Democrats & Liberals Archives

Another Take on the Election

An editorial from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal:

About the best thing Republicans can say after Tuesday’s election debacle is that at least it happened in an off-off year. This was a Democratic rout any way you look at it, from the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey to the ballot initiatives in California.

Some interesting comments on how the cuture war issues played out in Virginia.

Posted by Woody Mena at November 11, 2005 7:40 AM
Comments
Comment #91961

Woody:

Tuesday certainly wasn’t a banner day for Republicans. But the reality is that the Democrats retained governorships in two states. They did not gain two governorships—they retained them.

The media wants to claim a rout, but in reality its a relatively normal thing. As a conservative, I’m okay with the left of the country feeling like they won in a rout. I suspect they will find 2006 a bit different.

In any case, to use a boxing analogy, the Dems came out swinging and won Round 1 (and maybe even Round 2). The fight is 15 rounds, so there is a long way to go.

Should be interesting.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at November 11, 2005 8:21 AM
Comment #91966

I’m glad things went the way they did on Tuesday - and I hope it means what some people sat it means. I’m not sure - and I don’t care right now. If people need it, I hope they gain a sense of momentum for the DEMs and the courage to pursue 2006 even more vigorously.

I remember 5pm almost exactly one year ago, after 8 hours of canvassing neighborhoods and making phone calls. I KNEW we had won the election. There was something in the air, and it just felt like there could be no other possible outcome.

DAMMIT! (wheeeeeew… must remember to breathe deep… relax.)

OK, so I was wrong then. My point is, then even with a lot of hard work and an obsessive focus, gut feelings and assumptions with regards to elections can be completely wrong. My fear is that DEMs might see victory in 2006 as inevitable, and fail to make it happen in the real world.

But then again, I’m a 40 yr old Dem, and it’s not in my nature to be optimistic when it comes to elections.

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 8:41 AM
Comment #91968

JBOD,

I didn’t say the Dems won in a rout, the Wall Street Journal did. If the WSJ is “left”, then Attila the Hun is a moderate.

It is true that the Dems already had those governorships. On the other hand, the candidates themselves were NOT incumbents. If you don’t think that is a big difference, ask Al Gore.

Another problem with the “just maintaining the status quo” analysis is that one of the states is Virginia. If it is now being to be normal for VA to have a Democratic governor, then that is good news!

tony,

I certainly don’t want anyone to be complacent.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 11, 2005 8:59 AM
Comment #91969

“Another problem with the “just maintaining the status quo” analysis is that one of the states is Virginia. If it is now being to be normal for VA to have a Democratic governor, then that is good news!”

Woody- my home state of Massachusetts has now have Republican governors for 15 straight years. I am just saying…

Anyway, the election results were depressing to me in every way. Not only did Democrats win governorships and many of Arnold’s amendments failed, but the only conservative wins seem to be getting gay marriage bans. Bad day in every respect.

Posted by: Misha Tseytlin at November 11, 2005 9:06 AM
Comment #91971

… and when banning gay marriage is seen as a victory… damn. That is depressing.

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 9:09 AM
Comment #91973

Woody:

I didn’t say the Dems won in a rout, the Wall Street Journal did.

Which is precisely why I said that “the media wants to claim a rout”, as oppose to saying that you said it. And I’m not specifically referring to the WSJ when I use the term “media”. I’m referring to the media as a whole.

As I said, its not a banner day for Repubs, and certainly a victory for the Dems. But to consider it a rout would be overcharacterizing it by a long ways, in my opinion, regardless of who does it.

It does help Warner in his hopes for a Presidency, as it indicates that he has “coat-tails”. But its still way early to be opining about 08 with any degree of accuracy.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at November 11, 2005 9:30 AM
Comment #91975

JBD -

I predict that in ‘08, 95% of the elections will be own by the 2 major political parties. (How’s that for clairvoyance?)

