Democrats & Liberals Archives

The Republican Culture of Blame

Republicans. What can you say about Republicans? If nothing else, they are fascinating to watch. It’s like watching a dog chase it’s tail. Always trying to squirm out of a difficult situation. Always contradicting themselves. Always trying to blame their failures on somebody else.

That Liberal Press Thing Didn't Work? Blame Bush!

From washingtonpost.com:

Rep. Christopher Shays (Conn.) is using his House Government Reform subcommittee on national security to vent criticism of the White House's war strategy and new estimates of the monetary cost of the war.

[snip]

The shift is subtle, but Republican lawmakers acknowledge that it is no longer tenable to say the news media are ignoring the good news in Iraq and painting an unfair picture of the war. In the first half of this year, 4,338 Iraqi civilians died violent deaths, according to a new report by the U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq. Last month alone, 3,149 civilians were killed -- an average of more than 100 a day.

After failing to convince voters that the "liberal media" was simply giving a false impression of the condition in Iraq, they are now attacking Bush for poor planning and cost estimates. Why do they hate the President so much? It's Bush's fault I tells ya, not ours, Bush's!

Cut and Run Republicans

Faced with almost daily reports of sectarian carnage in Iraq, congressional Republicans are shifting their message on the war from speaking optimistically of progress to acknowledging the difficulty of the mission and pointing up mistakes in planning and execution.

Rep. Christopher Shays (Conn.) is using his House Government Reform subcommittee on national security to vent criticism of the White House's war strategy and new estimates of the monetary cost of the war. Rep. Gil Gutknecht (Minn.), once a strong supporter of the war, returned from Iraq this week declaring that conditions in Baghdad were far worse "than we'd been led to believe" and urging that troop withdrawals begin immediately. [emphasis mine]

Umm, no kiddin'? Just what Democrats have been saying for months. Maybe if you would listen to what Democrats have been saying, we wouldn't be in the messes we are in today.

It Was Our Agenda Before it Wasn't

And freshman Sen. John Thune (S.D.) told reporters at the National Press Club that if he were running for reelection this year, "you obviously don't embrace the president and his agenda."

Mr. Thune, you mean that agenda the Republican congress rubber-stamped and you and your colleagues have viscously defended? All of a sudden, you're against an agenda that you've embraced all along? If you didn't want to own the President's agenda, then you should have spoken out against it before now. Sorry dude, it's not just the President's agenda it's yours too.

The Iraq-Katrina Connection

"It's like after Katrina, when the secretary of homeland security was saying all those people weren't really stranded when we were all watching it on TV," said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry (R-N.C.). "I still hear about that. We can't look like we won't face reality."

Wow, linking Iraq with Katrina. The DNC should send a thank you card and a gift basket to Rep. McHenry for that one.

It Was the Democrat's Idea, Before it Was Ours

Rep. Jim Gerlach (Pa.), who like Shays is a swing-district Republican facing a tough reelection race, has introduced legislation to create clear measurements of progress in Iraq, in such areas as government stability and territory under the control of Iraqi forces.

On Tuesday, Shays joined U.S. Comptroller General David M. Walker in criticizing unreliable cost estimates of a war that is nearly 3 1/2 years old. Shays said the Defense Department has not "had respectful [cost] accounts since the end of World War II," adding that he hopes the agency will withstand an audit in his lifetime.

Gerlach took a similar road.

"Congress needs to be more proactive and aggressive in evaluating what is the progress in Iraq," he said. "The Iraqi government shouldn't feel like it's got a blank check on American lives and American dollars."

[snip]

During a debate last month, Gutknecht intoned, "Members, now is not the time to go wobbly." This week, he conceded "I guess I didn't understand the situation," saying that a partial troop withdrawal now would "send a clear message to the Iraqis that the next step is up to you."

"If we don't take the training wheels off, we will be in the same place in six months that we're in today," he said.

Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah, here, here, & here.

Can Charlie Come Out and Play War?

Republicans, especially those in swing districts, had no choice but to shift the emphasis of their war talk, lawmakers said. "The Iraq issue is the lens through which people are looking at the federal government," said Rep. Charles W. Dent (Pa.), another swing-district Republican. "That is the issue to most people. There's no question about that."

To pretend the war is resolving itself nicely is no longer an option, he said. [emphasis mine]

Well, at least one of them can admit the Republicans have been full of shit. While it is nice that some Republicans are coming around to reality, too bad they couldn’t have seen it months ago, when the Democrats did. Instead of addressing the situation and possibly changing "the course," Republicans were busy spewing their rhetoric and vitriol at the "liberal media" and Democrats.

House Majority Leader Bans Reality

Some like House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) will just never see the reality. They prefer to play partisan games and hope they can fool the voters, rather than look at this serious issue and try to find a solution.

Last week, House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) issued a statement hailing the turnover of Iraq's Muthanna province to Iraqi security forces under the headline "Progress in Iraq . . . Despite Doomsday Democrats."

On Tuesday, there was little talk of progress as he insisted that the rising sectarian violence was "nowhere close to civil war."

"Look, you have got one of two options," Boehner said. "We can pull out, walk away and watch everything that we've worked for and the Iraqis worked for fall apart and watch pure civil war break out, or we can stay the course. . . . As difficult as the problems are on the ground, it is either one of two options."

He is right about one thing though; our options are extremely limited. Perhaps we would have had more options if the Republican Congress had seriously assessed the situation a year ago, instead of turning it into partisan political mud slinging.

Priority (prī-ôrĭ-tē) (n.) Precedence, especially established by order of importance or urgency.

Besides, the Republicans have more pressing issues to deal with. Like how to make the deaths of 100 Iraqi civilians a day mesh with their "culture of life."

Bush (on stem cells): I think it's important to promote a culture of life...A society where every being counts, every person matters.

Stewart: Every. Being. Counts. Every. Person. Matters.

Bush: How many Iraq citizens have died in this war? Umm. I would say 30,000 more or less...

Stewart: Each one precious... ~The Daily Show

Of course, let's not take our eye off the more important issues like an un-passable discriminatory federal marriage amendment, non-existent flag burning, and stopping that dreaded online gambling (except horseracing, which is apparently encouraged by the Church of Conservatism.)

Gosh, now they have to figure out how to make restricting people's freedoms mesh with their "culture of personal responsibility."

...and the dog just keeps on spinning. Maybe he will catch his tail someday. Maybe he will.

Posted by JayJay Snow at July 22, 2006 4:00 PM
Comments
Comment #169802

JayJay,

Good post! Finally, enough people are seeing through this mad man and his games to be able to prune this bush.

Bush? Never heard of him

President bush’s effectiveness as a domestic president is ending not with a bang but with a whimper. Almost four months before the midterm elections, congressional Republicans fear an association with him might alienate their constituencies and result in a loss of the House of Representatives. They hold the House by only 15 seats and suddenly even previously safe districts are at risk.

With him running his mouth off and flexing a bit too much phony macho - over mislaid patriotism, spying on US citizens, cronyism with the rich and infamous, and a hundred other pissy idiocies - the time has finally come for even his former lockstep panderers to step aside.

Except, I suppose, some of those over in the red column who persist in calling anyone who speaks out against our or another country’s dire deeds as treasonous. I contend people who don’t speak out are guilty of treason!


Posted by: myles at July 22, 2006 6:24 PM
Comment #169811

I think everyone should speak out. I just wish that they had an inklining of the realities and facts of the situation instead of spouting rhetoric folled into soundbites and fed as fact all in an attempt to gain/retain power.

Which pretty much leaves the Dems and Repubs out in the cold in my book.

Posted by: Rhinehold at July 22, 2006 7:38 PM
Comment #169847

Rhinehold

So, what are the facts and realities?

