The W
Views: 100274906
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
31.10.07 1227
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Jim Jeffords Worst Nightmare and General Election Thoughts
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 3 Next(1983 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (60 total)
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 821/7534
EXP: 43780303
For next: 521459

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 487 days
Last activity: 487 days
#1 Posted on 6.11.02 1006.21
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1015.45
Well, I think any sort of power Jim Jeffords bargained for in May 2001 has disappeared now. First rule in politics, if you are going to pull the double cross, make sure you aren't around when the party you turned on takes power back.
Looking back at the last week of the campaign, the Democratic Party pulled one of the biggest choke jobs in a long time. From the moment the Wellstone memorial turned into a rally, everything broke against the Democrats. Example, Georgia. Opinion was the popular Democratic Governor would have such a landslide that he would pull Cleeland over the finish line. Outcome was instead both losing, and the Republicans winning the Governor's position in Georgia for the first time in, oh, 125 plus years.
I don't agree with much he says, but this much is true: Pat Caddell needs his own daily talk show. The guy is a few bricks short of a full load, but hell, I'd rather watch him than Begala.
Promote this thread!
DMC
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 664/1180
EXP: 2772540
For next: 97218

Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3483 days
Last activity: 3477 days
#2 Posted on 6.11.02 1123.25
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1128.09
I liked Caddell back in 2000 with the whole Flordia fiasco.

Is it safe to say the Dems "jobbed" to the Republicans this year?

I think where this election will hurt that party the most is in nominations of federal judges. Howard Fineman said something very true on Hardball last night--that the Democrats are typically the party that knows how important it is to control courts, they are the "trial lawyer" party, and they often use their power to strong arm the Republicans into putting who *they* want into court appointments. (Whereas the Republicans often vote for Democratic nominees and you do not see as much of a fuss.) I think this will especially hurt the Dems if one of the Supreme Court justices goes down in the next 2 years (Rehnquist is not getting any younger). You will probably see some kind of pro-life nominee from the Bush camp.

DMC

(edited by DMC on 6.11.02 0926)
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 674/3031
EXP: 11279610
For next: 191835

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on 6.11.02 1135.39
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1136.13
I've been trying to put a positive spin on the election from my point of view, and I'm really not coming up with anything. (Rendell won the PA Governers race, like everyone thought he would. That's about it for stuff I'm happy with yesterday.)

The best I can come up with is that now, when the economy continues to plummet into the toilet over the next two years, and as unemployment and crime continue to be drastically on the rise, at least now the GOP will have to accept responsibility instead of saying "Well, it's those Demmycrats...".

Oh, who am I kidding? Every problem with continue to be "Clinton's fault".
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 728/2108
EXP: 6621548
For next: 29142

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 1 day
#4 Posted on 6.11.02 1143.14
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1144.41
Yeah, the Dems sure did "job" this election.

I won't pretend it's anything other than their own damn fault though. The GOP's ran the whole time with a message of "We want to defend America and cut your taxes." The Dems ran with a message of "uh, you should vote for us because we love America too! And maybe if we win, the government will eventually pay for your kidney medication."

The Dems need to get over the Clinton message of "vote for us because we're like the Republicans, only less mean," which has completely destroyed the party in the last 10 years.

(edited by MoeGates on 6.11.02 1243)
evilwaldo
Lap cheong
Level: 78

Posts: 819/1597
EXP: 4351565
For next: 30680

Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3416 days
Last activity: 3196 days
AIM:  
#5 Posted on 6.11.02 1155.17
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1159.02
The question now for the Democrats is 'will Al Gore run in 2004?' If he runs the nominaton is his, if not then the party will have a difficult time coming up a quality candidate.

I think the media will focus the 2004 election on the economy which should play into the Democrats favor.

OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 675/3031
EXP: 11279610
For next: 191835

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on 6.11.02 1204.21
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1211.58
The Democrats lost because their message has been "Yes, George. Whatever you say, George. Just don't come in my mouth this time, George.". This pussyfooting around caused them to lose a lot of voters to the (goddamned) Green Party and a lot more to general apathy.

