons used by Saddam Hussein against the Iraqi Kurds and the Iranians does not fortify your point. Keep in mind he got those weapons from the Republican administrations of Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush.

If you're still hanging on to the ideology that a full scale attack on Iraq was a positive thing for our country in the long run, you have your head in the sand. Even Republicans are distancing themselves from the President on this issue now. The bottomline is that regardless of WMD's and all the bloodshed on both sides, it was a bad move with a majorly flawed strategy. Believe me. I am not a bleeding heart lib. If war was going to put our country's interests ahead I would be behind it as an American. But it cost us way more than it is worth. And we'll be digging out of this hole that this administration put us in for a long long time.

HOTSFCOUPLE,

I have never ever gone to the Limbaugh website even once in my life.  That you would resort to that typical Move-On.org bulletpoint crap shows your intellectual fatuousness.  Rush is intellectual pablum a step above your myopic twist on reality. 

While it is true that more Democrats voted against the Veto override than Republicans to state that it was because of non-Political reasons is to show your total lack of understanding of how Congress works.  Almost all votes are political in nature and when both sides get toether to override a veto then that should clearly point out that Congress as a whole thought that Clinton's veto was either political or wrong and thus chose to overturn it. 

To say that it was tied to a bill passed over a year later, a veritable lifetime in Politics is a joke. You make me laugh.  I hate to be patronizing but I think you are out of your league here so begone.  I deign not to waste any more time educating you.  

You may have the last word as this is my last word and I will not even come back to this blog.  I have never looked at these prior to yesterday and I promise not to waste my time with this crap again.  Who really cares what you or I think

FLTIGERS,

Apparently you can't read well.  Clinton vetoed the bill and the overide went through with democratic support on the understanding HIPPA would be allowed through.  The bottome line is Clinton vetoed it because it was bad and I'm sure the vast majority of those who voted against overriding the veto were democrats.  Stop cutting and pasting factoids from Limbaughs website and think for yourself.  All those things about Enron donating to democrats simply prove they were hedging their bets.

Finally to HOTSFLCOUPLE you really are funny and inaccurate.  While you are correct in that Clinton did veto this bill he was overridden by both Parties in Congress.  You can try laying this bill on the Republicans but it was approved by a 2/3 majority of the two parties combined.

The PSLRA was enacted into law by the U.S. Congress over a veto by President Bill Clinton. The U.S. House of Representatives approved the bill by a 319-100 margin, and the U.S. Senate approved it 68-30. Every Republican in the House voted in favor of the legislation, and only four Republicans in the Senate voted against it: William Cohen, John McCain, Richard Shelby, and Arlen Specter. Prominent liberals in the Democratic Party like senators Tom Harkin, Ted Kennedy, Clairborne Pell, and Carol Moseley Braun voted in favor of the legislation while many conservative-to-moderate Democrats such as senators John Breaux, Robert Byrd, Fritz Hollings, and Sam Nunn and represenatives such as John Murtha and Gene Taylor voted against it. Both the current Senate minority leader, Harry Reid, and the current House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, voted for the bill.

I don't care if Ken Lay gave money to Democracts.  I do care about the fact that our current President has gotten a pass from the American people on the fact that he attacked a soverign nation based on a lie, killed thousands of people, created an endless pool of terrorist recruits, and turned the entire world against us.

I don't care about anything else.  Refute that.  Refute the senseless death of our soldiers and the countless innocents.  Refute the torture.  Refute the lies.  Spin that.

43. Several senior Enron officials spent election night at Vice President Gore's headquarters in Nashville. Source: The Washington Post

44. Enron backed Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) in his successful 1998 campaign to oust Republican Sen. Alfonse D'Amato. Schumer's views on electricity deregulation dovetailed closely with Enron's. Source: The Washington Post

45. Two years later Schumer, who has advocated deregulation as a way of reducing New York State's high power costs, co-authored a bill to restructure electricity markets along lines favored by Enron. Source: The Washington Post

46. Enron also has supported Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), whose state is traversed by a major east-west Enron gas pipeline. Source: The Washington Post

47. Former employees say Lay's friendships with other Democrats were based as much on rapport as pragmatism. This group includes former senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE), whose brief 1992 presidential bid had Lay's backing, and Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), with whom Lay served on the Eli Lilly Co. board of directors in the 1990s. Source: The Washington Post

48. In 1996, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, stocked with Clinton appointees, helped Enron with a series of orders that weakened the monopoly of nuclear and coal-burning utilities. In July of that year, Enron gave $100,000 to the Democratic Party. Source: The Washington Post

49. In 1992, a Democratic-controlled Congress approved a major energy bill that set the stage for a new wholesale electricity marketplace. Trading companies such as Enron could use the transmission lines of regulated utility companies to sell blocs of electricity to private customers. Source: The Washington Post

50. Some officials in Enron's Houston and Washington offices backed Gore and Lieberman in the 2000 election. Source: The Washington Post. ***

35. To help push through energy initiatives in Africa, Clinton's Energy Secretary (and Monica Lewinsky's job counselor), Bill Richardson, visited Nigeria in August 1999. "As a result of Secretary Richardson's visit to Nigeria in August, we have embarked on a bilateral cooperation program. The Department is developing an action plan with the Government of Nigeria, which will be coordinated with USAID. Cooperation could include: restructuring and privatization; rural electrification; deployment of clean energy and renewable energy technologies; promotion of energy efficiency; and development of an independent regulatory authority. This initiative, coordinated by Richardson, led to $882 million dollars in power contracts for Enron from the government of Nigeria: Enron, an oil and gas firm in Houston, has signed a power purchase agreement to supply emergency electricity to state-owned power utility Nigerian Electric Power Authority (NEPA) through 30MW power barges located on the coast of Lagos State. Enron and its Nigerian joint venture partner signed the $82 million deal with NEPA and the power ministry in the capital Abuja. Enron and the Lagos state government entered a joint venture earlier in 1999 to build an $800 million gas-powered plant with capacity for 540 Megawatt (MW) to augment supply to the city. Unfortunately for Enron, the Nigerian Government cancelled these contracts in April 2000. As a further reward for their generosity to the Democratic Party, Clinton Administration Special Envoy Thomas Pickering hustled off to Nigeria (on the taxpayer's dime) to plead Enron's case. Source: Several Sources/FreeRepublic.com

36. Texas Democrats received more Enron contributions than Texas Republicans. Source: CBS Affiliate KTVT in Texas

37. Hillary Rodham Clinton ordered the destruction of documents, which Enron is now accused of doing, of four files in 1988 from her work on the failed savings and loan that's now at the heart of the Whitewater affair. Source: NewsMax.com.

