Oswald's overriding position on politics is that the two national parties are equal in all matters. There is no choice here whatsoever.
Therefore we basically need a new revolution.
He believes, on faith, that whatever comes after his little revolution will necessarily be better than what we have now.
Viewing the long sweep of history, I find it very hard to credit that position.

So when Oswald suggests that we can learn nothing from what politicians say, I guess he's saying that once elected, Hillary Clinton is as likely to be against a woman's right to choose as for it, since we can't trust a word she says.

If you really believe that, Abraxas, then how can you possibly choose? I mean, you won't actually go out and vote, will you, since you can't trust a word any politician says? You'd just be a fool to vote, or to have any opinion on any candidate other than that they are all liars and can't be trusted.
Pretty paralyzing, isn't it?

How do the posters here who idolize Ron Paul somehow know that uniquely in this field of candidates, he isn't lying through his teeth? After all, he's a politician, right? Or is he somehow special simply because he says he backs positions the Paul boosters like? So therefore he must be honest? Where's the consistency in the cynicism? Or perhaps you've "looked into his soul?"

Really, some of the cynicism on display here is just silly.

Thus asks Totino, 20-year-old poster boy for the Republican Party.

Yes. Even though I've criticized the current president, the party, and the party frontrunners numerous times.
You never even admit negatives within the Democratic party. You ignore flipflops, even though there are quotes with people like Clinton saying polar opposite things. I could go on, but you get the picture.

Give it up

Do you seriously think that the only information I obtain about current affairs is from a candidate's web site?
Do you seriously think that a candidate's web site is no gauge whatsoever as to what their agenda is?

I wasn't referring to you with regard to Paul, because I don't remember if you every posted in support of him. But for those who do, why would they? Because they heard what he said and liked it? But isn't that just as stupid as to read his web site and like that?

My point, which you seem to be trying really, really, hard to avoid, is that at some point one needs to take what politicians are saying as an indication of what they believe. And my point was not that every word on anyone's web site is The Truth, it's that when comparing, say, the Democratic leaders to the Republican leaders with regard to Iraq, there is a clear difference.

My god, this is not that difficult of a point to grasp. You are just desperate to paint me into an extreme corner. Why?

You paint yourself into a corner. Not an extreme one-just a cliche ridden partisan one.

OswaldTheOsprey

Totino, our resident slayer of Republicans. And he never ignores the flipflops of his Republican pals. Like Romney's 180 on abortion. Or McCain's 180 on taxes. Nosiree, you can count on Totino to be in the first rank, highlighting the dishonesty of those Republicans.

Such a straight-shooter. So even-handed.

Given the stuff I see from you, "yes" to the first.

Given the reputation of politicians and the fact that they'll say ANYTHING, "no" to the second.


You know the only thing I have EVER read on Paul's website is how much money he has?


You're right, I listen to what Ron Paul says, but I take NOTHING at face value. I look at his record on OnTheIssues.com along with what his critics say and what his supporters say. I also take note of his continuously straight forward and consistent view points.

With Hillary Clinton, she's all over the place, and it's not hard to find an instance where she flat out flip flopped. Same goes for Huckabee, Romney and Guiliani (all candidates I WON'T vote for), so don't make this about party.


If you aren't a Democrat, you're the bluest Republican I've ever seen.

You're just easy to read. Ninety five percent of the time I know what you're going to say on an issue cause it's usually the same line the Democrats bring out. I'm not saying you're a bad person because you're a Democrat or that I'm better because I'm not (I'm not a Republican either)... just that you are very predictable.

Not extreme. Just predicatable.

And I could go back and try to find the thread where I criticized Clinton on her Iran vote, but I'm not going to because you'll still paint me with the same brush anyway.

As for your criticisms of Republicans, you proved that you have in the past. Good for you. Keep it up.