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 9:34 AM
Comment #91976

(should’ve read : won by… not ‘own by’ )

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 9:35 AM
Comment #91986

But the polls show Americans trust Democrats to do a better job than Republicans by only 1% point, Woody.
I am among them. The DNC’s first priority is regaining majority power, which means reelection for its incumbents and replacing Republican held seats. Their 2nd priority is keeping that majority by hook or crook, and their 3rd priority is to blame Republicans for their unwillingness and inability to solve America’s intractable problems, defictis, border security, downward wage pressures due to globalization, salvaging America’s safety net without tanking the economy, and reversing the decreasing performance of American schools K-12.

American voters need to kick Republicans out of Office. But, you know what? They also need to kick Democratic incumbents out as well. And keep kicking them out of office until we get political parties who finally realize that reelection will depend upon bipartisan solutions to real problems, instead of bipartisan blame and gridlock.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 11, 2005 10:30 AM
Comment #91990

JBOD,

Pardon me, you did choose your words carefully.

But the “the media” is hardly monolithic. If the Wall Street Journal has something positive to say about the Dems, I think that means something (and I look at their op-ed page pretty regularly).

David,

I have a lot of problems with the Democratic Party, but lately the country has been in danger of not even having a SECOND party, much less a third one.

Misha,

What’s so bad about Democratic governors, from your POV? Republican governors raise taxes, too.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 11, 2005 10:42 AM
Comment #91991

Reposted from a similar thread, seems more suitible here.

One of the interesting things about the election in Virginia is that prior to the election we had a Democratic Governor and a Democratic Lt. Governor.

Post election we have a Democratic Governor which represents no party change but the Republican candidate for Lt. overnor defeated the Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor.

Also, in 2001, the Democrat won the election for Governor with 52% of the vote and the losing Republican had 47% of the vote. In 2004, the winning Democrat got the same 52% of the vote and the losing Republican got 46% of the vote.

The big winner here is the Independent candidate who doubled his % of the vote from 1% in 2001 to 2% in 2004. That’s progress.

Posted by: steve smith at November 11, 2005 10:47 AM
Comment #92015

Tim Kaine publicly thanked GOD for his victory. He ran as a values Democrat. That is the lesson for Dems. The moveon.org folks are losers. The Deaniacs will lead you down to road to perdition. Dems can win when they act and talk like normal Americans.

Posted by: Jack at November 11, 2005 11:47 AM
Comment #92017

All that happened Tue. was an election was held, the Democrats gained some Governors. It’s still going to be bueiness as usuall. The politicians are still going to take care of the big money donors and special intrest. Meanwhile the taxpayers are still going to get screwed.
The only way to stop this is vote the two main parties out and vote in independents or third parites. And keep doing it until OUR EMPLOYEES get the message the WE THE TAXPAYERS are THEIR BOSSES, and NOT the other way around.

Posted by: Ron Brown at November 11, 2005 11:56 AM
Comment #92022

David - I can’t believe it! We agree.

Posted by: Ilsa at November 11, 2005 12:09 PM
Comment #92026

Ron:

All that happened Tue. was an election was held, the Democrats gained some Governors.

Just to be accurate, the Democrats did NOT gain some Governors. They held on to two Governerships, having had Democratic governors in New Jersey and Virginia. Its being reported as the Democrats gaining, but in reality its the status quo. Still important for Dems, and a victory of sorts, but not the “rout” that the media is presenting.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at November 11, 2005 12:24 PM
Comment #92027

True, we didn’t “gain” the governorships in VA and NJ. But, we did win against two very good Republicans who were supportive of Bush (and he of them). The thing that is great about retaining these seats is that it shows that people are finally realizing that the Republican Party in this country does not speak for everyone. And, they must be stopped with their radicalism and corruption. I predict a Democratic victory nationwide in 2006.

Posted by: megan at November 11, 2005 12:25 PM
Comment #92029

—-
Tim Kaine publicly thanked GOD for his victory. He ran as a values Democrat. That is the lesson for Dems. The moveon.org folks are losers. The Deaniacs will lead you down to road to perdition. Dems can win when they act and talk like normal Americans.
—-

So the only thing you have to do to win the Majority of Americans is to publicly act like a Christian?

Or is it ‘thanks God’ for victory and ye shall receive?

Good thing we’re not in Roman times - it’d be ‘the best way to succeed is toss the Christians to the lions’.