38. -During the 1991-92-election cycle, Enron gave $28,525 to the Democratic party while former Clinton Secretary of Commerce Ronald Brown served as the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Enron gave $42,000 to the Democratic party in the 1993-94 cycle. Source: PublicIntegrity.org

39. According to internal Enron documents and the recollections of former employees, Chairman Kenneth L. Lay had the ear of top Democrats in the 1980s and '90s. He and his colleagues used that access to promote the company's interests with the Clinton administration and key congressional Democrats. Source: The The Washington Post

40. According to another Enron memo, Lay met with former Clinton Energy Secretary Federico Pea to urge White House action on electricity legislation favored by Enron. Pea "suggested that President Clinton might be motivated [to act] by some key contacts from important constituents," Source: The The Washington Post

41. Ken Lay was one of 25 business executives on Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development. Source: The The Washington Post

42. Enron's political action committee gave $10,000 in 2000 to the New Democrat Network, which was co-founded by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT). Lieberman, the Democratic vice presidential nominee that year, now chairs the Senate Government Affairs Committee, which is leading an inquiry into Enron's collapse. Source: The The Washington Post

21. David Boies, Al Gore's lead lawyer in the Florida recount, is representing former Enron CFO Andrew Fastow. Source: New York Post

22. Former Democratic Texas Gov. Ann Richards appointed Ken Lay, the Enron exec, to the Governor's Business Council and received contributions from Enron. Source: The The Washington Post

23. Enron introduced the Clinton team to Lippo Industries and thence to China's People's Liberation Army (a wonderful source of political cash), to John Huang, another good provider. Source: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

24. Tony Lake, then Clinton's national security adviser, persuaded the impoverished, war-torn country of Mozambique to sign a $770 million electric power contract with Enron. Source: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

25. Al Gore and Bill Clinton introduced Enron to market managers in Russia, China, Indonesia and India. In India, Enron quickly became involved in one of that country's most massive corruption investigations, contracts were canceled and Enron was out. Source: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

26. Just days before Enron Corp. landed in bankruptcy court, the one-time political powerhouse may still have been funneling campaign dollars to Democratic lawmakers, federal election records indicate. Source: Houston Chronicle

27. Enron contributed some $682,000 to the DNC during the 2000 election. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

28. Ken Lay hired Betsy Moler, Clinton's deputy energy secretary, as a consultant. She was accused of stopping Energy Department counterintelligence chief Notra Trulock from briefing Congress early on about Chinese espionage and security lapses at Energy's nuclear weapons labs Source: Houston Chronicle

29. Government records show that, during the Clinton years, Lay and other Enron executives got seats on at least four Energy Department trade missions and at least seven Commerce Department trade trips. Source: WorldNet Daily

30. The congressman who received the most money from Enron in the past 12 years is Ken Bentsen (D-Texas) who received $42,750. The second largest receiver was Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) who received $38,000 Source: Center for Responsive Politics

31. The ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, John D. Dingell (D-Mich), is the 10th largest receiver of Enron contributions totaling $9,000. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

32. 71 House Democrats received $257,140 Enron Contributions. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

33. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) was the 20th member of the Senate to have received the most money from Enron. He received a total of $6,000. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

34. 29 Senate Democrats, not including those that are retired, were unseated, or died, received a total of $110,513 in the last 12 years from Enron. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

6. In August 1993, McLarty, Clinton's former chief of staff, arranged an invitation for Lay, Enron's CEO, to play golf with Clinton in Vail, Colorado. This date irritated Oscar Wyatt, chief executive of Coastal, another natural gas company that had helped the Clinton election campaign raise funds. These connections to the Democratic administration helped Enron considerably. Source: Time Magazine

7. Clinton officials publicly helped Enron win the contract in India as well as in Indonesia. Enron had received U.S. government funds to build power plants in China, the Philippines and Turkey. Enron also won contracts in Pakistan and Russia while accompanying senior U.S. government officials on state trips. In June 1996, four days before India granted final approval to Enron's project, Lay's company gave $100,000 to the DNC. Source: Time Magazine

8. Enron got permission to build a pipeline from Mozambique to South Africa after National Security Adviser Anthony Lake threatened to withhold aid to Mozambique if it didn't approve the project. Source: Mozambique News Agency

9. The bulk of Enron's alleged chicanery had to have happened during the Clinton administration. Source: Fortune Magazine

10. Enron Corporation donated $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee. Six days later, Enron executives were on a trade mission with Commerce Secretary Mickey Kantor to Bosnia and Croatia. With Kantor's support, Enron signed a $100 million contract to build a 150-megawatt power plant Source: The Weekly Standard

11. Kenneth Lay hired the firm of Clinton's former chief of staff Mack McLarty. Source: Fortune Magazine

12. Democratic Senators Chuck Schumer of New York, John Breaux of Louisiana, and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico--chairman of the Senate Energy Committee were among the top beneficiaries of Enron's political donations. Source: Fortune Magazine

13. Kenneth Lay retained Linda Robertson, a Democrat who worked for the Clinton Treasury Department, as his top D.C. lobbyist. Source: Fortune Magazine

14. Dynergy, an energy company which wanted to buy Enron and later sued them, donated $1,000 of dollars to Henry Waxman (D-CA) in the 2001-2002 cycle, one of the men leading the Enron investigation. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

15. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee received three checks from the Houston-based energy and trading giant totaling $100,000. Karen Denne, an Enron spokeswoman, said the company had a record of two checks written to the committee -- dated Sept. 24 and Nov. 2 Source: New York Post

16. Joe Lieberman's and Tom Daschle's largest Contributor in the 2000 election cycle was Enron's Largest Creditor, Citigroup. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

17. Enron was apparently a big backer of some parts of the Kyoto Treaty. Source: Enron.com

18. Ken Lay slept in the Clinton White House and served as an adviser to the Clinton White House on energy issues. Source: Drudge Report

19. Enron's lead Washington lawyer is Robert Bennett, who represented Clinton in the Paula Jones case. Source: NewsMax.com

20. Neil Eggleston, a former White House associate counsel under Clinton, represents Enron's outside directors. Source: New York Post

"Especially the part where we attacked a soverign nation based on a lie, killed thousands of people, created a generation of terrorists and alienated a world against us."

Things really suck, eh?

If we've done all these things in the last few years, why did Osama bin laden and his organization attrack us in 1993, 1998, october of 2000 and september of 2001?

Why haven't we been attacked since?

I could continue on by bringing up the SLUSA Act of 1998 but I think what I provided here is sufficient to blow holes in yourt party line smokescreen.

As to Santorum I abhor his social policies outlook and personally would be hard pressed to vote for him unless the alternative would be to vote for the likes of Casey who is almost as light as Lamont in Connecticut.  But the fact is that statement proves my point, the Republican Party is a "Big Tent" Party that accepts different viewpoints.  From the same state as Santorum we have Arlen Specter who is a moderate Republican. 

Santorum is the 3rd highest ranked Republican in his gang.  His social policies are bolstered by his party, and that rotten apple is spoiling an already spoiled bunch.  If you think Specter is a counter-balance to Santorum, then your scale is truly busted.  And while you may assert that Republicans welcome opposing points of view (which is still bullshit, but for this argument I'll let it stand), the FACT is that this Republican administration slaughters anyone who actually votes against them.

Finally anyone who says they would take Sharpton over anybody is not someone to take seriously.

Sharpton is a loony, no doubt.  But keep in mind the context of whom I was comparing him to.

The bottom line is this:  I don't inherently hate all Republican ideals, I agree with many of them (small gov't, less taxes, little to no state-sponsored welfare, get a fucking job, etc.), but my bigger problem is our sociopathic economic policies and social restrictions, which are almost exclusively Republican dominated themes.  And even then, the bigger cause of my ire is that since the Republican party controls all three branches of government right now, there is no check and balance system in place (remember those?).  Everybody's rubberstamping everybody else, and it's taking us in a murderous and isolationist direction, all the while making us a LOT less safe and costing a lot more.  I don't know that the Democrats would've been much better had they been given access to such power, but absolute power corrupts absolutely, and that maxim has run its course in these times.  And while there may be some hypocritical republican swingers, the PARTY LINE among public republican voices is that swinging should be banned and its participants should be put on the level with violent criminals.  You'll forgive me if I take that personally.

Democrats aren't really Americans.  More like, South Canadians.  :) 

Basic question about the national debt... who do we owe that money to?