Posted by: mark at July 22, 2006 9:54 PM
Comment #169871

Just a month ago, the only Senators who voted for this so-called Democratic position to bring home the troops were Byrd, Kennedy, Boxer, Feingold, Kerry and Harkin. That’s a whopping 6 senators out of 100.

Seems to me that your gripe should be directed at Democrats as well, and that at the very least you should stop pretending that the left wing internet activist position is 1) synonomous with the positions of Democratic leadership and 2) the Democratic position is the opposite of the Republican position.

There are, in fact, many differing positions on Iraq, even among Republicans, that don’t include this crude and simplistic idea that “Republicans have been full of shit” all along. To question and make suggestions is not the same thing as a wholesale embrace of the views of the Democratic Underground, which you link to in your piece.

And I’ll politely point out that whatever the Republicans are full of, the vast majority of Democrats are full of it too. You might call it shit. I’d call it good common sense.

The basic problem with your analysis here is that you’re looking at the actions of Republican officials who already have pretty extensive records of going against mainstream Republican goals. Unlike Democrats, though, you don’t see Republicans organizing to kill off anybody who doesn’t toe a party line as is currently being done to Lieberman.

Somebody like Shays, a Republican elected in Connecticut who has a record of supporting Democratic candidates over Republican ones, is hardly represantive of mainstream Republican positions.

Gerlach and Dent both represent farily liberal Pennsylvania districts. Thune, who defeated liberal Democratic senator Tom Daschle, was one of the Republicans who fought against the appointment of John Bolton.

What does this mean? That there is a diversity of opinions among Republicans?

To say that these individuals are recently coming around to a “Democratic position” is fairly preposterous considering how close some of them are to the Democratic party already.

Actually, many of the B-list Republicans named here have been and still are much farther to the left on some issues than many Democrats, including many of the most prominent Democrats.

Posted by: M P at July 23, 2006 12:09 AM
Comment #169873

Here’s a very good article from a progressive think tank: http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/incompetent

It’s important to remember all these massive failures are NOT just the result of Bush’s incompetence, they are the result of his philosophy, the same guiding philosophy shared by any of the Republicans that now want to distance themselves from him.

I’m beginning to realize much of the “incompetence” is actually cunning, malicious planning in action. The massive deficit the GOP has created is not just because they are too stupid to figure out how to balance a budget. They hope that with a deficit, the US will be forced to cut progressive programs and regulatory agencies like the EPA and FDA.

Was the administration stupid enough to think the director of a horse-racing association with no experience would be the right person for FEMA? Or, it’s possible they want to put purposely incompetent people in government agencies. Then when the government agency fails (such as FEMA during hurrican Katrina), they can say that government itself can’t do anything right, the solution of course a private contractor. Iraq may be a failure from any sane person’s perspective, but it was a victory for the oil industry and defense contrators like Haliburton.
These aren’t just stupid, incompetent people, they have a greedy, self-serving agenda and know exactly what they’re doing.

Posted by: mark at July 23, 2006 12:31 AM
Comment #169898

M_P: I agree with you slightly. Democrats are trying to take credit for the anti-war movement when they know good and well that the majority of Democratic elected officials in Congress, especially in the Senate, have been pro-war.

The only anti-war or pro-peace parties are the Green Party and to a lesser extent the Libertarian Party.

Senate Democrats Fail to Differentiate themselves from Republicans:
http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/003849.html

Posted by: Richard Rhodes at July 23, 2006 4:09 AM
Comment #169904

And when the “In Party” isn’t blaming someone else, they are spinning the economy to be “good” or “very good”. It’s so predictable. What they don’t tell you is how temporary it is. Sure, anyone can look like they are doing good while they are borrowing and printing money like crazy. $8.4 trillion of National Debt, and $12.8 trillion of Social Security Debt, and the PBGC $450 billion in the hole will catch up to us later (that’s a total of $21.65 trillion in debt. Divided that by 299 million Americans, and that is $72,408 per person (every man, woman, and child)! How many of you have your share ? Guess it will have to come out of your Social Security? Or, perhaps we can just print more money ? Only the government can pay its VISA credit card with its VISA credit card.