If they don't give people a reason to care, and if they don't convince people they're different from the Republicans, they don't have a prayer. I can't stand the GOP, but I'll never deny the fact that they're the fighters. They're the one's who'll push their agenda through. The Dems have been afraid to do anything for a damn long time and I'm sick to fucking death of it.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 350/1759
EXP: 4934411
For next: 58459

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1323 days
Last activity: 90 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#7 Posted on 6.11.02 1210.09
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1213.36
The economy is not going anywhere but up- so you won't have that to count on!
This really is a good thing. How much garbage has been held up in the House, because the Democrats did not want to help Bush by either supporting him, or openly voting against him? What about the judicial nominations? Seriously- anyone who honestly things that Roe V Wade will ever be overturned is nuts... there is no real reason for them to have dragged their heels this long.
If this election does anything, it finally puts to rest the damned "illegitimate President" arguments.... I can't wait to see the things that actually get done now that there is no lame-ass political gridlock.
And I live in California- I have seen the junk that an all Democrat government comes up with (a SODA TAX? Come on!). It will be good to see some progress in the RIGHT direction for a change...
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 141

Posts: 182/6351
EXP: 33614188
For next: 505910

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 16 hours
Last activity: 13 hours
#8 Posted on 6.11.02 1219.34
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1223.04
Olfuzzy, What about the GOP dont you like? Not "they did this" or "they do that" But what about them, specifically, idealogincally do you not like? I am not trying to bait you into a argument, I just never understood peoples hatred towards the GOP, other than thier religious affiliation.

Please, educate me a little.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 548/4700
EXP: 21603251
For next: 233411

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1277 days
Last activity: 1074 days
#9 Posted on 6.11.02 1234.02
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1235.05
The DNC leadership triumvarate should resign if the Democrats want to hav ea shot. This was a referrendum on them and Bill Clinton as much as it was Democratic policy. But we do know that being for tax cuts is a better career choice than being against them.

Oh and BOB EHRLICH IS THE FUCKING GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND. HUZZAH!!!!!!
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 676/3031
EXP: 11279610
For next: 191835

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#10 Posted on 6.11.02 1236.56
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1239.23
The Republican platform is against any kind of gun control, against abortion, against birth control, against gay marriages/adoption, pro-death penalty (although the Democrats can be lumped in there), insanely gung-ho about the War on Drugs, in favor of senseless military spending (I'm thinking along the lines of "Star Wars" here), against raising the minimum wage, against legalizing marijuana, against legal gambling, against physician-assisted suicide, against drug treatment, anti-Union, for school prayer, their economic policies only benefit the rich and they're bought and sold by the oil companies. Not to mention the fact that they fixed a Presidential election and George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Rush Limbaugh, Tom DeLay, Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Tom Ridge, Rick "The Dick" Santorum, Ann Coulter and LL Cool J are among their members.

If that's your bag, fine, but it ain't me, babe. I'm sure a Republican member could put together a similar list of why they aren't Democrats, which will probably consist of changing all the "againsts" to "for" and all the "pros" to "anti", and then throwing up a list with Bill Clinton and Al Sharpton's name on it. (And I'm pretty sure one will. And I'm even more sure it'll be Grimis. :). ) It's all a matter of philosophical differences.
DMC
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 666/1180
EXP: 2772540
For next: 97218

Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3483 days
Last activity: 3477 days
#11 Posted on 6.11.02 1239.00
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1239.29
Gee, I guess so.

DMC
bash91
Merguez
Level: 55

Posts: 83/711
EXP: 1297672
For next: 16526

Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 807 days
Last activity: 15 hours
#12 Posted on 6.11.02 1249.24
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1249.29

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    If they don't give people a reason to care, and if they don't convince people they're different from the Republicans, they don't have a prayer. I can't stand the GOP, but I'll never deny the fact that they're the fighters. They're the one's who'll push their agenda through. The Dems have been afraid to do anything for a damn long time and I'm sick to fucking death of it.


Good grief, are you channeling James Carville? I heard him make almost that exact same comment at about 2AM on CNN and I was fairly certain that it was one of the signs of the apocalypse when I found myself nodding in agreement. Seriously, this election really demonstrated that while "All politics is local," there needs to be a unified national theme or voice to assist those local politicians in their races.

In another sign of the apocalypse, Paul Begala and William Buckley both noted that one of the biggest problems for the Democrats in this election was that their platform was "We aren't W. We're not sure what we are, but we aren't W." Buckley went on to argue that one of the biggest problems for the Democrats in this cycle was that there were very few "Daschle Democrats" while there were a boatload of "Bushocrats."