Also I find "Islamic jihadists are actually using our blunder in Iraq and subsequente disregard for International law (against torture) as a recruiting tool for more terrorists." interesting.  I wonder, what was Bil Laden's recruiting tool?

------------------------------

For me, Republican philosophy has made the most sense and is the one I most closely mirror...with many exceptions.  Do I agree with everything?  No.  Although, I will always agree that less government is better.  The less redtape and more decision making power we have as individuals, the better.  Big government just seems to trip all over itself and gets in the way of real progress.
------------------------------

Someone downthread mentioned that this unencumbered Republican party in control of all branches of government - house, senate, white house, supreme court, most state legislatures, and most governorships - have managed to spend more than the Democratic party has in the history of the United States.  They have also made the government much larger and intrusive than ever before, with the intention to this day of making it even more so (gay marriage ban, NSA's illegal wiretapping and data collection, etc).  The National Intelligence Estimate just came out and basically said that the War on Terror (what a concept!) is now much harder to fight because of our ill advised adventure in Iraq (no WMD's were ever found - the intelligence was cherry picked to make a case for war and info to the contrary was blatantly ignored).  Islamic jihadists are actually using our blunder in Iraq and subsequente disregard for International law (against torture) as a recruiting tool for more terrorists.  Our government's policies have made us much less safe - exactly the opposite of what they are supposed to do.  How can anyone still support this government and these policies?  What justification can there possibly be?  How are Republicans still considered better for national security if they have demonstrably shown that their policies have made the world more dangerous?  Where is the disconnect? 

Every time the conservatives are in power, jobs go down, pay goes down, homelessness rises, deficits go way up.  When was the last time you heard about "Balancing the budget" out of the mouth of any Republican - isn't it common sense that we keep our house in check, and act responsibly with our children's money?  Why are we buying all of this stuff on credit and leaving our kids to foot the bill - isn't this the height of selfishness? - Especially since the social security system is also under attack.  Money and Security - supposedly the Republican's strong points - if they're that bad at these, then how are they at everything else?

I'm not trying to attack anyone or put anyone on the defensive - I just want people to consider things rationally.  I think there's a study out there that shows that if people were given just the platform and policy positions of both parties to choose from without their knowing the names of the political parties in question - the Democrats would win in a landslide almost every time and on almost every issue.  Is it the name?  Is it the spin?  Is it the corporate media consolidation?  Is it the dumbing down of America with "reality" TV?  What in the heck is going on when people are convinced to vote against their own interests?

FLTIGERS,

If you want to comment on the Enron, Tyco crap and blame it on Clinton, you need to look up a law called the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act written by and passed by the republican congress and allowed into law by Clinton under threat of veto override and and threatened refusal to pass HIPPA.  After you read about that law and how it was passed and what it allowed to happen, then come back and try to make an educated comment about corruption and who wrote the book on it.

Best line of this thread so far!!!

"My age has nothing to do with my knowledge or wisdom."

He,he!

First off, if you're in the lifestyle to some extent you're an independent thinker, going against the norm or mainstream America.  Instead of thinking Republican, Democrat or even an Independent, before you label yourself. educate yourself.  Don't vote because of part affiliation, don't be a Democrat Nazi or Republican Nazi.  Educate yourself on the issues that are important to YOU and then find out what individual candidate represents what you feel as important.  Fuck labels, there is no one political party that is going to represent half of your opinions much less one politician.  But PLEASE before you take on an opinion make sure that it is your own and back it up with facts not because of what Rush, Bill O'Rielly or Bill Clinton said so.  I am a Republican with liberal tendencies, wishy-washy HELL NO!! I am exactly what politicians hate an educated voter BUT I believe in smaller government and less taxes (republican) and I also believe what you do in your house and your backyard is no one else's fuckin business (unless it is lowering my property value).  My wife is the complete opposite she is a liberal Democrat with conservative tendencies.so even after 14 years we don't discuss politics too often.

So if you're going to have an opinion make sure it's your own.  Don't be part of the American Sheeple.  

In response to comments much earlier, I joined the Marines right out of High School, infantry baby!  I fought in the first Gulf War, spent seven months in Somalia and ran counter narcotic missions in Panama and Columbia.  So I too and well traveled and educated, I have been around the world three times. I EARNED a PhD from the school of hard knocks.  My classes were: How to survive an artillery attack, Shoot or don't shoot 12 year old kids with machine guns and What will drug producers do to protect their crops.  After that, I was GIVEN a degree in mechanical engineering because I showed up to class for four years (and a couple of summers). SO I may not speak five languages, but business is done in English any way. I can order a beer in seven different languages though.

FL tigers, you're stoned.  If your party stuck to defense and economics, I might jump on board, but they're too busy firing gay arabic translators, banning gay marriages, banning sex ed, banning sex toys, banning rap music, and banning drugs that do more harm in the prohibition then they ever did while legal.

Your party is the party of Falwell, Robertson, and Enron.  Your party is the party of FOX "news."  The party of Rick Santorum, who is on record as stating that the Victoria's Secret catalog should be banned. 

Wow - they got rid of slavery - way to be out in front on that one.

Your party, if they knew what you were doing - even in the privacy of your own home - would excommunicate you.  Party of diversity?  Fucking PLEASE.  Each party is defined by its extremists, which is usually what drives people to the other side.  So to that, I'll take Al Sharpton over Bill O'Reilley any day of the week.

If you're a Libertarian, which you sort of claim, then I'm with you (I'm a Libertarian as well), but the Republican party is simply a party of evil and greed.  Period.

I've definately never cared for the religious aspect of the republican party.  Thought that Schiavo thing here in FLA was just awful.  However, I don't see the dems doing enough in the opposite direction to warrant my support.  I do like republicans when it comes to most other things.

For AANDC just so you'll have the correct info on what the government is doing about consentual adult sex.....please go to this website and keep up with some of the legal issues on adult movies, novelties, etc. the legal archives are informative also

http://www.avn.com/

Also, having grown up in the 'church' it is very hypocritical to be a swinger and be a Christian which most every Republican claims to be....not all, but most. In fact I haven't heard of any politician who doesn't claim to belong to some religious organization.

RUSH LIMBAUGH IS A DRUG ADDICT!

Can a con-rep be a swinger?

Not without being extremely hypocritical.

Rush Limbaugh...

everyday @ 11:00 am

listen

Intelligence is genetic...You had the same IQ at birth as you do now with little change...You cannot improve intelligence...Education is something you can improve almost without limit...You will never be able to fill you brain to capacity even if you begin to study at birth and continue till death.  When we say some one is smart, it generally refers to their level of education regarding the amount and type of information they can recall into useful formats...Please don't confuse intelligence with education...George Bush is obviously very educated, just not quite as intelligent as one might expect a President to be.  Wisdom is entirely different still...It is the sum of your life experiences...No young person regardless of how mature can claim to be wise by common standards, just not possible to cram 60 years of living into a 20 year old mind...Being wise also does't make you right, you're just wise...

When I was 21 I too had my own house and no silver spoon in my mouth...I didn't even know what silver was as a kid...I grew up extremely poor in the rural midwest and thanks to Uncle Sam did receive some college education...At 21 I to had all the answers to life's most troubling questions and no one could tell me differently...I had my own business and generated a respectable income by most standards...I thought I was on top of the world...That was until I sat in a jail cell facing the death penalty...Needless to say I lost everything including my pride, ego, and dignity...After 5 years of growing up behind bars awaiting trial, a jury of my peers decided to give me a second chance at life...Over the past few years that I've been out, I've been rebuilding my life, this time not forgetting where I came from and where I've been...I've seen the worst society has to offer first hand...Now I just want to help make it better...It's easy to judge when you are on top looking down...Spend some time at the very bottom and see if your perspective on the world changes...Mine did!