Of course, I would completely disagree with you as to what being a ‘normal American’ means. Statistically, I’m about as ‘normal’ as you can get in America (except I vote - the normal American doesn’t.) I’m also a member of MoveOn and heavily support Dean.

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 12:25 PM
Comment #92030

Is it true that neither candidate for the Gov. seats on Tuesday were incumbents?

If that’s the case, then it’s hardly the same thing as ‘holding on to’ those seats they way it sounds (i.e. - that incumbents won…)

Does anyone know the expected % of non-incumbent, same party holding onto Gov. seats? (In North Carolina, we’re 100% for the candidate named Jim. Didn’t apply in the last election.)

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 12:29 PM
Comment #92039

Tony:

Statistically, I’m about as ‘normal’ as you can get in America (except I vote - the normal American doesn’t.) I’m also a member of MoveOn and heavily support Dean.

The second sentence, of course, negates the first :)

Also, I didn’t state that the governors were incumbents. I said the Democratic party held on to two governorships. But your point about that distinction is correct…it means more than if the governors were incumbents, in my view.

Still, all in all, its two states that retain Democratic governors. While some might call this a signal to the country, its really only the media and the Democrats that are pushing that. We’ll find out in a year if it is so.

Posted by: jeobagodonuts at November 11, 2005 1:20 PM
Comment #92044

Jack:
“Tim Kaine publicly thanked GOD for his victory.”

Wow. That’s huge… not!

“He ran as a values Democrat.”

As opposed to the Republican’s, of whom people are now coming to realize have no values, despite all the empty lip-service they give to them.

“The moveon.org folks are losers.”

Says who? Those with no real values?

“The Deaniacs will lead you down to road to perdition.”

Never take advice from the opposition, kids.

“Dems can win when they act and talk like normal Americans.”

So, in your opinion do “normal Americans” approve of robbing the middle class and the poor to give more and more to the rich? Or like to start unnecessary wars, and don’t mind sacrificing their children for no good reason? Or like the idea of permitting corporations to dictate both domestic and foreign policy? Or condone torture and the idea of melting the skins off of a civilian population during wartime? Or want to trash the environment and ignore the dangers of global warming? Or think it’s great that their leaders would become Traitors to the country simply to gain a few political points? Or think it’s okay if their leaders are obviously corrupt and crooked?

No, normal American’s don’t approve of any of that, and that’s why they’re now voting for the Dems.

tony:
“Good thing we’re not in Roman times - it’d be ‘the best way to succeed is toss the Christians to the lions’.”

:^) Good one, Tony!

Posted by: Adrienne at November 11, 2005 1:41 PM
Comment #92047

This is what most “normal American’s” think these days:
AP-Ipsos poll: Most Americans Doubt Bush’s Honesty

Posted by: Adrienne at November 11, 2005 2:00 PM
Comment #92048

Adrienne

You don’t have to take my advice. I understand your reluctance. But clearly Kaine sold himself as a moderate successor to a moderate governor. He talked about giving municipalities more control over their zoning laws; he talked about schools; he talked about roads. He didn’t talk about hating Bush or talk much aboutthe war in Iraq. I found nothing particular to dislike in Kaine, just like I find nothing particular to dislike in Mark Warner. If you Dems want a future, these are the kinds of guys you need.

The moveon.org and the Dean people are to your party what Anne Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are to mine. I find them entertaining and I enjoy some of the things they say, but I wouldn’t stake my future on them. That is good advice.

Posted by: Jack at November 11, 2005 2:08 PM
Comment #92050

—-
“Statistically, I’m about as ‘normal’ as you can get in America (except I vote - the normal American doesn’t.) I’m also a member of MoveOn and heavily support Dean.”

The second sentence, of course, negates the first :)
—-
I don’t care what stats say, though - in reality, that first sentence is absolute, complete fiction. I’ve met a few people I might (at first glance) consider normal - but after looking deeper, my skin started to crawl. I think the few normal people out there usually show up in CSI TV scripts.

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 2:10 PM
Comment #92060

“If you Dems want a future, these are the kinds of guys you need.”

