Pop N Wood Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 An actual email exchange between a convervative and liberal friend of mine. Dave, have you decided what country you’re moving to yet? : P You say it in jest' date=' but Meghan and I are seriously discussing it. I’d betalking to a real estate person about selling my house today if we weren’t stuck here until Meghan graduates. At the very least, I have given up on America and 50-some percent of its people. I really don’t give a shit what happens to this country anymore. I will never set foot in a voting booth again. It’s a waste of effort. There are no checks and balances in this country. The ultra-conservatives are in charge. Theory is that the undecideds voted along moral lines—so Bush’s gay marriage amendment red-herring worked like a charm. You’ve got the house, the senate, and soon there will be at least one (up to three) additional Scalias and Thomas-es on the Supreme Court. I hope you like Nathan learning about God (the Christian God, of course) in school—it’ll be part of the No Child Left Un-Reborn Act pretty soon. I would gladly renounce my citizenship at this moment if I could. And I’m perfectly serious. The lemmings in this country deserve whatever they get. [/quote'] Funny but sad all the same. How will our country ever heal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Funny and scary. Somebody watches too much television. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeromio Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 The guy's a freak, but he's right about the Supreme Court though - and that personally scares the crap out of me. W will get to fill at least 2 spots in this next term. Roe v Wade is going to get squelched and Patriot Act squared will pop up at some point. Then of course there's the 4 more years of spending free for all with the GOP in total control of the purse strings. Let's just see how much more money we can borrow from the Chinese..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Democratic Soul Searching: http://marccooper.typepad.com/marccooper/2004/11/the_democrats_h.html The Democrats Have Met The Enemy Las Vegas 4:00 am November 3 Here's a draft of what I have written for the L.A. Weekly column. I will provide the link to the final, edited version when the Weekly posts it Wednesday night. Whatever slim hope that Democrats might have of extracting something positive from this week’s resounding defeat depends entirely on how much authentic introspection they are willing to inflict on themselves. To the degree that they look outward –instead of inward—to identify the causes of the 2004 debacle, the more certain they are doomed. The more that we hear in the coming days and weeks about counting and recounting in Ohio, about supposed voter intimidation and suppression, about fixed machines, crooked and partisan secretaries of state, about unfair advertising, or Karl Rove’s dirty tricks, then the more that anyone with something other than tapioca for brains should abandon any hope of rejuvenating or rebuilding this hollowed-out excuse for a party. The Democrats lost this election fair and square and have absolutely no one to blame for it than themselves. They don’t even have pathetic Ralph Nader to scapegoat like they did four years ago. Sorry if I rush to hang the crepe. But the four million vote margin racked up by Bush—the first absolute majority since 1988 in a presidential election—is an undeniable and clear victory that robs any other solution – as unlikely as that might be—of any moral legitimacy. At least it should --after Florida’s Hurricane Chad-- in whose aftermath the Democrats screeched that Bush was an illegitimate president because he had lost the popular vote and was appointed, in effect, by the Supremes. Surely the Democrats would want to eschew any similar stigma, wouldn’t they? Locating the roots of this defeat, you are free to dig as deeply or as superficially as you care. We could start this particular narrative, I suppose, in 1993 when a newly-elected Bill Clinton gambled all of his political capital to bully and ultimately divide his own party, forcing passage of the pet project of Bush 41 – the job-shredding NAFTA. Or perhaps, you’d prefer to begin this story three years later when the same Democratic President signed the Republican abolition of federal welfare thereby putting on the table the simple question of why we should even bother to continue having a Democratic Party. Or maybe in ’98 when Democrats re-assured America that all presidents lie and why pick oin you-know-who. Yet, to unravel this latest tragedy, there’s no need really to rehearse the ancient history of the Clinton Nineties, now enshrined in official Democratic mythology as, perhaps, the peak moment of Western Civilization. Going back to the fall of 2002 will suffice. I refer to the moment when Senator John Kerry joined with Trent Lott and Tom DeLay among many, many others in voting the same Florida-tainted George W. Bush full authorization to move toward a patently and brazenly unnecessary war with Iraq. Not that Kerry really meant it, of course. He had opposed what was a significantly more justifiable war with Saddam a decade earlier. But, then again, Kerry wasn’t contemplating a presidential run back in ’91. Or we could zero in on that frosty evening back in January when about 30,000 rosy-cheeked and gray-haired Iowa farmers and their neighbors decided that, among Democrats, only John Kerry was “electable†and millions of Democrats coast-to-coast immediately rubber-stamped that now rather discredited notion. Maybe it’s unfair, however, to isolate any single catalytc moment. A cool-headed assessment of the entire Democratic response to the Bush presidency would herald the doom deal out on Tuesday night almost independently of who ultimately was the candidate. From the onset of his administration, the Democrats have combined a freakish accommodation to Bush with a shrill, sometimes paranoiac exaggeration of his evil. One moment they are part of his War Cabinet. The next they are demonizing him as an individual and warning we are on the doorstep of fascism. And then we blame the voters for being confused. . But once so many Democrats had