You make some good points, but the fact remains that she does stand up to the abuse pretty well. Which, to me, is admirable.
Hitler was also a rather stalwart fellow.
tenacious, maybe. And he was also rather idealistic. He seems on balance to be more abusive than she does. She's mostly taking slop, not dishing it out to others.
To be honest, I suppose that my desire to see a Republican-controlled congress might win out,
I still don't see why you favor the oppressive party. You work for a university - thus your bread is buttered to the left. You claim to have some kind of hedonistic tendencies, and though I suppose those are all in the past, I find it hard to believe you look forward to the theocracy. You make a huge salary, certainly, but not enough to be harmed by centrist economic policies. Quite frankly, you are too old to still be stuck on adolescent Randian fantasies of individualism. I really can't see why you take your irresponsbile line in politics.
Hardly huge, but we do well enough. My family and I live a reasonably comfortable lifestyle precisely because we do not live beyond our means. I would like to see that our society, as a whole, does not live beyond its means. Indeed, I do favor centrist economic policies.
Also, like most Republicans, I remain a proponent of government funding of education and of R&D. The people, through their legislatures, fund schools, colleges, and universities. The federal and state governments fund medical, military, and environmental research, as well as basic research operations. I'm sure the Democrats and Republicans would argue over specific priorities, but neither of these parties denies education/R&D funding altogether. You are probably thinking of Libertarians or Constitutionalists. I am
NOT a Libertarian; I am a Republican.
And "theocracy" is so overdone, don't you think? I do not think a Republican takeover of congress will yield a theocracy. For starters, the US Constitution would prohibit that. Stop being so dramatic.
Poll