If you Republican’s want a future, you might want to quit demonizing the Democrats while simultaneously trying to tell them what they need to do. Instead, you could start thinking about what your party has come to stand for over the past five years. In other words, perhaps the GOP should start showing the Dem’s a bit of respect, and begin cleaning their own house?

“The moveon.org and the Dean people are to your party what Anne Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are to mine.”

Coulter and Limbaugh are hatefilled idiots who never, ever get their facts straight, and they certainly shouldn’t be equated with either Moveon or Dean.
Rather than an insane and bile-filled talking-head, Moveon is a political action committee that doesn’t always go along with what the Democrats are doing, but who, with their petitions and campaigns, are doing a very good job of keeping the Democratic party from becoming Republican Lite.
And rather than an overweight blow-hard drug addict and liar, Howard Dean is the DNC chairman — who happens to be doing one fantastic job for his party. His goal as chairman was to commit the party to winning elections at every level of government and in every region of the country, as well as organizing and directly raising individual state money in all voting precincts in the country. He has done that. The fact that so many Democratic candidates have just won should be considered a strong indicator of how well Dean is doing in his role.
Also, his grassroots-style fundraising has managed to raise more money than any DNC Chairman within a similar post-election period. The Federal Election Commission has come out with a report that claimed he raised approximately eighty-six million dollars in the first months of 2005 — an increase of over fifty percent on the amount raised during the same time period in 2003. Now that’s a successful party chairman! And if we compare this with the RNC’s activities, we see that their fundraising during the same time period has shown an increase of just two percent.

“I find them entertaining and I enjoy some of the things they say, but I wouldn’t stake my future on them.”

I think that the Dems would do very well to stake their future upon the work of Moveon and Howard Dean — because they are both doing extraordinary things for their party.

“That is good advice.”

Like I said, I consider it very unwise to listen to the advice of the opposition.

Posted by: Adrienne at November 11, 2005 3:07 PM
Comment #92065

My fear is that we have reached a position of extreme polarization between the 2 parties.

I wish I could say that I am above that and willing to reach across to the other side in order to make things work… but the other side preaches War, torture, disdain for anyone who lives differently, speaks evil of any who disagree completely with them, and (as a matter of fact) seeks to destroy the messenger when the message does not fit within their acceptable view of the world. And - just to top things off - their leader in Congress says that he is more worried about a leak of information about ‘secret CIA prisons’ than the fact that the prisons actually exist.

And they try to force Christianity on to others - when their own actions are abhorrent to the faith.

Anyone who could support those in the Senate and the White House now - I just can’t see justification to forgive and forget. They simply have gone too far to be acceptable.

Posted by: tony at November 11, 2005 3:16 PM
Comment #92081

Will everyone please STOP and take a deep breath. My friends we are poised to take this country back to sanity and you’re wasting our collective time arguing stupid minutiae with the fringe right and their supporters. For crying out loud are you masochists? I’m going to keep saying this until I’m blue in the face and well beyond the point where you will all (okay, except for Betty Burke and a few others in here who prove we’re not all sterotypical liberal weenies) be sick of hearing me. If we don’t express our anger and point out that what is going on in our country is not a source of pleasant debate or mere disagreement, but is downright illegal, corrupt and a danger to our very society then you all deserve to live in Mullah Robertson’s theocracy sponsored by Disney, Glaxxo and ExxonMobil. Screw being nice to them all the time. Screw pleasantries. It’s okay to to show your anger - what’s going on is WRONG, period. It’s not up for discussion and you all know it.

The elections this week proved that the Republicans have blown it - it’s still up to us to present our side clearly and stop rolling over.

Of course the sycophants will write off yet another Hollywood-type spouting off, but those of you with a brain may actually appreciate John Cusack’s post today on Arianna Huffington’s site…http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-cusack/on-bush-the-dems-jon-st_b_10485.html

Posted by: roger at November 11, 2005 4:04 PM
Comment #92082

Isn’t that the Dean who says hates the Republicans and all they stand for. Or the Dean who said that only black people at a Republican convention would be the cleaning staff. I know you might think he is being clever, but reverse the terms and what have you got?