While I'm certainly happy to see Tom Daschle removed from his role as obstructionist-in-chief, the renomination of the first 2 judicial nominees rated well-qualified by the ABA and rejected by the Senate, the elimination of the marriage penalty and the death tax, and a host of other conservative issues being passed by both houses, I'm less happy with the thought that this makes Al Gore the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in '04. I began dreading that campaign the moment I heard Bill Press make that suggestion last night.

Tim
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 355/1759
EXP: 4934411
For next: 58459

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1323 days
Last activity: 90 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#13 Posted on 6.11.02 1304.17
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1309.05
    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    The Republican platform is against any kind of gun control, against abortion, against birth control, against gay marriages/adoption, pro-death penalty (although the Democrats can be lumped in there), insanely gung-ho about the War on Drugs, in favor of senseless military spending (I'm thinking along the lines of "Star Wars" here), against raising the minimum wage, against legalizing marijuana, against legal gambling, against physician-assisted suicide, against drug treatment, anti-Union, for school prayer, their economic policies only benefit the rich and they're bought and sold by the oil companies. Not to mention the fact that they fixed a Presidential election and George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Rush Limbaugh, Tom DeLay, Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Tom Ridge, Rick "The Dick" Santorum, Ann Coulter and LL Cool J are among their members.

    If that's your bag, fine, but it ain't me, babe. I'm sure a Republican member could put together a similar list of why they aren't Democrats, which will probably consist of changing all the "againsts" to "for" and all the "pros" to "anti", and then throwing up a list with Bill Clinton and Al Sharpton's name on it. (And I'm pretty sure one will. And I'm even more sure it'll be Grimis. :). ) It's all a matter of philosophical differences.


You have, quite completely, listed all of the things that the liberal media accuse the Republican Party of as scare tactics. Nothing like a Democrat telling a Republican what he believes!
Some of your more blatant errors-
Military spending- This is a classic example of Republican ideals. However, you have the CONTEXT completely wrong. Republicans, in general, are anti-big fedral government. The constitution originally intended for more powerful state governments, and a federal government with some very limited duties, one of the most important of which is "Provide for the common defense." The Republicans support military spending not because they want to build an "evil Empire," rather, THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THAT IS THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB!!"
Economic policies only benefit the rich- That is the biggest, most obsene lie I have ever heard. So you are telling me that Bush's tax cut only helped the rich? The Republican's are for fair tax laws, and just because they do not give tax refunds to unemployed people who don't pay taxes in the first place, does not mean that they only are interested in helping rich people. It is a damned fact that the top 50% of wage earners pay almost ALL of the taxes that this government collects. So the government decides they are collecting more money than they need, and the BOTTOM 50%, the people who pay for less than 4% of the money this government collects in taxes, should benifit more than the people who pay the lion's share in a tax cut? Please! The very fact that the Republicans are for a smaller government means that tax cuts will come, and people who put in more taxes are going to, logically, benefit more from a tax cut. But the people who put in less are still going to benefit. Why should the top 50% of wage-earners be taxed more for working harder?
Birth Control, drug treatment, oil companies- Give me a break. I might as well say that the Democrats are in favor of selling your daughters off to whorehouses and castrating your sons, and that they are bought and sold by condom companies. It is the same, unsubstantiated, bullshit that typical Democrats (with the help of the press) try to use to scare people into thinking Republicans are evil. If you are going to be anti-Republican, at least get your facts straight.
Yup, I am against abortion, but I personally do not think it should be ILLEGAL, and I do not think it ever will be. Yes, I am anti-Union, because current labor laws have eliminated the need for them, and quite honestly, they have grown beyond providing for workers' rights, and have developed into independant entities that seek only to increase their own power. Look at the Dockworkers on the west coast for crying out loud! Going on strike when they make $100k a year, and only have to work 20 hours a week? And THIS is a necessary union?
And fixing a presidential election? BULLSHIT! If anyone is guilty of election fraud, it is Democrats. What about bussing college student's into Minnesota, because they have same-day voter registration? What about the DNC submitting thousands of sequentially numbered absantee ballot filled out in the same handwriting? What about the New Jersey "canditate replacement," that blatantly violated election law (that the Demo's pocket judges helped through)? What about the Miami touchscreens that MAGICALLY changed peoples Republican votes to Democrat? What about the FLOOD of lawyers the DNC dispatched throughout the country to legally challenge ANY election that was close enough to do so? There are more cases of suspicious Democratic election behavior than I can possibly name here, and I challenge you to show me a solid Republican example.
OFB- how about talking about the ideals you support instead of blindly attacking Republicans with hollow arguments and cliche's that our "neutral" media have taught you all about? I mean, really! They way you talk all Republicans are evil bastards who want nothing more than to kill poor people and burn the Earth to a crisp. That, frankly, is ridiculous.
And, I am a pro-legalization of pot Republican, anti school prayer (formalized, that is, but if a kid wants to pray, let him) and pro legalized gambling, so you have me there....