Both Democrats and Republicans are culpable, but the American people will be the ones that suffer most for politicians’ irresponsibility.

Posted by: d.a.n at July 23, 2006 6:27 AM
Comment #169946

——The afternoon an niteshift have made a good diagnosis of patient U.S.A. Maybe the day shift
could come up with a treatment program an suggest
long term goals to prevent the recurrence of
disabling WE the People, By the People an For
The People! Patient U.S.A may then survive with
a little TLC.

Posted by: DAVID at July 23, 2006 1:27 PM
Comment #169984

I thought other administrations did spin well. This administraiton has spin for spin for their spin. They will go down in history as not only clueless but as totally incompetant. Now only the administration but the Republican leadership must be heald accountable for the mess they have gotten this country into.

We are a little over 100 days from E-Day. Make sure you and everyone you know are registered to vote and VOTE. We must mobilize and send the Occupant of the White House as message that, “We have had enough.” Support local, state and national candidates that you believe in with your time and as much money that you can afford.

Posted by: C.T. Rich at July 23, 2006 3:38 PM
Comment #169989

My goodness. GWB is blamed for environmental doom, global warming, hurricanes, and (I’m sure this is coming eventually) the invention of the fossil fuel drinking reciprocating engine. GWB is the reason terrorists are in the world. GWB is the reason for 9/11. Indeed, he probably orchestrated the entire day! GWB is why North Korea has nukes and why Iran wants them. GWB is blamed for nazi-like behavior.

It’s good to hear from the party taunting “THE VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!!” that republicans falsely blame things on other people. That’s rich as hell.

Posted by: Ken Strong at July 23, 2006 3:46 PM
Comment #170016

JayJay,

I finally just replied to Rowan’s last article and I’ll reply to yours about the same way. It’s a brilliant article, but I’m totally confused as to what exactly the Bush administration plan is.

The only thing I can come up with is, they must want to watch everything go to hell (or get blown to hell), maybe that’s why the national debt doesn’t matter to them. I can’t help but wonder who’d possibly still support this buffoon and his administration.

Perhaps so many recent American political actions have focused on “Biblical law” because the “insiders’ know that Bush is accelerating our movement towards armageddon. I just can’t imagine any other political reasoning to neglect international diplomacy, run up a hell of a debt, allow our Armed Forces to fall into disrepair during war time, and abandon all common sense.

Those who are suicidal often display exactly the kind of tendencies that George Bush is displaying right now. The fact that so many would “drink the kool-aid” is nothing new either, just look at Jonestown. Hopefully those of us who aren’t “drinking the kool-aid” can stop this BOZO before he pulls it off.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at July 23, 2006 5:22 PM
Comment #170022

If liberals just focus on Bush’s incompetence, rather than his conservative ideology, it will just be another disaster for Dems. The Republican party will just spin it as Bush’s fault alone, and we could be stuck with more radical conservatives and America going further down the drain.

http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/incompetent

My goodness. GWB is blamed for environmental doom, global warming, hurricanes, and (I’m sure this is coming eventually) the invention of the fossil fuel drinking reciprocating engine. GWB is the reason terrorists are in the world. GWB is the reason for 9/11. Indeed, he probably orchestrated the entire day! GWB is why North Korea has nukes and why Iran wants them. GWB is blamed for nazi-like behavior.

It’s good to hear from the party taunting “THE VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!!” that republicans falsely blame things on other people. That’s rich as hell.