Remeber when Clinton put Sister Soulja down for her hatred? Was he wrong.

Worse for you all that Dean is head of the DNC. Consider this, around 40% of American voters consistently support Republicans. Dean says he hates them and all they stand for. Dean says he hates me and all I stand for. Dean hates my wife and my 20 year old daughter. My 17 year old son can’t vote yet, but he says he supports the Republicans. Dean hates him too. My 14 year old son helped distribute Bush literature. I suppose Dean must hate him by association. No prominent Republican has said things like Dean.

If you don’t think that is an extreme position, you must also be a hater. I hope that hate has not become such an accepted part of the mainstream to hate more than 40% of the American people.

There is much more hate on the left than the right these days. Coulter and Rush are just entertainers. They don’t speak for me. If Dean and moveon.org speak for you you …

Posted by: Jack at November 11, 2005 4:10 PM
Comment #92086

Jack,

I wish Rush Limbaugh were just an entertainer. Unfortunately, he is a revered, influential political figure. He may not speak for you, personally, but it would be crazy to say he doesn’t speak for conservatives and Republicans.

Ann Coulter is just plain nuts, or pretends to be. There is no comparable figure on the left I am even aware (maybe some moron at a college newspaper or something).

Newt Gingrich is/was nastier than Howard Dean any day of the week.

I would agree with you so far as Dean is not a great leader. (Sorry, Adrienne). His “white, Christian” comment was silly. Not crazy or hateful, but counterproductive.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 11, 2005 4:34 PM
Comment #92091

joebagodonut
I stand correctedon the Governors.
But it’s still going to be business as usuall unless the voters wakeup and start firing the 2 main parties incumbents. Then replace them with eirther Independent or third party canidates.

Posted by: Ron Brown at November 11, 2005 4:47 PM
Comment #92092

Woody

I suspect that you are a moderate too.

Posted by: Jack at November 11, 2005 4:50 PM
Comment #92100

Woody:
“I would agree with you so far as Dean is not a great leader. (Sorry, Adrienne).”

Woody, I strongly disagree. Howard is doing exactly what he’s supposed to be doing. Namely, raise a hell of a lot of money, energize the base, and be a total bulldog towards the opposition.

Posted by: Adrienne at November 11, 2005 5:06 PM
Comment #92109

Roger,
I’ve always liked John Cusack (a rare combination of dishy, paired with obvious intelligence), and I really loved that article.
In fact, I though it was so good, I’m going to put it up again, as a link:
On Bush, the Dems, Jon Stewart, Hunter Thompson, Bill Moyers, and King (not Don)

Posted by: Adrienne at November 11, 2005 5:29 PM
Comment #92116

Jack, you said:

No prominent Republican has said things like Dean.

Here you go:

“Just turn Ashley [Lowndes County Sheriff Ashley Paulk] loose and let him arrest every Muslim that comes across the state line.”
- Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)

“Conrad, how can you live in Washington with all the n***ers?” - Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) telling a newspaper editor about a question he was asked by a rancher from his home state. He told the rancher it was a “hell of a challenge”.
“If I see someone who comes in that’s got a diaper on his head and a fan belt wrapped around the diaper on his head, that guy needs to be pulled over.” - Rep. John Cooksey (R-LA)
“Aside from doing a rain dance and making it rain—- We’ll assign that to Senator Campbell—- I’m not sure what we can do.” - Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT) suggesting that Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, the only Native American in the Senate, might help alleviate the drought of 2003
“These people are intellectually dishonest in just about everything they do or say,”…. He added, “They start by pretending that it is just another form of love. It’s sickening.” - Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC) on homosexuals
“Hitler and his supporters were Satanists and homosexuals. That’s just a true statement.” … “The notion that is involved in homosexuality, the unbridled sort of satisfaction of human passions [leads to] totalitarianism, Nazism, and communism.”- former Republican Presidential candidate Alan Keyes

That should do for starters. Who knows where Dean gets his crazy opinions…?

As to MoveOn.org, yes I can usually say they speak for me. I have not come across anything they have said or promoted that could constitute as hate speech, if that’s what you’re implying, at least no more than any other political group on either side is guilty of.