Meanwhile ... Republicans outnumber Democrats 55 to 27 in this poll.   LOL!

Maybe the Republicans moved to the Diebold vote stealing machine to SDC!

Yep, quite right .... Republicans can not be swingers!!!!   Now who is being intolerant and close-minded?

See, I'm loved again.

But just so you know, that life you thought I had is pretty similar to the one Bill Clinton lived. 

And once again, I'm a big time republican and not religious in any manner.  Totally agnostic.

Any thanks for calling me a pauper, dude.  Real sweet.  You know, I actually took your blog to heart until I reread that part.  You tell me how many people you know bought their own house on their own at age 22.  And yes, that's being defensive.

Auuwww you are back in my graces......i am sure you are a handsome baby boy. I dont drive a ford...i drive a hummer. (wink)

thank you for coming back to earth with regard to your ego. Its much more fun to banter each other on a blog when i am dealing with your 'thoughts' as opposed to your ego.

have a good weekend,

Ouch.  Well that wasn't very nice. :)  You know, some blog article doesn't show who you are.  I wouldn't begin to make assumptions about babysue, other than she is a hardline liberal, who believes everything is really, really bad.  I drive a Ford Focus, my parents live across the country, though I do ask them for advice from time to time.  My girl and I support each other. 

The Euro is at 1.27 today, but last year was as low at 1.167 last year in november.  That's according to www.oanda.com.  That's quite strong as some thought that Euro was going to $2. 

I don't own any pink shirts and have never had a manicure, even though my lady wants me to get one.  But thanks for the Boca Boy comment.  I think that was kinda nice.  :)  And sure, I'll vote this november. 

Having said that, I'm quite impressed with the articulate nature of most everyone on this blog.  Seems swingers are more well written and passionate than the average person I know. 

Of course I'm not comparing myself to Alexander the Great.  Please.  I was making a point that two world changing men were losers and conquerors at the same age.  My achievements, in fact everyone's achievements pale in comparison to Alexander. 

Think she'll be nicer to me now?

Hehe.  Maybe I'm not as mature as I thought I was.

Sometimes we rightwingers can go too far. 

But I'm in the Navy BDCP program and will be an officer when I graduate.  So you can't fault me there. 

•  said "Of all the questions I've posed during this blog, not one has been answered.  What explanation can anyone offer for my success?  If things are so bad, how was I able to achieve what I did?"
  
  Being a fellow Republican who has very close party ties, I have been following your posts with much interest and respect.  Unfortunately, your last posts seem to be a bit defensive and your credibility has diminished.
  
  From experience, your own assessment of why you have achieved what you have is a little misguided. 
  
  First, neither political party has that much influence over whether or not an individual will succeed.  You are succeeding based upon your own drive and ambition.  I do caution you not to use your own situation as the benchmark for success.  If I had only accomplished what you had at age 23, I would have considered myself a pauper.
  
  Second, this answer is not going to be very popular, although it is accurate.  You are a good looking caucasian male with drive and intelligence.  That alone gives you a leg up.  That may have opened some doors that were probably not open to some minorities in your same situation.  You have capitalized on this and pulled yourself up by your bootstraps and  that is commendable.
  
  Truly, any individual that is going to succeed needs to take personal responsibility for their own success and not rely on any party or any other person for that success.
  
  My adult life started when Reagan was in office.  My own ambition and drive is what allowed me to progess, and that is the same for anyone.  If I came up against obstacles, I had to figure out how to overcome them.  Everyone has obstacles and has to figure out how to get around them.  Thinking a certain party or individual was responsible for any success is a bunch a bunk.
  
  On the IQ issue.  There is no correlation between IQ and success.  In fact, most of the successful people I know probably have average IQ at best.  What they do is surround themselves with people who are smarter than them and capitalize on those ideas.  There is always someone who is going to be smarter than you.  I tend to hire people who are smarter, better looking, more articulate or whatever perceived weekness I have.
  
  Do I agree with everything Bush is doing.  Heck no.  Do I believe in every aspect of my party platform.  No.  Although, I do agree with more of my party platform than I do with others I have studied.

The fact that certain people don't care about politics until later in life has nothing to do with me.  I've been into politics and world history since I was a small child.  I am a linguistics major and in the process of being fluent in 5, count 'em 5 languages.  My knowledge of the world is far superior to almost everyone I've ever met.  I can't give you the IQ of a president though, cause that's kinda up for debate. 

I have as much life experience as anyone from my background does.  My age has nothing to do with my knowledge or wisdom.  I know plenty of people in their 50s who are much more immature and poor decision makers than I am.  Winston Churchill was considered a failure by his family until his early 30s, Alexander the Great conquered half the world at age 23.  Individuals are different. 

And who is babysue to tell me about critical thinking.  Anyone who thinks the world is going to end in quater 3 or 4 2007 and we're all going to be slaves to China is a sensationalist.  I bet she had her house full of supplies when the world was first going to end, Y2K.  

People make assumptions about where I get my information, like "turn off fox news".  yet I have never stated where I get my information.  People assume I get it from a certain place based on my opinions.  This shows their own ignorance.  I get my info from the news headlines on my yahoo mail, and I form my own conclusions.  When politicians speak, I listen to the words they say, I don't hang back and snicker when they flub up a word. 

Of all the questions I've posed during this blog, not one has been answered.  What explanation can anyone offer for my success?  If things are so bad, how was I able to achieve what I did?  I'll tell you why.  Six years of the Bush admin and the economy has done nothing but get better.  Interest rates low, unemployeement low, economic growth: slow and steady (the way it should be), inflation low, the euro down relative to the dollar, the nasdaq and the dow at record highs, two countries half way around the world once swarming with those trying to kill us, now swarming with the deadlist killers on the planet: The Marines. 

That was a really long sentence, wasn't it?  Things are bright for America, bright for the world.  I'm looking forward my life.  Too bad these liberals aren't for theirs. 

Gas under $2 in MO baby!

I'll go back to my original point:  Moderates decide every Election.

According to Gallup Polls:

35 to 40% of Americans consider themselves Conservatives,

15 to 18% of Americans consider themselves Liberals,

45 to 50% of Americans (i.e. the Majority) consider themselves Moderates.

The Angry Left nor the Religious Right decide elections.  All they contribute is noise and acrimony.

 Is there such a thing as a true conservative republican anymore?You have the far right you have the far left.Most are smack right in the middle choosing values , ethics  that apeal to them from either side.

 Can they be swingers ,perhaps. I would tend to think they would have a better time arguing over where can this go  and who is going to pay for it then to have sex.

 WHAT I HAVE LEARNED FROM THIS BLOG

 I have found out That Bush is the anti christ, Bill Clinton was great at  getting blow jobs from the wrong people.One  is a coccaine sniffing beer drinking cowboy , The other is the dreaded cheating male.Gees we can't drag sigle males into this! LMAO

 One is way to stupid but is the most powerful man on the planet.Not to bad for  an idiot.The bright one had a difficult time with the meaning of "of "

 That most people are to stupid to be able to contemplate how they are being used by all parties.Its amazing that we are reproducing.

Only a few understand the real terrors of whats going on.

There are no good news broadcasts that are truthful.Not that they  are fabrications mind you , just those little white lies everyone tells. Such as weight ,age

More to come as the saga of politics taking shape on SDC.

What it all comes down to , pissing against the wind

AANDC I have a comment for you relative to something Babysue said.

