There are a few examples of rich people running for office , spending millions of their own money who did not get elected. So in that sense money does not guarantee being elected. But can they still give someone already elected money to buy a vote?

I'm on the side of the people. I'm for we the people, and when I say we the people, I mean the citizens of the United States. The politicians should put the interests of the people before the corporations and the unions. Ross Perot and Ron Paul have both advocated taking the money out of elections, I would like to see that as well. I would also like to see the candidates get equal air time, in prime time. It's not fair when the network talking heads give certain politicians speaking time and cut others off and cut them out. I would prefer that the media not be picking for us.

If you were on the side of the people you wouldn't have voted for 30 million people not to have health coverage, for tens of thousands of people to die every year because they aren't covered, for tens of thousands more people to go bankrupt because they don't have coverage...and that's just the health insurance issue. Republicans suck even harder when it comes to saving human civilization.

hahahahahahahahahahahah Oh man.. hahahahahahahahahahah

The joke's on you, Jeff. That's reality. You're not usually a jerk, so I'm surprised you'd be one now.

Here's one of millions of links about the bill the Senate passed, but I deliberately chose CNN's so it would have some credibility. The bill covers 30 million more Americans and makes it so insurance companies can't refuse coverage for pre-existing conditions (which is what causes people to go bankrupt):

http://us.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/24/health.care/index.html

18,000 annual deaths because people don't have health insurance (this was 2004 - it's much worse now with people having lost their coverage along with their jobs in the recession):

http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2004/Insuring-Americas-Health-Principles-and-Recommendations.aspx

As far as saving human civilization, we've had lots of debates about global warming, but you'll see that the Democrats won't be able to do anything about it now. Cap and trade is no cure-all, but it's one step. No way will it pass now, nor will anything else now that the f-ing Republicans have a 41% "majority" (yes, the rules are bizarre).

Naaaa Nick, Its been a long day and i was more laughing about that you said that reps suck when it comes to saving Human Civilization. I guess its all in how you define it. Especially when the Reps classify themselves "pro-Life". Again, I guess its how you define human civilization right?
Were you aware that a conservative organization was on the ground in Katrina giving care before any government agency? They didn't want any press either.. just under the radar being good to people and giving care.
Nick, Can a person who disagrees with you not be a jerk? I mean really. Just because I don't think the federal Government is out of line in what they are doing, does that make me a bad person? Especially since I think that the states need to make the decision not the federal government.

Yeah .. pro-life .. right.

All they care about is telling people what to do. You ever notice once the kid is born they could care less what happens to it?

No Insurance - no problem
No Education - no problem
Want to marry who they want - no way
Commit a crime - kill them
They get old? - screw them
They drop dead - have a $250 "death benefit"

On some issues, yes, but the reason I took offense is that I thought you were laughing at what I was saying as if it were totally stupid. If that's not what you meant, my bad - sorry about that.

Also, re: Katrina - one of the things I simply don't get is how some totally well-meaning, warm, caring people can be conservative. It's just bizarre how they can be so nice personally and at the same time so inhuman when it comes to their politics.

What Joe says is sort of true! That's why I don't understand how people who aren't monsters can vote Republican.

Ok, Can i ask this philosophically? Just trying to get at an answer, or rather discover it together. Because I think that this is a very good question. So, Please dont flame on this, but rather speak as to what you think drives it.
I too think that Republicans and conservatives can come across as heartless in many ways as can Dems/liberals in many other ways.

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding as to what drives each side of the equation.

Just as a for instance. Abortion. How can a liberal be into saving the whales, the environment and the dolphins and yet not care about an unborn child? And on the other hand how can a conservative be the opposite - so concerned about an unborn baby and yet not care about other living things???
It is inconsistent on both sides - at least it appears on the surface to be. Can we please not make this about sex in the bed room? I think that this has evolved way past that - at least for this discussion, but perhaps you disagree. I am just using this as a point of showing the inconsistencies.

I think that there is a sense of inner drive for conservatives that says "I did it myself, I don't need any help, and you don't want any help either." So, any one needing help is looking for a hand out or a freebie?" Its like they are afraid to help any one else in some ways. Does that make sense?
This sense of Self also bring along with it a certain amount of independence and self reliance. They really do not want any any outside help either or any laws that smell of that. As in most things, a strength becomes a weakness.
So, as Joe pointed out, they always seem to say no to those things. But why do they say no??
I don't think it comes from a sense of evil or being a moron, but it is they way they think and there are reasons behind them.

By way of contrast, the thinking of a liberal is much different. It seems to want to help others and help them improve their way of life - especially if those that need the help can't help them selves. We can see this in how they approach the environment and nature. They want to bring everyone along. Again the strength can become a weakness as well.

I think the down side to the conservative way of thinking can be that no one gets help - even those that desperately need it. The Survival of the fittest comes into effect.

I think the down side of the liberal way of thinking is that it becomes enabling to allow people to not have to strive and make life happen.

Im curious as to what you think drives both sides in their thinking. Nick, I know you think they are morons, but there is something that drives their way of thinking. Is it worth gaining understanding?