Posted by: Charles Wager at November 11, 2005 5:52 PM
Comment #92117

Sorry the quotes above are so hard to read. I forgot to replace all the unusual characters with new ones so that this badly written software would not mangle them.

Posted by: Charles Wager at November 11, 2005 5:54 PM
Comment #92121

Charles

Okay. I take that point. But I would say that those are not the same sort of thing that Dean says all the time and I suspect these Republicans had to disavow the statements. They were also not so sweeping.

In any case, I have no trouble disavowing these statements. They do not speak for me in those cases. Dean said he hated me and all Republicans. When called on it, he just repeated it. His statements were not taken out of context. They were not made lightly. It is what the hateful guy really thinks. (BTW – as a former resident of New Hampshire, I met Dean twice on the campaign trail. He is not more pleasant in person.)

I don’t mind the pep-rally type things. He can whip up the core constituents by saying that Republicans are wrong. He can criticize the policies. But when he says he hates more than 40% of the American people, he is wrong. That is why if you take the analogy test you can say Ann Coulter is to Republicans as Howard Dean is to Democrats.

We can all dispense with the howling weirdoes.

Posted by: Jack at November 11, 2005 6:18 PM
Comment #92140

Jack,

And Karl Rove said:

liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers
Rove’s comments are even more sweeping than if he had said “Democrat”, certainly more sweeping than Dean’s, and at least as untrue. You may not see it, but to liberals such as myself this is just as hateful as Dean’s comments in spite of his not actually using the word “hate”. Incidentally, I don’t recall Rove ever disavowing his statement, or feeling the slightest bit of remorse.

With that said, I’m not supporting Dean’s comments here… I do think he’s doing a good job, but I think he’d be even more effective if he would tone down the extremism—but only tone it down slightly. He’s doing well in trying to fire up the Democrats, but he could find a way to do so without drawing so much criticism. By the way, I don’t think he cares about having the support of that 40% you speak of, and I don’t think he should care…but he shouldn’t go out of his way to offend them either.

Posted by: Charles Wager at November 11, 2005 7:37 PM
Comment #92148

The Republicans have been in power for about one quarter of the time that the Democrats were in power. This after they(Republicans)wandered in the wilderness for forty years. Now they have shown the American public their true colors. Their lust for absolute power and self serving greed. In due time they will be put back in their box where they belong and we will not have to listen to them beat their chests anymore.

Posted by: Marko at November 11, 2005 8:50 PM
Comment #92157

Then what Marko? The democrats get to show their greed and lust for absolute power again?
Meanwhile the country keeps going down the tubes because NEITHER party is willing to address the REAL problems that face this country.

Posted by: Ron Brown at November 11, 2005 9:10 PM
Comment #92171

Ron Brown,

I don’t see eye-to-eye with you an some issues. However, on the issue of getting nearly all incumbents out of office….eye-to-eye my friend….eye-to-eye.

Posted by: Tom L at November 11, 2005 9:55 PM
Comment #92178
many of Arnold’s amendments failed,

Actually ALL of Arnold’s amendments failed.

but the only conservative wins seem to be getting gay marriage bans. Bad day in every respect.

Don’t forget this was also a win for the KKK.

Republican governors raise taxes, too.

What is worse, a tax and spend Democrat or a borrow and spend Republican?

Just Jack Section

Dems can win when they act and talk like normal Americans.

If you are saying that Repubs act and talk like normal Americans, then I am proud to be an abnormal Democrat.

Coulter and Limbaugh are hate filled idiots who never, ever get their facts straight
That is why if you take the analogy test you can say Ann Coulter is to Republicans as Howard Dean is to Democrats.

Even though Dean may be over the top, at least what he says is true. Ann Coulter is just a nut. Period.

Conrad, how can you live in Washington with all the n***ers?; - Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) telling a newspaper editor about a question he was asked by a rancher from his home state. He told the rancher it was a hell of a challenge;.


They were also not so sweeping.

Jack,
What is your definition of sweeping? A statement aimed at 36.4 million Americans isn’t sweeping? I beg to differ. Do you feel these statements are sweeping because they are against groups of people you feel are unimportant or not as important as your 40%?