You know, you are very young to be throwing around such generalizations and to be so polarized.  I didn't even really start thinking seriously about the core difference between liberals and conservatives until around 25.  That means I have been sorting things out for over 25 years now with an adult brain, on my own, pulling myself up by my bootstraps, raising my kids, yada yada, all those American pie things.

I was raised a conservative until I realized that essentially the simple truths you think you know are mostly misrepresentations peddled by professional manipulators -- a status quo desperate to remain the status quo.  And the ones you cite are classics.  I can tell you haven't examined the questions carefully by what you say, and you might consider 10 or 12 years of anlysing specifics before making such grand conclusions.

I don't care to argue, but if you can muster up assessing political and other ideology as if it were two equally reasonable camps -- before you start judging -- you will come up with some much more useful ideas.  Those who actually deal with ideological issues can articulate these matters much better than the politcos that you seem to be reading. 

I think you will find that Congress and "the machine" are perverted examples of ideology, easily revealed by how an unencumbered GOP government quickly outspends all the Democrats in history, despite their earnest promise they stand for less, and decades of warning us about the boogey man on the other side.  If you've got any sense at all that should be a reality check for everything they say.

• Since the responses to this blog now seem to be more about swerving from left to right than keeping the issue focused in the middle of the road, I thought I would post a link for all to read:
  
  Even John Stossel saw the light and moved from his far left mainstream media position to libertarian status.
  
  http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/6/2/91815.shtml?s=lh
  
  Here are some excerpt's about why he changed positions:

"The "20/20" co-anchor made a dramatic about-face when he realized that "less government is good government." He abandoned his liberal perspective, became a libertarian - and paid a heavy price, he recently told NewsMax in an exclusive interview."
...

"As a young reporter crusading on behalf of consumers, Stossel says he embraced the liberal mantra that "people should be pretty free to live their own lives but that wise government should tax people to make their lives better - and it should especially tax rich people to make poor people's lives better. That would end poverty and do all kinds of wonderful things."

The deeper Stossel dug into these complex issues, however, the more he saw that the regulators and bureaucrats who were supposed to solve problems were often at their very root.

"I had an unusual ringside seat on the regulatory state as a television consumer reporter," he explained. "I'm a little embarrassed about how long it took me to see the folly of most government intervention. It was probably 15 years before I really woke up to the fact that almost everything government attempts to do, it makes worse," Stossel confesses.

"Top-down central planning is never as effective as free individuals making their own choices, because free individuals will adapt to reality every second, but the central planners can adapt only when they get together to vote."

...

"The outspoken journalist says conservatives impress him with their willingness to still invite him to conferences. "But the liberals just say, 'He's icky,' and don't want to have anything to do with me," he says.

"Liberals have been so dominant in the mainstream media that they have grown fat, lazy and intolerant. Conservatives are happy to have someone in the mainstream media who will at least consider their ideas," the newsman adds."

Sounds like the same two people voted 20 times each..

There no voter fraud!! In that party. Must be in Florida.

My fantasy conservative Republican dream is to have sex with Ralph Reed and his wife at an Indian Casino on top of a stack of money that was extorted by Jack Abramhoff.  Be still my heart.

A far smarter person than me stated that she cried when 43 took the oath of office.  She thought that he was going to pollute the land and destroy the economy.  Six years later she said that she woefully underestimated her pessimism.

Meanwhile, Republicans outpoll Democrats 49 to 23 in this poll on what one would imagine is a liberal lifestyle and liberal website.

I guess Republicans are not the prudes that liberal Democrats would like to characterize them as such.

It's also funny how a discredited poster tries to make up for their lost credibility by increasing the volume of their posting most of which are just cut and paste jobs from newspaper articles.  

Ok AANDC you asked for my sources hear ya go..

http://www.moneyweek.com/file/9630/why-rising-interest-rates-wont-save-the-us-dollar.html

go to money week and there is a fantastic article regarding China's huge purchases of the US Treasury bonds and they go further in the detail of how China has collected a trillion US dollars (the value is dropping badly) and they are switching to GOLD.

ok baby boy...you asked for it....now turn off fox and READ. its all there.....

AAAAAAAAGGHHHHHHHHH !!!!   What the heck, you people really respect your government NOT   jeepers willie politicians good honest ones are few and far between, with lobby groups that pay their wages come on get real its the same everywhere. It doesn't take high IQ's to run a country a touch of common sense would be nice though, like put brain into gear before flapping gums. when you become wealthy and powerful it don't do what I do, do what I say. we really dislike the bushes because they seem to be perfect examples, we vote and are activists in the labour party and most the party is totally confused how tony blair is so far up bushes arse. even conservatives wouldn't go that far and these people are as close to the far right as we will let em go. Some people think maggie thatcher was a great prime minister fro a population now 60 million she had over 5 million out of work now its about a third of that even with the influx of eastern europeans. and its reported the republicans when under reagan and continued by the bushes borrowed that economic formula from her.

 its great for big business because thats how you get cheap labour forces but disaster for the society. encouraging people to be dishonest to make sure the kids are fed etc and woah there where did the national health sevice go ouyr education system where parent where having to pay for basic essential like books in the classrooms.

 WISH  it was possible to cherry pick the good and the bad from these policies from both parties the left of centre has policies that are sheer madness in being too lenient and the right of centre would have severe lack of facilities fo the public and begging bowls every where with some of there economic and social policies. and we suppose you have the same problem in the usa.

In the case of both counties, are the problem we should determine the policies of our parties not unions or big business and we can olky do that by joining parties and get hte changes from grass roots and vote with our brains and get off our bums to put it right

Forgive me because its 3 AM and I'm a little drunk from being out at the bar.  I'm a little confused as to why Babysue continues to blog, as she's been discredited as both a liar and misinformed.  She quotes information from completely rediculous and unreliable sources, and in her newest blog, is claiming to be an expert on economics and American politics.   Neither of which she knows anything about.  I'd like to see the link where she receives her current information. 

As for making blog's personal, where's the fun if you only speak in niceties and pleasantries?  A little nastiness is good for the spirit.  It gets everyone interested.  I think that this blog has a many posts as any other, because we're all having fun with it.  :)

I'm an average citizen.  I'm 22.  I bought my own house 9 months ago.  I moved 1500 miles away from my family at age 19.  I work as a bartender at an incorperated  casino.  I have good medical benefits.  I have a beautiful girlfriend.  We are both in college.  I am a liguistics major and she is an Accouting major.  We have a beautiful puppy, money in the bank, and a succesful life ahead of us. 

All of these things were earned by us.  No one helped us.  Not my parents, not her parents, not anybody.  Other than my work ethic, I have no skills which can be put in a resume.  Yet I was able to do well through my own effort.  That's the beauty of America.  That's what liberals can never understand.  The government's job isn't to write legislation to help the average person.  The government is supposed to leave the people alone and let their merits decide their success.  That's precisely what conservatives believe. If the governments of the planet leave well enough alone, the people of the world will produce wonderful things. 

As I am convinced no one can compete with me in a real, factual debate, I'll proceed to responding to all the emails I've receive about what a wonderful job I'm doing on this blog. 

Nighty night.

You did a good job of articulating your question, you qualified any supposed rigid stereotyping of folks, and you encouraged people not to make personal jabs. That's about as much as anyone should ask.

If I read you right, your point was that some of us -- maybe most of us --  might be hurting the rest of us here in the swing world by bending to the political rhetoric -- and causes -- of one side while we are camped in another.