Conservatives love to put words in progressives’ mouths. Too bad it usually is a bunch of BS. Bush didn’t cause global warming, but he refuses to do anything about it. He’s not the only cause of environmental degradation, but his party has rolled back environmental regulations for their polluting friends’ greed. I know few, if any, liberals who actually blame Bush for 9/11 (it seems to me conspiracy theorists are a lot of the time conservatives, although small-government, libertarian-type conservatives). However he did ignore warnings to it and thus 9/11 happened on his watch. Posted by: mark at July 23, 2006 5:41 PM
Comment #170036

Mark,

I’ve read your links but I honestly don’t know what you mean by “conservative ideology”. I think I’ve used the same words in the past and I thought I knew what the ideology was. I just don’t know anymore.

It makes the Libertarians mad when i say they are the new conservatives but it seems to me that Republican party has moved towards some kind of idealistic principles that point towards a true Theocratic Party.

OTOH my Democratic Party has almost seemed to become a party of individualistic ideals while still recognizing the greater good of a responsible society. (biased ain’t I?)

I’m just not really sure what either party stands for any more. It certainly has seemed that all Republicans have stuck with Bush unless they fear losing an election. Then again, the Democrats can’t seem to agree on anything.

I’d just like to know what you mean by “conservative ideology”. I’m not arguing, I’m just very confused and curious. I personally think the Bush ideology is: if ya can’t eat it or f**k it then p**s on it!

But I have a bad attitude towards Bush & co.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at July 23, 2006 6:49 PM
Comment #170112

The thing about “conservatives” is thay refuse to take responsibility for anything. In environmental issues they refuse to pay the price for the pollution they produce. Thats why the Bush Admninistration refused to ratify the Kyoto Treaty which made polluting companies pay for their pollution. They want to keep dumping pollution into everybody’s, including Republicans, air for free.

Similiarly, they refuse to take responsiblity for the 6 years of foreign policy failure they have presided over. The Democrats that supported the war were stampeded into following them out of fear of the “conservative” campaign war chest and the overwhelmingly conservative media-Drug Addict Limbaugh and his brethern on vitriol radio and Faux News. (Was that $16 million in a special election in California for 9 months in Congress?) The policies are finally collapsing, the Taliban are rising in Afghanistan, our troops are dying in Iraq while the insurgency thrives. The Israelis are providing a distraction from the rest other failures. In fact I would not be surprised if the timing of the Israeli overreacton to prepare for the up coming elections was not coordinated.

By the way we have about 130,000 troops in Iraq. What happens if the approximately 1,000,000 man Iranian Army joins with the Shiite majority of the Iraqi people in attacking us….Does the name Custer mean anything to you?

And of course there has been a Republican Congress passing budgets since 1996 and they have no responsiblity for trillions of dollars of deficits?

Even when Republicans do take credit for something they misrepresent their roll in it. In trying to loosen the Clean Air Act provisions they state that they can do this because the air has gotten cleaner over the last 30 years…What they refuse to acknowledge is that the air has gotten cleaner because of regulations Democrats pushed over Republican objections.

The hypocrisy moves on, how many incumbent Republican Congressmem ran on the Term Limits Pledge 12 years ago saying that the Democrats were corrupt and that Congressmen should serve no more than 6 years. How many of them are now hoping they aren’t indicted in the ongoing corruption scandals?

Will we hear about this in the media? No, we will hear about gay marriage and flag burning. When was the last time you saw a picture of a flag burning in the United States?

The old saw that no one ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the American people is clearly the strategy of the Republican Party.

Thank you for tolerating my rant.

Posted by: Bill at July 23, 2006 11:34 PM
Comment #170126

Well, in the article conservative ideology mainly meant “small government” principles. However in reality the cons aren’t necessarily for a small government, as we’ve witnessed over the past 6 years. They are however against a government that helps out its citizens, as witnessed by them gutting regulatory agencies that protect the public and the Katrina non-response.

Then there’s the fact that the Republican party is completely corrupt. I don’t think corruption is an actual conservative principal, however maybe being a pro-business, pro-wealthy conservative makes you more likely to be corrupt.