Jack said: There is much more hate on the left than the right these days.
Oh really? Why don’t you ask a few people in the GLBT community about that. I think you’ll get a starkly different answer. When it comes to GLBT issues the Repubs are nothing short of Hate Mongers.
In any case, I have no trouble disavowing these statements. They do not speak for me in those cases. Dean said he hated me and all Republicans.

So Jack, let me get this straight. When some idiot on your side says something offensive, it doesn’t speak for your party. But when some idiot on our side says something offensive then it speaks for all Democrats? Thing that make you go Hmmm.

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 11, 2005 10:16 PM
Comment #92187

Correction:

Jack,
What is your definition of sweeping? A statement aimed at 36.4 million Americans isn’t sweeping? I beg to differ. Do you feel these statements are notsweeping because they are against groups of people you feel are unimportant or not as important as your 40%?

But I would say that those are not the same sort of thing that Dean says all the time.

Well, I agree with you here. They are much much worse than anything Dean has said.

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 11, 2005 10:34 PM
Comment #92189

Hey now. The Democrats brought use Womwns suffrage,Social security,The Clean Water Act, The Clean Air Act, Medicare, The Family Leave Act, The Civil Rights Act, The 40 hour work week etc. These are important and good things for America. The Republicans,when in power try their best to undermine all this. How can anyone possibly say there is no difference. Please do not throw your vote away.

Posted by: Bill at November 11, 2005 10:39 PM
Comment #92200

Gee Ron, I don’t remember the Democrats attempting to take away peoples civil rights. I don’t remember them giving the government broad sweeping powers to intrude into citizens lives. I don’t remember them raiding the treasury to pay off their corporate sponsors.

Posted by: Marko at November 11, 2005 11:01 PM
Comment #92208

Bill

A majority of Democrats voted against the civil rights act. It passed only because of Republican votes.

What year was the clean water act and clean air act? Who was president in 1972?

In fact, Nixon is also responsible for affirmative action in the form we know it (not a good thing, but it was Nixon)

I don’t think women’s sufferage was particularly a Dem issue. It is a long time ago, in any case. If you want to go way back, of course you know that Republicans were responsible for ending slavery and a Republican president had to fight a big war to get it done. Later the Dems enacted Jim Crow laws. Both parties have mixed records. Don’t start feeling too virtuous as a Democrat.

Posted by: Jack at November 11, 2005 11:40 PM
Comment #92209

Jack When I see kids politiking for Republicans I get the same feeling I got watching those young Nazis sing Wagner in Cabaret. Evil on the hoof

Posted by: Cass at November 11, 2005 11:44 PM
Comment #92211

Thank you Adrienne, sorry I screwed up the link. Glad you agree about the article. I saw it and realized that I’m not just pi-sing in the wind. Keep up the good fight…

Posted by: adrienne at November 11, 2005 11:46 PM
Comment #92216

Jack, it’s very easy to feel virtuous as a current democrat. Compared to the Frist/DeLay/Bush cabal our guys have a complete lock on moral and ethical values these days. And remember, the liberal/progressive base were the only ones who have seen through the emperor’s clothes the entire time.

We in here support the dems because they support our ideals most often. Unlike republicans, we’re not dogmatic and monolithic. The southern democrats voting against the civil rights act were not liberals or progressives - your boy Nixon sure exploited that racially charged divide now didn’t he? The republican president who freed the slaves and saved the union from the war of Southern Treason was, especially in the context of his time, a liberal, any way you slice it. So were the founding fathers and jesus. So is Mike Bloomberg - his huge reelection had nothing to do with his being a Republican - it was despite it - and because he is a liberal/progressive manager.

We’re not nearly as slave driven to our party nor as willing to allow it freedom of corruption as most of the current republican base. We know Nixon was responsible for the EPA and affirmative action but we also know that his many evils outweighed those few good actions. Alternatively, we know that Clinton (most likely the most effective president of the 20th century not named roosevelt) was a death penalty supporter too. A few rarified examples do not momentum make. We’re not blind as many of your peers are.

