Is Conservative Dominance Finished?

Our new president (orator) 's policy

With this orator we will take the biggest step to socialism this country ever took;we are building it slowly for a long time,but now that pace will be accelerated much more.By bailing out financial institutions we already built financial socialism;now we are in the process of building economic socialism as well.

The voters of this country last year elected an orator,not a politician,since he only had one term as senator.They paid attention to how he spoke,not to what he said;and being younger than his opponents,he had the energy to fascinate them more than the others had.

I wonder how many of those "voters for socialism" were aware that he had the most liberal voting record in the senate.But that did not matter;he spoke nice to them.

Africanization of America is now in full swing.Marx must be turning over in his grave already full of hapiness !

P.S.If you will coose to publish my comments as a letter from a reader,I allow you to shape it up in order to make it more readable;send me the final form before publishing it for my approval.

323-4613867 With anticipated thanks,

Ioan Dirina

end of conservative dominance

If the under-educated, blind-faith ideologues who voted for Republicans during the last 30 some odd years actually understood how conservative policies have ruined their economic realities - well then, things might change. I can hope and pray that conservative dominance will end but there are an awful lot of stupid people living in the U.S. And yes, it really is a matter of being intelligent, educated and having the ability to think critically which makes the difference between voting Democrat and Republican.

More of the same

The reality of how a person or group of person behaves vs. what they say can be quite large. To claim that Reagan as a good or great president is up to personal evaluation of the steps taken during his presidency. This is the same for any of the past presidents. Mr. Bush is despised by many, including myself, for his actions. Yet, he (and Mrs. Bush) actually think that his work has been for the benefit of all. Reality. Mr. Reagan had the historial opportunity to challenge the Russians. By chance it fell. Not necessarily a good thing since it brought chaos into Russia. Thankfully, no one deployed a serious weapon in the aftermath. Mr. Reagan implemented a rather large military buildup. If you benefited from this change, Mr. Reagan was excellent. If you live in a foriegn nation and some of these weapons have fallen or continue to fall on you, your property, your friends just because some stranger in a distant nation claimed you are the enemy, not so good. Korea, Vietnam, the Philipinnes, Hawaii, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kuwait,Somalia, Cambodia, Laos, Japan, Italy, France, Algeria, the Netherlands, Germany, China, Russia, Iran, Lebanon, the many nations in central and south America, all have seen the ill effects of American foreign policy. Most Americans do not know the whys and will support the attacks based on government claims. Yet, the reality is that most of these attacks by US forces have had zero basis of national defense, of our "freedoms" as it is claimed time and time again. Mr.Tim Weiner in his book "Legacy of Ashes" outlines these attacks and explains the consequences. If Reagan was good to you check out where he sent US forces. Heck, check out all the presidents since 1949 and how, while we might elect them to run our country, they de facto have given themselves the right to run the world. No laws need to apply. Mr. Nixon even stated that "It is legal if the President says so." Chilling words, indeed. Mr. Bush even gave up on any of these "respons1bilities" and gave free hand to many in the White House. Conservative or not; liberal or not; or whatever classification you many wish to grant, US presidents need to focus on America and not the world. Their job description says so.