(edited by Pool-Boy on 6.11.02 1110)
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1123/3273
EXP: 12787615
For next: 303738

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 207 days
Last activity: 8 days
#14 Posted on 6.11.02 1333.04
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1334.08
They way you talk all Republicans are evil bastards who want nothing more than to kill poor people and burn the Earth to a crisp. That, frankly, is ridiculous.


Ridiculous or not, that is what a lot of us who sit on the left believe about those who sit on the right. It's rather funny actually. My high school was a little hippy school in the woods, populated mostly by kids who would consider themselves liberals. A few however have conservative parents, and think of themselves as conservatives. Whenever one of them would let this be known, all the other kids would look at him/her completely surprised. Number one response? "You're a Republican? But you're such a nice person!"

The truth (about both parties) lies somewhere in between both extremes. I think the main problem here is just a lack of education. Smear campaigns wouldn't be so effective if the majority of the voters knew more about the issues at hand, rather than what is given to them by the politicians.

-Jag

Of course, people have trouble remembering/understanding the issues from the last election, much less issues dating back over 200 years.
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 823/7534
EXP: 43780303
For next: 521459

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 487 days
Last activity: 487 days
#15 Posted on 6.11.02 1344.10
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1349.25

    Originally posted by Grimis
    The DNC leadership triumvarate should resign if the Democrats want to hav ea shot. This was a referrendum on them and Bill Clinton as much as it was Democratic policy. But we do know that being for tax cuts is a better career choice than being against them.

    Oh and BOB EHRLICH IS THE FUCKING GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND. HUZZAH!!!!!!






The most important thing of all: A Kennedy loses. Maybe now the Camelot pablum that the media loves will disappear. Except for Ted and his retarded son Patrick, the Kennedy legacy is dead.
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 678/3031
EXP: 11279610
For next: 191835

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#16 Posted on 6.11.02 1442.26
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1448.38
Bash91 - that's the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me on this board.


    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
      Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
      The Republican platform is against any kind of gun control, against abortion, against birth control, against gay marriages/adoption, pro-death penalty (although the Democrats can be lumped in there), insanely gung-ho about the War on Drugs, in favor of senseless military spending (I'm thinking along the lines of "Star Wars" here), against raising the minimum wage, against legalizing marijuana, against legal gambling, against physician-assisted suicide, against drug treatment, anti-Union, for school prayer, their economic policies only benefit the rich and they're bought and sold by the oil companies. Not to mention the fact that they fixed a Presidential election and George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Rush Limbaugh, Tom DeLay, Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Tom Ridge, Rick "The Dick" Santorum, Ann Coulter and LL Cool J are among their members.

      If that's your bag, fine, but it ain't me, babe. I'm sure a Republican member could put together a similar list of why they aren't Democrats, which will probably consist of changing all the "againsts" to "for" and all the "pros" to "anti", and then throwing up a list with Bill Clinton and Al Sharpton's name on it. (And I'm pretty sure one will. And I'm even more sure it'll be Grimis. :). ) It's all a matter of philosophical differences.


    You have, quite completely, listed all of the things that the liberal media accuse the Republican Party of as scare tactics. Nothing like a Democrat telling a Republican what he believes!
    Some of your more blatant errors-
    Military spending- This is a classic example of Republican ideals. However, you have the CONTEXT completely wrong. Republicans, in general, are anti-big fedral government. The constitution originally intended for more powerful state governments, and a federal government with some very limited duties, one of the most important of which is "Provide for the common defense." The Republicans support military spending not because they want to build an "evil Empire," rather, THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THAT IS THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB!!"