My point was that there are other reasons even more dynamic and useful in noticing what you mentioned.  That the same thing that caused the oversight you mentioned can cause a predictable out of sync -- sometimes after sexual favors have been exchanged and feelings are involved.  This can affect openness, and it can affect your swing world quicker than bad laws.  If  I hadn't experienced it with two separate wives -- and on several occasions -- I would not have mentioned it.

Along with hair color and HWP, selecting swing partners with their world-view in mind is totally legitimate.  Noticing the ways that people deal with disagreement can save you some contortion down the road. And discussing this on a swing site is perfectly legitimate.

My advice to fellow pervs is to notice when people inappropriately use character assasination, condemning your group to shut you up, or the excessive use of labels just to be right.  That does not mean you can't generalize or say something unflattering about someone else or another group.  Just do it specifically and be ready to take some shit and be patient.  There are other people out there who have likely been asking themselves some of the same questions you ask yourself, and talking -- and listening --  your way into wisdom can be a lot better than making the mistakes.

And for Christ's sake, if good ol' American values got the sex thing so wrong, you can damn well bet that there is a whole long list of other things that are not at all what they are advertised to be.

Unfortunately it seems that the IQ article seems to be a hoax, (but a damn funny one you've got to admit!)  I think everyone could agree, Bush may have(or not) conquered Bagdad, but the English language is a battle that is kicking his ass!  "Not the brightest bulb in the knife drawer"...See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD9isKv1K0A&search=impersonator     You will piss yourself laughing!

I don't have anMBA from Yale, hell I didn't even graduate from college (yeah, drop out), and US President seems a bit of a stretch for me so I can't rag on someone doing better than me...Hell, I got a B- in senior English...I still knows ya cain't "put food on yur fam-ly"and OBGYN's had best not be practicing "their love with their patients" unless they are looking for a jail cell!   Anyway, have fun with this!  For the times we're in we need a little humor!

Baby Sue's method of information gathering is typical of liberals.  I heard it on CNN!!  I read it on the internet!  It must be true!!  See!!! Bush is stupid!!!! Yay! 

Liberals bask in the negatives of our culture, and are made happy by every piece of negative information.  And why do libs care so much about the lives of soldiers?  Libs would cut every aspect of military spending if they could, because they oppose what the military stands for.  The war being fought in IRAQ is a good thing, because it makes IRAQ the battlefield instead of Manhattan.  That's just common sense. 

I think the response to the original question, can a conservative Republican be a swinger, the answer is cleary yes, as indicated by the voting poll at the top of this blog.

Well so what have we proved?

That a rhetorical question about the ideological integrity of the conservative Republican swinger will result in an argument over the IQ of presidents, or abortion, or Santa Claus as they duck the meaning of the question?   That if thay caynt unnerstan it it aint rite?

 Can they claim the literal title of swinger?  Sure.

Can they claim equal swinger savvy to moderates and liberals along with rulership of the free world, God, bombs, freedom, goodness, other people's blood, ubercontrol of America, and everyone's tax money?  They will probably try.

Sorry, a lot of folks think what passes for a conservative today is someone who is hopelessly insecure to the point they have to control everything.  Desperate for power, insensitive to others. Bloody, big spenders with other people's money, and dishonest intellectually and factually. 

That makes them less likely to have the virtues that many people would assume necessary to be a good partner for some add-on intimacy.  Their way-of-seeing includes their sex and their politics. Some are easier to tolerate than others, because we are all individuals. To some of us connection is a bigger part of sex than to others.

If you insult, invalidate, tirade, and evade in a rage over the question even being asked, you give more credence to the question, "Can they really be good swingers?"

We have tried, but those same little insults and insensitivities means the wife doesn't get wet for them any more.  Half of them don't get it, and the other half get insulting.  This trait is less obvious in extreme liberals, who actually tend to specialize to fault at being sensitive, but there are exceptions to everything.

Anyone of any stripe can be out of touch.  But society asks this question because there are obvious turn-offs and obvious trends.

Let's see.....

147 Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) Brought country back from a terrible depression
132 Harry Truman (D) Ended world war 2 by droping bomb
122 Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) Commanded Allied forces duing World War 2 and defeted Germany
174 John F. Kennedy (D) Screwed up the Bay of Pigs
126 Lyndon B. Johnson (D) Known for dead people voting for him
155 Richard M. Nixon (R) Resigned his office
121 Gerald Ford (R) Played golf
175 James E. Carter (D) Screwd up everything. Had highest interest rates ever
105 Ronald Reagan (R)Had great economy 
 099 George HW Bush (R) Took back Kuwiat from Iraq
182 William J. Clinton (D) Impeached

091 George W. Bush (R) Brought country back from worst terror attack ever.

SEEMS LIKE DUMB WINS DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN

Congrats on not being a liar.  However, that article proves nothing and is based solely on the opinions of whoever wrote it.  It is no different than an editorial in a newspaper.  I find it very interesting that the high scorers were all democrats and a discredited Republican.  I think I'll get together with the people from talk radio and we'll make our own list.  Then we'll get it published in the wall street journal and I'll go quoting it to bloggers. 

When I was 6 and scored a 129, it was doing a test looking at shapes and colors and stuff.  I scored the same at 18, doing a different test with word problems and math.  So yeah, his lack of scholarly stuff has nothing to do with his IQ.

The margin of error is plus-minus five points? Why not plus-minus 5.5 points, or 4.9 points, or 10 points?  What kind of nonsense is that?  Who made that up?  Do you believe in the toothfairy?  Santa?  Really, I can find an article online PROOVING Santa is real.  Really I can.  I'll send it to you.

And seriously, has anyone here every heard of the bakersfield news service?  I have a bakersfield news service in my kitchen.  :) 

 I thought it was funny.

Fine... don't laugh.

What exactly does some of the top professors mean?  Show me a link that confirms your last post.  Don't give me moveon.org.  Si lo es posible. 

 That's not how you acurately score an IQ test.  I had one when I was six and mine is 129.  My dad's is 138.  I took a test online 4 years ago and my score was.... 129. 

I'm sure the liberal college professors grading ole' Billy's IQ aren't biased in any way. 

Obviously I watch CNN, otherwise I wouldn't have remembered Clinton's interview on that network. 

With regard to the last blog....you two should watch somethinig more than Fox news....its not news kids...its a commentary.

Bill's IQ is correct with a plus or minus 5 points range. Some of  the top professors have been ranking the presidents for years and they come to this by their use of vocabulary, schools attented, published papers..etc...The work of these scholars have been checked and they are right on target....this will make you feel better...'his daddy' George senior is at 99. Nixon was the only republican president that was higher in the list however severly beaten by JFK and Jimmy Carter.

I know its hard for your small minds to grasp the magnitude of the situation, but for me it gives me insite every time he opens his mouth ,...that he really is an idiot!

Certain people need to learn how to simplify their comments.  Though I can totally understand "previously posted over-generalized liberal pontification of the conservative view", most people cannot and this statement can be made in a much more consice manner.  That's why people like Bush, cuz he don't tawlk luhk that.  

And if Bill Clinton had an IQ of 186, which by the way is a completely absurd number, he would've found an intern who'd keep her mouth shut.  You don't cheat on your wife with girls who'll go run and tell everyone about it.  Duuhhh.  On, and if he had had a pair to go with his "brilliance", he would have done something about our muslim terrorist friends after the USS Cole was bombed.

What explanation can liberals give for Bill Clinton's missile attack of baghdad in 1998?  When he went on CNN and said that IRAQ under hussein was attempting to acquire WMD, where was the liberal outrage?  Where was the French outrage?  Nowhere.  Those same reasons are why Bush invaded IRAQ, using party French intelligence as information regarding Iraq's cabalities.