Anyway, the author of that article is a linguist named George Lakoff. He apparently thinks part of the reason conservatives are so succesfful is how they use language to “frame” policy debates.
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml
The think tank he founded (www.rockridgeinstitute.org) is writing a manual for progessives on how to debate with conservatives which they’ll post for free on their web site. It might be worth a look when it comes out.

I find what he says about progressives vs. conservatives interesting. Basically he says that, psychologically, conservatives and liberals have very different views of how the world works, and this is based on how they think a parent acts toward a child. Conservatives have what he calls a “stern father” view of the government.Progressives have a “nurturant parent” view of the government.

Posted by: mark at July 24, 2006 12:53 AM
Comment #170143

Jay Jay

Good post. 100% on the money.

Posted by: Cole at July 24, 2006 4:33 AM
Comment #170153

Can anyone on the right please explain the clip that JayJay linked to on the Daily Show? I’m really quite interested in Bush’s quote about ‘not taking life to save life’.

Isn’t this what the entire Iraq debacle is (now) based on? Playing God with cells (unthinking, unfeeling, most of which are destined for the trash bin) is bad, but playing God with entire countries and their citizens (thinking, feeling, but now many of them are destined for the trash bin) is just peachy though?

Sorry, but I get a little perplexed at such moral relativism…

Posted by: Liberal Demon at July 24, 2006 6:17 AM
Comment #170349

All over US inner cities and urban areas we lose more than 100 adults, teens and children to gang related and drug related deaths. What about the racial and “sectarian” carnage here? Perhaps the Dem’s only care about Iraqis and not their urban neighbors. I always thought the Dem’s were in charge of inner cities, at least that’s what Maxine Waters says. Now where’s the blame game here? I suggest that while we are at war, let the big kids (the Bush admin) take care things, and Dem’s mind your own backyards.

Posted by: gopRkwel at July 24, 2006 8:46 PM
Comment #170362

Yeah, gop Irkel, the gang carnage is us killing us. Explain how killing innocent Iraqi’s is ok.

Posted by: ray at July 24, 2006 9:33 PM
Comment #170365

gopr

After the way Bush& co. have been “taking care of things,” NO THANKS.

Posted by: mark at July 24, 2006 9:45 PM
Comment #170367

Liberal Demon

Not “taking lives to save lives”, perhaps the most hypocritical thing Bush has said.

Posted by: mark at July 24, 2006 9:51 PM
Comment #170395

Ken,

you said: “It’s good to hear from the party taunting “THE VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!!” that republicans falsely blame things on other people. That’s rich as hell.”

so, consider -
I posted this on the other side:

I’ve run through this sooo many times… Here it is again:

The reason Kerry lost in ‘04, is because he was soundbited to death by an inherently dishonest and deliberately deceptive republican campaign.

To wit: Kerry NEVER waffled, BUSH most assuredly DID!!!

Kerry, like the rest of the senate, supported and voted FOR action in Iraq when it was understood that such action would be in accord with our agreement in article 1441, namely that we would come back to the U.N. security council BEFORE taking military action unilateraly in Iraq. That is what BUSH said he would do when he sold the senate on it. WE DID NOT. It was clearly used, maybe even intended as a trap to snare honest possible opponents from the Democrats! When it became clear that BUSH had NO INTENTION of honoring either article 1441, the U.N. Charter or security council, then naturally Kerry opposed action in Iraq since such action would be (and thus is) ILLEGAL. IT VIOLATES BOTH AMERICAN LAW IN THAT IT IS BASED ON THE CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER OF WMD’S THAT WERE NOT THERE *AND* IT VIOLATES ARTICLE 1441 OF THE U.N. and thus violates INTERNATIONAL LAW AS WELL!!!