I don't deny that military spending is important, but you missed my key point there. They refuse to spend any money intelligently. We had two skyscrapers taken down last year by terrorists armed with boxcutters. The Star Wars Missile Defense plan is a complete and total waste of money that wouldn't protect us even if it does work, which it won't, and the only reason the very concept of it stays on the table is because it was Reagan's idea. If you want to pump more money into the military, how about paying the soldiers who are risking their lives for this country a little more than the pittance they're getting, and that would give us the added benefit of attracting more people, and more qualified people, into the army in the first place.

And the GOP pretends to be all about state's rights, but they haven't been for a long time. California passes a bill to allow medicinal marijuana. Ashcroft comes in and puts a stop to it. Oregon passes a law allowing physician assisted suicide. Ashcroft comes in and puts a stop to it. Doesn't sound like a smaller federal government to me.

Economic policies only benefit the rich- That is the biggest, most obsene lie I have ever heard. So you are telling me that Bush's tax cut only helped the rich? The Republican's are for fair tax laws, and just because they do not give tax refunds to unemployed people who don't pay taxes in the first place, does not mean that they only are interested in helping rich people. It is a damned fact that the top 50% of wage earners pay almost ALL of the taxes that this government collects. So the government decides they are collecting more money than they need, and the BOTTOM 50%, the people who pay for less than 4% of the money this government collects in taxes, should benifit more than the people who pay the lion's share in a tax cut? Please! The very fact that the Republicans are for a smaller government means that tax cuts will come, and people who put in more taxes are going to, logically, benefit more from a tax cut. But the people who put in less are still going to benefit. Why should the top 50% of wage-earners be taxed more for working harder?


Why shouldn't the people who can afford to pay higher taxes pay the higher taxes? I feel very sorry for the Julia Roberts of the world, but it seems a little more fair to me than lowering taxes for the wealthy and fleecing welfare mothers, but that's just my crazy, bleeding-heart liberalism shining through again.


Birth Control, drug treatment, oil companies- Give me a break. I might as well say that the Democrats are in favor of selling your daughters off to whorehouses and castrating your sons, and that they are bought and sold by condom companies. It is the same, unsubstantiated, bullshit that typical Democrats (with the help of the press) try to use to scare people into thinking Republicans are evil. If you are going to be anti-Republican, at least get your facts straight.


So, you're telling me that Republicans are suddenly in favor of drug treatments rather than jail time, the use of birth control being taught in sex education classes rather than the "if we ignore the problem it doesn't exist" method of teaching abstinence only, and no longer accept huge campaign contributions from, and base their foreign policy around, oil special interests. Huh, guess I haven't been paying attention.

Yup, I am against abortion, but I personally do not think it should be ILLEGAL, and I do not think it ever will be.


Well, the last time a vote to overthrow Roe V. Wade came up, it was voted down by a razor-thin 5-4 vote. Now, should, say, Ruth Bader Ginsburg retire - or pass away - while a Bush is in office, well, I don't think he'll be appointing a left-winger in her place.

Yes, I am anti-Union, because current labor laws have eliminated the need for them, and quite honestly, they have grown beyond providing for workers' rights, and have developed into independant entities that seek only to increase their own power. Look at the Dockworkers on the west coast for crying out loud! Going on strike when they make $100k a year, and only have to work 20 hours a week? And THIS is a necessary union?


Can't say I entirely disagree with you, but I can't believe that a bunch of wrestling fans don't realize what happens when labor isn't allowed to unionize. Ask Tony Atlas about it sometime.

And fixing a presidential election? BULLSHIT! If anyone is guilty of election fraud, it is Democrats. What about bussing college student's into Minnesota, because they have same-day voter registration? What about the DNC submitting thousands of sequentially numbered absantee ballot filled out in the same handwriting? What about the New Jersey "canditate replacement," that blatantly violated election law (that the Demo's pocket judges helped through)? What about the Miami touchscreens that MAGICALLY changed peoples Republican votes to Democrat? What about the FLOOD of lawyers the DNC dispatched throughout the country to legally challenge ANY election that was close enough to do so? There are more cases of suspicious Democratic election behavior than I can possibly name here, and I challenge you to show me a solid Republican example.


Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah... Seriously, if anyone wants to have the 2000 Election conversation again, I suppose I'm up for it, but even I'm tired of this subject. (Although, you're right - that wasn't fair in New Jersey.)

OFB- how about talking about the ideals you support instead of blindly attacking Republicans with hollow arguments and cliche's that our "neutral" media have taught you all about? I mean, really! They way you talk all Republicans are evil bastards who want nothing more than to kill poor people and burn the Earth to a crisp. That, frankly, is ridiculous.