Bush by the way had a better GPA at Yale than John Kerry did.  Nah nuh nah. 

The more Bush, Hannity, Limbaugh and O'Reilly's- the better!!! Swing on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Before Bush the joke around washington from republicans was; ' There is nothing scarier than a tax and spend liberal'

Well now the joke around washington is; 'there is nothing scarier than a BORROW and spend republican.' 8 trillion and climbing (incase you dont know..1 trillion is a MILLION MILLIONS....)

All i can say is that a republican will hold your hand.....while they slit your throat!

This 'do nothing' administration has used the enviroment as it personal trash can, run up record debt, isolated america, killed innocent civilians in Iraq, put young soldiers in a war based on this administration's personal agenda..WHICH by the way has killed over 2500 soldiers and wounded over 13,000 troups, The republican congress is the most corrupt group of members of congress in US history, (speaking of congress...they set the schedule and so far have worked the least amount of days since 1944 and are about to set the record by years end), used the constitution to wiped their 'god fearing ass', lied us into a war, blocked minimum wage increase while giving themselves a pay raise, (Hillary tried to block them but of course they tied to the inheritance tax) and the list goes on and on...

Bill Clinton was a rhodes scholar in economics...IQ 186, George Bush, complete, moron IQ 96. (lower than an under graduate...)

p.s....if you want to stop abortion its real easy......PREVENT THE PREGNANCY!(Bush has cut more programs that helped poor people have access to birth control than any other president TO DATE!)

• I attempted to respond to each point of the previously posted over-generalized liberal pontification of the conservative view, but I found no basis in fact in the drivel that was spouted, although that could be due to my "mental laziness."  It is difficult to argue with logic like that.  Besides, the liberal view turned into too much of an us and them argument and that confused me since the conservative view was suppose to be us or them.

  Thus, I return to the original statement and question.  I go back to my earlier point of the definition of a "true swinger."  The original poster, like myself, is a single male.  According to some, we are not by definition a true swinger.  According to some, soft swap couples are not by definition a true swinger.  According to the blog poster, conservative Republicans cannot be a true swinger due the fact that the "common thread of being conservative would seem to conflict with the extremely liberal lifestyle of a swinger or swinging couple."  Therefore, liberal's by mere definition are purportedly the only ones who can be true swingers, due to the fact that they are more open and accepting.  If this is the case, explain why some that are self-professed liberal's in this lifestyle are not more open and accepting of single males, soft swap couples or male bi-sexuality (and no I'm not bi, so don't e-mail me).  Seems to be a bit of a conflict there as well.  It seems like a very limiting and dare I say, conservative view point to propose that anyone who is not liberally open to any and all possibilities and/or combinations is not a true swinger and therefore should be excluded.

  I'm not even sure the people who make up the lifestyle are extremely liberal or live an extremely liberal lifestyle to begin with.  Many couples in the lifestyle have family's and live a very conservative life in the suburbs.  Most are also very discreet and not open about their involvement in the lifestyle.

The last post offers a perfect example of afraid, whining, scared, and most importantly, incorrect liberal politics from someone not living in the United States.  When I made the previous post, I did so with a smile on my face.  I feel the tears running down the face of the guy who just posted.  Whoa is me!  Whoa is the world!  Everything is so horrible!! 

And I, like many Republicans, am not religious in any way.  FYI

Universal health can't and doesn't work.  Every aspect of Government run programs are bad.  Teachers who don't perform can't be fired, you wait hours in line at the post office.  Ever try to go to the DMV with only a few hours to burn?  Good luck.  Imagine if the grocery store was government run.  You'd take half your day to buy some milk.  Leave that inferior free health care in Europe.  There's a reason why every foreigner who can afford it gets their medical work done here.  All those babies conjoined at the head from India get their surgery done in the USA. 

Oh, the main reason I could never vote with American liberals.  I have never heard a logical explanation for why its okay to "kill" an unborn child, but not okay to "kill" a convicted serial rapist and murderer.  I understand the debate about what constitutes and child and what does not, and I myself am pro-choice when it comes to government.  I don't think the government has a right to tell a woman what she should do with her fetus.  But anyone who is pro-choice and anti death penality is a completely illogical person.

All these comments about the nature of conservatives have not cited one factual piece of evidence nor quoted directly from anyone to support their argurments.  They are simply statements of opinion, albeit jaded, misinformed and emotion based opinions.  American conservatives, like myself, are neither liars nor bigots.  We believe people should have the freedom to do as they please, so long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of others.  This, and the idea of limited government, are the foundation of our beliefs. 

Here is the rest of the text of my first post.  I didn't know about the word limit:

Conservatives tend to put a lot of stock in rules, but they also feel disproportionately that if they break them it is no big deal, and they will not feel the axe.  That is in part because of their station in society ($,  in control) and in part because of the schism they allow between their ideology for others and their personal liberties.  You don't have to be out of touch to be a conservative, but what you are in touch with will not be folks or things much different than yourself.  That's just how it goes.

3) Like the president, they will tend to be more dishonest as a matter of course, in ways that they don't realize.  They don't do this because they worship Satan, they do this because their world-view is self-shifted, and they justify the conflicts in their me-or-them, with-me-or-with-the-enemy mindset as some sort of macho ego building personality trait.  It is only that to other conservative swingers -- to the rest of us it looks like weakness, pig-headedness or selfishness, depending on the manners they use.

As far a condemning them to hell or anything for this I don't.  It's just that they think in terms of fewer variables than folks from the other side -- that is why they are conservative -- conservative meaning "don't worry about all those details -- worry about the essentials and watching out for #1 is the main essential". 

The fewer considerations you have the more you have to round off your facts, and the more you round things off the less sensitive and specific you can be.  It's simple math.  And it's why a conservative can know invasion is the right thing to do without first checking to see if they kill more innocent people than the bad guys they are fighting.  It's why a consevative can lambast the other side for spending then spend far more when he is in control.  It's why a conservative can call his country the most free and yet put more people in jail per capita that any other democracy.  They just don't have to have as many criteria for what they say, so it looks to them like they are telling truth.

For example, some folks will answer your question by saying anyone can be anything they want.  Or it's nobody's business.  That is the response of a person who actually has no way of analysing the substance of your question, but who feels that your thrust needs to be invalidated.  Usually people do that for self-interest.  They don't want your inquiry as they feel it would complicate something for them.  Self-shifted conversation.  Conservative logic.  And almost nobody wants to be invalidated when sex is in the offing.  That is why your question is very reasonable and very important.

And sort of on the point, did anyone ever wonder when folks say, "God Bless America" if that is a request or a command?  I see it being used as both, and a statement of claiming God, a reaffirmation of bringing their religion into the mainstream of communication, a way of exhalting our country over others, and a few other things.  I don't see it as a simple, humble request to the Lord -- if it was it wouldn't be worded like a command or a statement.  But then I am not very conservative.

The Moderates decide elections.  

According to Gallup Polls, 35 to 40% of Americans consider themselves Conservatives, 15 to 18% of Americans consider themselves Liberals, and the majority of Americans (between 40 to 50%) consider themselves Moderates.

The extremes on the Left and Right turn off the Moderate voters.   And the Moderates vote for the party who is less extreme at the time.   Sometimes the Moderates vote for a 3rd independent candidate like Perot or Anderson and peel off enough votes to let the other party win in a race where they would clearly lose if it was a 2-way race.

When the Religious Right acts up, Democrats generally win.  When the Looney Left acts up, the Republicans generally win.