worked themselves into a frenzy with the mantra of stolen elections and Supreme Court electoral coups, the die was cast. If Bush was, in fact, the most dangerous, evil and demented President ever as Democrats tirelessly reminded themselves (and apparently only themselves), then Anybody But Bush would do just fine and … well… the rest is now history. Mr. Anybody turned out to be quite the loser that voters suspected he was before his miracle resurrection in the snows of Iowa. No one can, with a straight face, repeat just what was the precise message of his just-passed and wretched campaign. Is there a reader out there who would like to write in reminding us of one memorable line to be extracted and preserved from amidst the logorrhea that overflowed his campaign? Could there possibly have been an incumbent more easy to knock-off than George W. Bush? A real-life opposition party would have been insulted to be matched with a such an unworthy and frail rival. The Democrats, by contrast, got their lights punched out.. Think for a moment, if you can bear, just how fraudulent the Party has become as a champion for everyday, working Americans. John Edwards, it should be said, did a fine job of evoking the rude inequalities of the Two Americas. And it’s a pity that someone like Edwards couldn’t emerge as the Democrats’ national rabble-rouser. For a brief historical moment, the unlikely Howard Dean flashed in that role and then was even more quickly extinguished. But when you ask yourself who are the great Democratic mass icons of our times, the two or three individuals who put a face and some heart on the core populist values, damned if we don’t come up with literal clowns like Al Franken and Michael Moore. They may or ( may not) be just dandy entertainers. But doesn’t this say something rather startling about the state of the Democrats? Once the whining over Ohio dies out, what will laughably be called the war for the “soul†of the once-again-defeated Democratic Party will commence – a struggle so drearily predictable that the whole exercise can be easily scripted in advance. On the one side the corporate shills of the Democratic Leadership Council who will argue that Tuesday’s results demand a repositioning of the Party to the right. On the other, the “progressives†who will refloat their own formula that success resides in simply moving the Democrats leftward (as evidenced by what? The 2% primary draw of Dennis Kucinich). Both notions are simplistic and insufficient. The Democrats have not won the sort of absolute national majority pocketed by Bush in more than a quarter of a century. The party doesn’t need to be reformed or repositioned. It needs to be rethought and reborn. The re-election of George W. Bush is a tragedy for which we all pay dearly—some much more than others. And the only succor I cling to is the notion that the President’s punishment for being re-elected is that he will now have to manage the myriad catastophes he has conjured. Good luck to him -- and to us In the meantime, I shed no tears for the humiliation of this Democratic Party-- only for those who suffer for having invested their hopes in it. But that the Democrats richly deserve to go down-- no question. My deepest regret is only that the Republicans don't go down right alongside it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Ever wonder how many state sponsored grants and scholarships Meghan received to go to school? like a sucking tick those ungrateful parasites are waiting to leave once all their "entitlements" given to them by this "terrible country" until after they drain that last drop of blood while my taxes pay for her education. Leave now. I don't even want to know how far that attitude got you in any other country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannji Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Canada just announced that all the Mehgans will have to wait at least one year if they want to bail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikelly Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 I'll bet dollars to donuts it is all atalk and your buddy will be here in four years... the wounds will heal, only to be opened again... And if he goes, so what... Good bye. The Supreme Court will NOT change... Democrats will stall and filabuster the nominations to death... this means nothing in that area... there will be checks and balances... Let the panic begin... Mike 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Baldwin Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Unfortunately the idea of "checks and balances" has seen ever greater erosion as the executive gets more and more greedy and crass. That the public and the congress seem to gladly tolerate this makes it all the more disturbing. Congress has repeatedly gleefully approved "presidential authority" as a means to avoid its constitutional responsibility (War goes badly: blame the pres.! War goes good: see we did the right thing!) The INTENT of the Constitution was that ONLY the legislative branch should be able to declare war, and ONLY the judicial branch could determine who is imprisoned, ensuring due process of law. The Executive continues to make inroads into congressional and judicial authority. Just like its external foreign policies, this administration's internal domestic policies are hegemonic in nature and in the end couterproductive and idiotic. They ONLY understand the direct application of brute force. It ain't workin', and it ain't GONNA work. There are often much better ways to get desired end results than throwing soldiers at problems and perceived problems abroad and throwing freedom/privacy/liberty-sapping legislation at problems and perceived problems at home. This administration has no understanding of REAL power to exert influence through more moral, ethical, Constitutional, and SUBTLE means. But of course since the public at large can only see things in Football terms of winning and losing, they get what they want. Rah rah rah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Baldwin Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 JohnC Enjoyed reading your snippet. So rare to read candid honest assessments. Brings up an interesting