Dammit, Pool-Boy, you're absolutely right! I totally forgot how anti-environment they are! Thanks a million. I feel like an idiot.

The ideals I support? Well, read why I dislike the Republicans and turn everything around backwards. I'm in favor of individual freedom - even if said person wants to do something that might hurt himself, including smoke a joint.

I think every American should have the right to own a gun, unless, of course, they're a convicted felon or mentally unstable, and I think that it's in the best interest of the American people to make goddamn sure that such people cannot buy a firearm. And I don't think you need a semi-automatic weapon to hunt deer, either. I also think that, if someone has a child and a gun in the same house, and they want a trigger lock, they should get it, and I can't fathom why anyone who isn't a criminal would be against ballistic fingerprinting, especially since it's what's going to damn sure get the DC Snipers convicted. I'm not in favor of "taking your guns away", but neither are any of the Democrats. That's just scare tactics from the "liberal media".

I'm not a huge proponent of abortion, and I don't think I could have one if I was a woman, but I'm not a woman, and therefore have no right to pontificate on the subject. Besides, as cold as it sounds, we've already got too many damn people on this planet.

I think everyone should make enough money to be able to pay rent and buy food. Crazy liberalism, I know. (Try living on minimum wage sometime. Thank god I still live at home, because, working at a Toys R Us, when it's not the Xmas rush season, I usually pull in about $60 a week.)

I think more money ought to go into our public schools than into our prisons - and if we legalize pot, we'd have a lot less prisoners, and I think school vouchers *taking away* money from struggling schools is the most mindless idea to come out of our mindless President's mouth yet.

I think sending our country into an unprovoked war for the first time in American history is a hell of a lot worse than lying about a blowjob.

And, I am a pro-legalization of pot Republican, anti school prayer (formalized, that is, but if a kid wants to pray, let him) and pro legalized gambling, so you have me there....


So I won't bother to argue these points. Besides, you're not a Republican - you're a Libertarian.

Oh, and no matter how much the "liberal media" likes to scare you, it's perfectly legal for a kid to pray in school - and I'd be damned pissed off if it ever wasn't. It's only illegal for the school to encourage said-prayer.

Sorry to hijack the thread, folks. I just felt compelled to defend myself here. Continue with the election thoughts.

EDIT: Wow, was my html fucked up! I hope I fixed it.

EDIT NUMERO DOS: Well, not entirely. Maybe now.
(edited by OlFuzzyBastard on 6.11.02 1546)

(edited by OlFuzzyBastard on 6.11.02 1548)
DMC
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 667/1180
EXP: 2772540
For next: 97218

Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3483 days
Last activity: 3477 days
#17 Posted on 6.11.02 1446.57
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1449.28
"And the GOP pretends to be all about state's rights, but they haven't been for a long time. California passes a bill to allow medicinal marijuana. Ashcroft comes in and puts a stop to it. Oregon passes a law allowing physician assisted suicide. Ashcroft comes in and puts a stop to it. Doesn't sound like a smaller federal government to me."

But I take it you've heard of that little thing called the Civil War, right? Someone can stand for "states rights" but that doesn't mean they are saying that *anything* a state wishes to do is ok. There is still something called a Constitution and a federal government.

DMC

(edited by DMC on 6.11.02 1250)
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 732/2108
EXP: 6621548
For next: 29142

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 1 day
#18 Posted on 6.11.02 1503.10
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1505.46
SO you draw the line where? Where you happen to want it drawn?

Neither party is for "State's Right" when said State disagrees with them, and both are for it when said state agrees. I have yet to hear either party say "you know, with disagree with that law Oklahoma passed, but we think they should be allowed to do it anyway. State's rights and all."
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 358/1759
EXP: 4934411
For next: 58459