As a Libertarian (not Liberal), I am for the maximum amount of Liberties and the least amount of Government intrusion in our personal and financial life.  Both parties suck at that.  I generally vote Republican (but have voted Democrat on occassion) because at least, in principle, the Reps are for less government spending and less taxation. Even though the Republicans have sucked lately on Government spending.  However, Democrats are generally worse.

The most interesting thing I find on this Blog Poll is that the Republicans are outnumbering the Democrats 2 to 1 on what one would assume be a generally liberal website and generally liberal lifestyle.  I'd expected to see the opposite poll numbers on this site.   Oh well, it is still early in the polls, perhaps the polling numbers would change.

Conservative Republicans definitely know how to fuck people.  Especially, minorities and the poor. 

A Conservative Republican can be a swinger.  He can also rig an election to become President, attack a soverign nation based on a lie, kill thousands of innocent people, throw an entire region of the world into an unstable quagmire, arrest and torture people without due process, turn his back to the scientific community on global warming and stem cell research and claim that he has read 60 books to date this year.

beats us how kbk gets along with anyone seems to believe they don't need anyone else and that money is the only form of interaction. its this kinda thing that causes wars, by taking things out of context and thinking only of SELF.

 would be happy to have the arguement off sdc as we are diametrically opposites and will bore the pants off anyone who's into swinging.

NO - I agree w/ Sebastions comments all the way.

Newbie stirring up shit... he, he

not sure whether your title is a good one, doesn't it tend to difting into other areas like religion, and shouldn't the question be "how can we be swingers and claim to belong to the opposite" like a christian or a right wing voter, and we are sure you can think of some more. Perosnally we don't see it as a personal moral issue veing a swinger after all its just fucking other people as a bottom line. but in life we should stand by our moral convictions, say if we were christians then live by that code of ethics, same with republicans or conservative in the uk. within the christian and jewish religions you have pro homosexual and paedophilic groups that are trying their best to say its allowed under gods law. blah blah blah if you don't afree with the rules of the club don't join start one with the rules that fit you, or if your into politics don't be hypocritical and support things that suppress your ethics and others like you, when you are shagging your secretary and standing under supposed family values. if you are leaders or willing to speak out for something then you should have the guts to stand for what you truly believe and not hide behind a political or religeous machine and take money for doing so also, thats the worst kind of prostitution.

 having had a right old rant now lets ask ourselves just how much are we willing to stand for our ethics, hpw many realise we are bringing about the destruction of the earth yet use energy in many different forms without regard. and anyone who can see the weather knows that its changing dramatically so to say otherwise is either deliberately burying their head in the sand or truly under-educated, yet how many od us as soon as we have a choice of jetting off somewhere nilly willy conveniently forget the impact we are having. OR whe the next gay carnival hits town, go down and enjoy the festivities wonder why the other alternate lifestyles communities don't fight for their rights like the gay community did. guess we are all hypocrits 

First let me say that giving the United Nations time to do anything is like urinating in the face of a hurricane. Your intentions are good but everything turns to crap. The United Nations has outlived it's usefullness, if it ever had any. It is a corrupt, third world ran organization. Trusting them is akin to laying in bed with a rattlesnake. The leadership(lol), I use that term loosely is out for their own enrichment. Current case in point.

Second and I know this is crude but I would rather have a sister in a whore house than a liberal in the White House. I think people should get off their rear end and work for a living, our welfare country is large enough. I DON'T OWE ANYONE A LIVING. The biggest problem with Liberals are they are educated to the point of stupidity. "Book learning" is of absolutely no value without the common sense to correctly apply and adapt what is learned. Another problem Liberals present is the inability to recognize they are wrong. They seem to believe they are too educated to be wrong so therefore it is someone elses fault. There comes a time when talking does absolutely no good. The current situation in the world is one of those. It is time the Liberals understand we are in a fight for survival. All people who do not believe as the radical Islamist do are targets. This is not the first religious world war and it won't be the last. If Liberals believe they can talk to the radical Islamist, be my guest.Go to Southwest Asia. Just don't scream for help once you get there.

I am an American who has lived in a foreign country for 15 years.  When I left the States, I was a die hard Republican.  One of the first things I noticed when listening to media reports from "foreign journalists" versus "American journalists" was that the same story could sound very different when reported by someone other than CNN or any of the major news networks in the States.  I opened my mind as I began to view the way other countries and cultures view American politics.  The Clinton-Lewinsky scandal was an embarrassment because the rest of the world doesn't really want to hear about our politician's dirty laundry.  However, it has been much more difficult to accept the arrogance of the current administration and its determination to impose its "moral values" on not only Americans but the rest of the world.  From the Administration's refusal to give the United Nations time to complete its report on WMD in Iraq, to the alienation of American Allies for many other reasons, to the veto against stem cell research on home soil, regrettably it appears to much of the world that this Republican Administration is trying to "Play God" and it would not surprise me in the least if "God" tried to outlaw the sexual activities of consenting adults.  I'm not quite sure if I've become more liberal due to swinging or if I'm a swinger because I've become more liberal.  In any case... my politics and personal preferences are "No to Bush!"

oh yeah and p.s. ~ live and let live and to each their own.  We are all entitled to our own opinions and I have many friends where we agree to disagree and not let it affect our friendships.  All the best!

• The first thing that needs to be clarified is what the definition of a "true swinger" is.  There seems to be some debate in other blogs over what defines one as being a "true swinger."
  
  Are you just interested in whether or not a "conservative Republican" can be a "true swinger" or does that extend to moderate and liberal Republican's as well.
  
  Is the converse of what you are saying, that Democrat's don't have a conflict with the Lifestyle and all Democrat's accept an openly gay or lesbian lifestyle?
  
  Is this the creed of the Democrat's..."All people should be equal and have equal opportunites, rights, etc. regardless of race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, socialeconomic status, criminal history, etc...?" 
  
  I'm sorry, but I don't want a convicted pedophile having the same equal opportunities and rights as a decorated upstanding school teacher.
  
  I also don't want to see the preconceived idea that being equal and having equal opportunity means everybody has to be treated the same.  Otherwise, we will never have people fulfilling their potential.

I must say I'm a Democrat for many reasons...My reasoning basically comes down to choices and being able to make them...Pro choice, (which doesn't mean Pro Abortion as many would suggest), for the separation of church and state, (not keen on the idea the President getting advice for the nation from God...What happens when we vote the wrong President into office with a different God and different agendas???!!!)...Anti-death penalty,(killing is wrong even if it seems right by your standard, your standard may not be someone else's)...For redistribution of wealth,(pro labor unions, higher minimum wage, keeping American jobs in America etc.)...War as a last resort, (No one has the right to play world cop, regardless of how bad another nation may seem to us, especially without UN support...War should be defensive or at least not based on speculation nor personal interest)...All people should be equal and have equal opportunites, rights, etc. regardless of race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, socialeconomic status, criminal history, etc...If your blood is red and your heart is beating than you qualify to be a part of the human race, no other qualifications required!  Even if you're a SWINGER!   And thank you Miss-E, forgot about the stem cell research issue, my grandmother has advanced Alzheimer's Disease...Sure would be nice to find a cure!  Also, trying to figure out why the oil giants are recording record profits, O' , I forgot, I just paid $ 78.00 to fill up my car! And yes, the Democrats do raise taxes to pay for the public's needs but they put more in your pocket to pay them!  I'm still not sure what we got for our $300 Billion WAR!  That money could have done wonders distributed through the education system in America...That's $ 6000.00 each for 50 million students!  We took a country with a horrible dictator and spun them into an equally horrible civil war, at our expense of lives and money...

Let every VOTE count!