problem with the way we "choose" our candidates. I'm of the mind that in the primaries and in the election, polls should open EVERYWHERE at the same time and close at the same time. Our primary system of having states vote on potential candidates weeks apart from one another is entirely ridiculous. They should at LEAST be required to be on the same day everywhere. Also good to read an account that doesn't reduce it to red team vs. blue team. In my mind they are both equally culpable. We've got some serious soul-searching to do as a nation if we're to get back on the road to a better (to me, a more small-"l"-libertarian) democracy. Unfortunately we are by and large a lot of self-satisfied fat smug idiots all to eager to pick a "side" and blindly adhere to it without realizing that 90% of us don't really HAVE a 'side" beholden to and representing us. The ruling class is swayed by one thing: $$$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buZy Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 liberal loser on the attack vegetarian piss in a glass horn rimmed, army boots, with a dress says americas such a stupid mess you would protest my bowl movement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 IMHO, this paragraph from Cooper's article is why the Democrats lost: "But once so many Democrats had worked themselves into a frenzy with the mantra of stolen elections and Supreme Court electoral coups, the die was cast. If Bush was, in fact, the most dangerous, evil and demented President ever as Democrats tirelessly reminded themselves (and apparently only themselves), then Anybody But Bush would do just fine and … well… the rest is now history." I've voted Democrat many times before (I'm a registered independent) but I was disgusted with the Democratic characterizations (way before the campaign started) of Bush and of similar characterizations of people who supported Bush. The fact that the temper tantrums and tirades of an extremeist such as Michael Moore got such a public and positive response from the Democratic party just turned me off compeletly. I don't want to be associated with a bunch of whiners. I had similar feelings about the characterizations of Clinton and would probably have voted Democrat in 2000 except Al Gore was nominated. I'm not happy with some of the things Bush has done during his term, but he was the only "candidate" running. The other choice was not a candidate, but an emotion: "Anybody But Bush." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Baldwin Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Ah, but John it is YOU who've allowed yourself to be manipulated by emotion. What does being associated with whiners have to do with it? I for one would prefer an "emotion" to W. An "emotion" isnt' as likely to get the retarded idea that it can get us into war based on deliberately misleading the populace and get away with it. I voted not based on emotion but because I wanted to deny W the opportunity for leading this country into further misadventures. Why do so many have to feel like they're on a "winning" team? Both teams are hopelessly corrupt and in the pockets of corporate American and foreign interests anyway. We lose either way, but W. is just dangerous to the world abroad and personal liberty here at home. "Patriot Act III: Lockdown of a Nation" is surely on its way, in the aftermath of the next attack on us which the administration's policies all but assure there will be. Microchip implants for everyone! I don't want to be associated with a bunch of whiners. The other choice was not a candidate' date=' but an emotion: "Anybody But Bush."[/quote'] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 From: http://asmallvictory.net/archives/007678.html If you don't mind, I'd like to address the throngs of Chicken Littles who seem to be out in full force on the net today. I just want to clear up a few things, as you all seem to be pretty misguided in more than one area today. I voted for George Bush. I am not a redneck. I do not spend my days watching cars race around a track, drinking cheap beer and slapping my woman on the ass. I am not a bible thumper. In fact, I am an atheist. I am not a homophobe. I am educated beyond the fifth grade. In fact, I am college educated. I am not stupid. Not by any stretch of facts. I do not bomb abortion clinics. You will not be thrown in jail for the sole reason of being a liberal. Your child's public school will not suddenly turn into a center for Christian brainwashing. Your favorite bookstore will not turn into puritan central. This is not Nazi Germany in any way. You will not be forced into concentration camps. You will not be burned in human-sized ovens because of your religion. We will not be forced to wear uniforms and march in line every day. You will not live in fear. If you think this is a country in which you have to live in fear, I have some friends in Iran who would like to have a little talk with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bastaad525 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 From: http://asmallvictory.net/archives/007678.html You will not be thrown in jail for the sole reason of being a liberal. Your child's public school will not suddenly turn into a center for Christian brainwashing. Your favorite bookstore will not turn into puritan central. You will not be forced into concentration camps. You will not be burned in human-sized ovens because of your religion. We will not be forced to wear uniforms and march in line every day. You will not live in fear. that's not to say there aren't some people in (or with close ties to) the goverment who don't wish some or all of this was so. I can't say for sure if Bush himself is one of him (personally I don't think he is), but I know some of the people who back him and influence him might be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest V8Datsun Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 A hugely significant reason given for voting for Bush was "moral values", which sounds hypocritical when one considers how the Bush administration got us into the war in Iraq: For what turned out to be no reason at all, known by them (at least by Cheney and Wolfowitz) from