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1323 days
Last activity: 90 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on 6.11.02 1533.51
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1539.52
Well, it seems pretty clear that the reason that Ashcroft went after those things was because, I don't know, he was attorney general, it was his JOB, and as attorney general he is supposed to look beyond partisan politics? Sounds to me like he did exactly what he was supposed to.
Ironaically, OFB, you agreed with almost everything I said, which is scary enough. But on what you DIDN'T..
Why should someone pay more taxes just because they can afford it? Honestly? I mean, look at it this way.. the REASON that wealthier people get certain tax advantages in some situations is because they do not just take their money and stuff it under a matress somewhere. They invest it. They run companies. They buy bonds. This money that the government does NOT need gets put back into the economy, where it creates jobs for that same welfare mother, and people like her, so they do not have to take as much of our (the government's) money. Honestly, there is no way to give a tax break without some of it going to that top 50% of wage-earners, because frankly, if you gabve tax cuts only to the bottom 50%, it would amount to nothing. When has there ever been a tax cut in your working life that you did not benefit, at least a little, by?
As far as living on minimun wage- I have done it. I did it when the minimum wage was $4.25 an hour. And yeah, it was hard. But I busted my ass and I make more now. And Republicans are not about freezing the minimum wage for all time. Quite frankly, Democrats tend to go overboard in raising it. If you raise it too high, labor costs too much and either A)Jobs go away, or B) things you buy cost more. It is simple economics. Letting the minimum wage rise in step with inflation is the best way to go, or else your economy gets torn to shreds.
This is the thing I notice about Democrat arguments. Take Social Security. The damned thing is broken. Republicans come up with an idea to fix it. Democrats, instead of coming up with another alternative (leaving it alone is clearly not a viable alternative), they start screaming about how Bush hates Old people, and wants to take away their social security, when all he is talking about is fixing it! Your minimum wage and other social issues go here. Republicans drag their feet on these issues because there are money concerns that need to be addressed. It is not that they are uncaring, they just see that money is not infinite, it comes from the taxpayer, and money for social programs needs to be spend effectivly and RESPONSIBLY. Government is not the place for unbridled compassion, rather level thinking. And when they say things like... "Whoa... $15.75 an hour is too high for the minimum wage.. that will be disasterous to our economy," The press comes out in full force with "Republicans Agaist Raising Minimum Wage- THEY HATE THE POOR!" and their message is totally drowned out.
As far as pot goes- Hell yeah, legalize it. You can tax the hell out of it (would pay for a lot) and it would still be cheaper than you could buy on the street, it would provide another cash crop for US farmers, the quality would be better and the pot would be safer, and crime would drop. I am all for it...
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 661/2042
EXP: 6315267
For next: 77532

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 3041 days
Last activity: 255 days
#20 Posted on 6.11.02 1549.05
Reposted on: 6.11.09 1549.37

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    The Democrats lost because their message has been "Yes, George. Whatever you say, George. Just don't come in my mouth this time, George.". This pussyfooting around caused them to lose a lot of voters to the (goddamned) Green Party and a lot more to general apathy.

    If they don't give people a reason to care, and if they don't convince people they're different from the Republicans, they don't have a prayer. I can't stand the GOP, but I'll never deny the fact that they're the fighters. They're the one's who'll push their agenda through. The Dems have been afraid to do anything for a damn long time and I'm sick to fucking death of it.



The Democrats screamed long and loud about Nader's "few differences between Bush and Gore/Democrats and Republicans" rhetoric of 2000 -- and yet they seemingly didn't learn a damn thing from the experience. Two years of waffling and passive-resistance and lukewarm "Vote for us, because, er, well, we're not Republicans" campaigning later, we have a Republican sweep, and the Dems have the gall to look surprised about it.

Interestingly, a week before the 2000 election, Nader shredded Gore and Lieberman not over the issues, but over their terrible campaign: "If [Gore] cannot defeat the bumbling Texas governor with that horrific record, what good is he? It should be a slam-dunk." Last week, roughly a week before THIS election, Nader wrote an open letter to the Democratic Party (search on Google, you'll find it) excoriating them over similar campaign failures, all but begging them -- the vulnerable issues are RIGHT THERE, why aren't you using them to your advantage?

For someone who many claim is the sworn enemy of the Democrats, Nader's analysis sounded a hell of a lot like Carville's postgame wrapup, but at a time where it might've done some good (BEFORE the election) had anyone taken the unsolicited advice and gone on the attack.

If the Democrats had ten Carvilles and weren't afraid to use them, they could win elections by the truckload. Or they could refuse to dismantle the Democratic Leadership Committee and keep wondering why they're losing. Right now, they're like a baseball player who won't swing the bat, closing his eyes and hoping to draw a walk.
Pages: 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: Al Qaeda and Everyone else
Next thread: Here we go again. Again.
Previous thread: Tactics like these....
(1983 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Jim Jeffords Worst Nightmare and General Election ThoughtsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.225 seconds.