KERRY LOST BECAUSE rEPUBLICANS DON’T GIVE A RAT’S ASS ABOUT LAW OR WHAT IT MAKES US LOOK LIKE INTERNATIONALLY IF WE IGNORE OUR AGREEMENTS, OR WORSE, USE OUR AGREEMENTS TO MANIPULATE OTHER NATIONS INTO DOING OUR BIDDING OR AT LEAST ALLOWING US TO DO AS WE WISH REGARDLESS OF LAW OR CONSEQUENCES TO OTHER NATIONS!!!!

Kerry lost because republicans have lost perspective, gained immense ability to manipulate information in the media and are basicly anarchists. “Laws? We don’t need no stinking laws!”

IF NATIONAL INTEGRITY MEANS ANYTHING TO ANYBODY OUT THERE…VOTE DEMOCRAT!

Posted by: RGF at July 24, 2006 11:31 PM
Comment #170466

Mark,

Quite true. I only wish someone would try and explain it to me, if only for the entertainment value such an untenable and irrational explanation would give.

Times like this make me wish that politicians were forced to actually defend themselves, their ideas and their words, rather than be granted immunity for contradictions such as these. Imagine Bush (or nearly any politician for that matter) on national television, being made to watch himself, and then the deafening silence that followed as the world waited for some sort of coherent response.

What a world that could be, huh?

Posted by: Liberal Demon at July 25, 2006 7:42 AM
Comment #170532

Bill—

“The Democrats that supported the war were stampeded into following them out of fear of the “conservative” campaign war chest and the overwhelmingly conservative media-Drug Addict Limbaugh and his brethern on vitriol radio and Faux News…”

Oh I see…those poor misled Democrats were
“STAMPEDED”…forced to comply when they really didn’t want to!! But I thought you guys always think for yourselves…isn’t that one of your claims to fame…how you are really the free thinking, rational ones?

And how amazing that a guy who has been classified by the left as “just an entertainer” and has been termed a wacko and therefore not worth listening to, can have such an impact on the supposedly clear thinking and rational Democrats.

By the way, why is it that when Democrats, lefties, Hollywood elites and other liberals have a dug problem, it gets treated as if it is no big deal and we should legalize those nasty drugs anyway; but when someone like Rush gets hooked on habit forming pain pills, he gets ridiculed and harassed constantly for it? Wanna’ talk about hypocrisy!!!

“…In fact I would not be surprised if the timing of the Israeli overreacton to prepare for the up coming elections was not coordinated.”

And the conspiracy lives on!!


RGF—

“The reason Kerry lost in ⦣x20AC;˜04, is because he was soundbited to death by an inherently dishonest and deliberately deceptive republican campaign.”

Oh…but I thought the reason Kerry lost was because the election was stolen? Well which is it? What excuse are we using now?

And again, as I said with Bill above, how is it that you supposedly rational, free thinking liberals and Democrats and your brethren in the voting public were able to be so easily swayed by “soundbiting” that Kerry lost the presidential race? Or was it those ignorant, uninformed Americans who voted Republican who were actually swayed?? Because isn’t that how you liberals see the people…as uninformed and ignorant…until YOU guys inform them after which they will hopefully see the light and vote Democrat!

If only it weren’t for those soundbites, why the nice, friendly, caring, open minded, tolerant Democratic liberals would have won, and not those nasty, mean spirited, racist, sexist, bogoted, homophobic, redneck, religious zealots on the right!!

That’s the liberal mantra for the world…”If only”. If only we could have peace. If only everyone loved and cared about each other like WE (liberals) love each other (except the unborn of course…they don’t count because they aren’t really people yet). If only we could just talk, then maybe those murdering, raping, torturing terrorist-supporting dictators would see the error of their ways, and we could all live in harmony together eating wheat bran and tofu and driving electric cars. “If Only…”

DaveR

Posted by: DaveR at July 25, 2006 12:22 PM
Comment #170542

As far election hacking is concerned:

http://www.filmstripinternational.com/filmstrips.php?filmstrip=election

As far as the deceptive BS about ‘waffling,’ I have already explained how it was BUSH who waffled, NOT KERRY. Just read for content rather than picking out of context and attacking piece-meal.