the outset. Add in the Bush family's cozy relationship with the Saudi royal family, Cheney's intimacies with Haliburton, and one wonders what "moral values" means to those who said that. What won the election for Bush, in my opinion, was the "grass roots" pro-Bush organization that got voters out- the churches. The Democrats had no such infrastructure and so they lost. In congregations across the land, "God-fearing" dimwits were told in so many words that it was a sin not to vote for him and they bought it (the Catholics said that outright). We're on the verge of a Christian theocracy here, which matches well with the Muslim theocracies in the middle east, and soon we all can march back to the 10th century and recreate the Crusades- righteous invasions in the name of "freedom" and "God" that no one in the target country understands or wants. If we all get "born again" into some fundamental religion that can't accept any ideas newer than the bible, we'll be the sort of Americans that can live comfortably in the future USA. I think that when the draft is brought back to man any new adventures for George, only those states that voted for him ought to have their kids drafted. They like Bush that much, let them back him up with THEIR sons and daughters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 In congregations across the land, "God-fearing" dimwits were told in so many words that it was a sin not to vote for him and they bought it (the Catholics said that outright). So, in your first post on this board you decide to insult folks who believe in God? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannji Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 In congregations across the land, "God-fearing" dimwits were told in so many words that it was a sin not to vote for him and they bought it (the Catholics said that outright). So, in your first post on this board you decide to insult folks who believe in God? Werd..... If we all get "born again" into some fundamental religion that can't accept any ideas newer than the bible, we'll be the sort of Americans that can live comfortably in the future USA. What ideas "newer than the bible" were you referring to? I think that when the draft is brought back to man any new adventures for George, only those states that voted for him ought to have their kids drafted. They like Bush that much, let them back him up with THEIR sons and daughters. This is just ignorant beyond words.... and I apologize for the insult. Do you have any idea how many kids are over there now, in a voluntary basis, who have parents that dont want them there? Besides... a draft is going to be a very hard sell.... and will have to have some very convincing reasons to get it through legislation. All the "chicken littling" before the election didnt stop Bush from getting elected, and it will convince fewer people now. When are people going to require proof before they start sheopling conspiracy therories? We went there for the oil...... seen any evidence yet? Halliburton bought their way into Iraq.... Well... we sure as heck didnt want the contracts going to German or French companies, now did we? Besides... if you read a little fact before the fiction, many of the jobs awarded to Haliburton "without being bid on by anyone else", were jobs only Haliburton was qualified to do. Is there corruption over there? Of course. Has nothing to do with awarding contracts to an American company tho. I think it is high time people stop the rhetoric here, and for the people that just "lost" in the election, follow your erstwhile leader's fine example and bow out with class. Try joining in and working towards your goals within the current administration. That will get you a lot further than spending the next 4 years bemoaning the fact that a majority of the country doesnt agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zerrari GTO Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Amen Brother! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Baldwin Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 In congregations across the land, "God-fearing" dimwits were told in so many words that it was a sin not to vote for him and they bought it (the Catholics said that outright). So, in your first post on this board you decide to insult folks who believe in God? Er, I think he's only insulting those who are "dimwitted". I'm a believer (though probably not in the same grey-bearded sometimes-wrathful/sometimes friendly-like partisan "God" that seems to have a lot of popularity these days), and I don't feel insulted. Regarding Halliburton [edit: this is in reply to tannji], Cheney's implemented policy to single-source contracting out of logistical support for the military TO Halliburton under Bush I pretty much ensured they'd get all that money. You have to be BLIND not to see blatant conflict of interest. Cheney gets the policy implemented, goes on to CEO the one company it had the greatest ($$$$$$$) impact on, then as Veep encourages a needless war which profits, who again? We should spend the money to keep the military more self-sufficient, for a variety of reasons. One being to reduce/eliminate profiteering, another being to prevent private US citizens being lured into what amounts to combat duty for $$$$ (small change for Halliburton, but a lot compared to what actual combat troops would make for the same tasks). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeK280z Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 I think that when the draft is brought back to man any new adventures for George, only those states that voted for him ought to have their kids drafted. They like Bush that much, let them back him up with THEIR sons and daughters. Recently I've heard a lot of talk about "Bush reinstating the draft". To my knowledge, that would require legislation that would have to pass both the House and Senate before the President can sign it. Let's take a moment and remember what every Congress person and Senator wants.... to be re-elected. So: a. It's not just George's draft. b. I find this to be highly unlikely. I'll refrain from commenting on the numerous other opinions in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.