Here’s my historical perspective: the memories of great men like Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower and Nelson Rockefellor are being shamed by the modern Repubican party.

Posted by: roger at November 12, 2005 12:08 AM
Comment #92223
Worse for you all that Dean is head of the DNC. Consider this, around 40% of American voters consistently support Republicans. Dean says he hates them and all they stand for. Dean says he hates me and all I stand for. Dean hates my wife and my 20 year old daughter. My 17 year old son can’t vote yet, but he says he supports the Republicans. Dean hates him too. My 14 year old son helped distribute Bush literature. I suppose Dean must hate him by association. No prominent Republican has said things like Dean.

If you don’t think that is an extreme position, you must also be a hater. I hope that hate has not become such an accepted part of the mainstream to hate more than 40% of the American people.

There is much more hate on the left than the right these days. Coulter and Rush are just entertainers. They don’t speak for me. If Dean and moveon.org speak for you you …

Jack,

These statements really struck a nerve with me. If Howard Dean comments made you feel this way, then I am glad he said it.

Now you know what it is like for every Gay and Lesbian American, when the right spews their hatred. When the President of the United States wants to alter one of the most sacred documents in America, to say that you are less of a citizen because you are gay. The very document that guarantees our rights and that he took an oath to uphold.

You now know what it feels like to have the right tell you that your hopes and dreams of having a family and raising children don’t matter. When the right says they hate you for being gay, they hate our relationships and our partners for living openly and truthfully and they hate our children because they don’t fit into what the right’s idea of what a family should be.

How would you feel if you could go to any conservative website and see people who don’t have a clue about homosexuality dissecting and trashing your life with lies and misrepresentations? You can even look at their website’s source page to see that these people who profess to be only interested in your wellbeing are nothing but the Devil hiding behind God.

Up until today, the meta tag keywords for Focus on the Family’s website “Troubled With” were:

META NAME=”Keywords” CONTENT=”same-sex attraction,ex-gay,sexual partner,life partner,gay,lesbian,lover,butch,effeminiate,dyke,flamer,fag”

dyke, flamer, fag? This from the group that states on their home page:

We care about you. You’re not just a face in the crowd. You’ve found a safe place and someone you can trust.
From their contact page:
“The approach and perspective offered here reflect the views of the organization and its founder, Dr. James Dobson.”
So all you FOF followers: you are following a self-professed hate monger. Not very Jesus like.

Click here to go to Focus on the Family’s Troubled With. Right click on the screen and select view source.

This is a cached copy of the site. It was saved because just as suspected when FOF found out we knew about this blatant hatred, they changed the keywords.

Now they are:

META NAME=”Keywords” CONTENT=”homo,gay,lesbian,effeminate,GLISTEN,closet,son,daughter,coming out,experimentation,acting out,won’t play sports,tomboy,sissy,same-sex attraction,tolerance”

Homo, sissy? Not much better. Tolerance? What does FOF know about tolerance?

From http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2005/11/focus_on_the_me.html
Good as You

They didn’t even feel that the word “homosexual” was key, yet dyke, flamer, and fag (not to mention “butch” and a misspelled “effeminate”) were? So much for the “compassionate message of transformation and truth” the FOFers claim to offer those “troubled with” a case of the gay.

These are the people that the Republican Party have sold their soul to. I also wouldn’t be too proud to be affiliated with a party that is trying to forward an agenda that the KKK endorses.

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 12, 2005 1:16 AM
Comment #92307

In a slaughter house or a poultry/meat processing facility there is something called an eviscerating room. For those of you who are unaware, this is the room where the disembowelment of the animal takes place, organs are set aside for use or discard.

With very few exceptions of posts on topic virtally every political party and individual mentioned as being associated with that party has been eviscerated by an opposition advocate.

There are no main party people left who can be trusted, are credible, have acceptable moral values or, are much more than “idiots”.

Since there is nobody within the two main parties on whom we can rely, I think it is time to start looking elsewhere. It is time to take back government from the politicians who follow the principle of “Goverment of ME, by ME and for ME and replace it with Government of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE. That’s us, the voters.

Posted by: steve smith at November 12, 2005 11:54 AM
Post a comment