Posted by: RGF at July 25, 2006 1:02 PM
Comment #170578

Republicans squirm away from criticism. Democrats stand back and tell us how things would be different if they were in control. It reminds me of my two boys going at it and rings about as mature. Dems ask yourself why Republicans have control and rarely find themselves in the predicament you find yourselves. Why? You tell us how horrible Bush is, yet he is in his second term. Why? Seems to me dems need to be taking notes. When the competition continues to beat you, find out Why?

Kerry lost because because he had fewer votes. He lost because he had no message outside of “I’m not Bush”. He lost because he is too far to the left and attempted to reinvent himself for the election. They STILL do not have a unified message. The fact dems continue to deny that Kerry is a obsessive poll watcher is evidence of no lesson learned. Give Kerry a little credit, Dean is killing the party more than anyone else. The silence of Dean would be a good thing.

When guys like Kerry & Gore learn that they can not take both sides of an issue, they may gain a shot at the Presidency once again. Bush (and congress) has put us in an incredible mess, but I don’t have to guess where he stands on most issues. I detest that about so many politicans. It has been a long time since I voted democrat outside state elections and looks to be continuing.

Kerry, if you happen to read this…..don’t come and tell us how Israel would not have attacked Lebannon if you were president. Figure out HOW to be president before tooting your own horn. Another reason to not take you seriously and another reason you have no class. Try dealing with the present. FDR, rest easy…..you would be an Independent today.

Posted by: curmudgeon-at-large at July 25, 2006 2:49 PM
Comment #170584

Hey, curmudgeon,

You said: “When the competition continues to beat you, find out Why?”

WE KNOW WHY:

http://www.filmstripinternational.com/filmstrips.php?filmstrip=election

Posted by: RGF at July 25, 2006 3:53 PM
Comment #170602

Plenty of blame to go around is my take on all this.

When are you guys going to vote Libertarian?

Posted by: ILIndCon at July 25, 2006 4:37 PM
Comment #170609

RFG
How long has this been out there?
Everyone should see and be aware of this.

Posted by: mark at July 25, 2006 5:01 PM
Comment #170611

It seems to me far too many bloggers are using the terms “Republican” and “Conservative” as interchangable, as well as “Democrat” and “Liberal.” They are not.

I am a fiscal conservative and a social moderate, if pigeonholes are needed. I have many friends who are fiscally much more liberal than I, but are still Republican.

I think it would be much more to-the-point if bloggers would be specific in their attacks, referencing a particular official who sponsored or voted for particular legislation, rather than schlepping an entire party or political ideology into one gelatinous mess.

Unfortunately, what I see happening on many blogsites is a continuance of sweeping generalizations that will do nothing more than fuel more fires. I don’t identify with any party, except perhaps David Remer’s VOID (if it were a party).

Parties do nothing more than fan the flames so their individual bases will rise up and donate more money. “The Republican Culture of Blame” could just as easily read “The Democrat Culture of Blame.” Silly at best. Tragic for our nation at worst.

The really tragic part of this is that the issue never gets resolved. As soon as the reps and the dems stake out their positions, the issue becomes moot. The only thing that matters then is the continuation of the arguement in terms of who screwed up. How can we pin this on them?

We live in the most partisan times I can remember. Issues no longer matter. Just blame, finger pointing, bet hedging, partisanship and re-election.

Tragic.

Posted by: Chi Chi at July 25, 2006 5:04 PM
Comment #170613

The average taxpayer couldn’t give a shit who screwed up. FIX THE FRIGGIN’ PROBLEM!!!!!!

Then, if someone needs to pay for a mistake, great. Don’t hold up the solution for political points.

Posted by: Chi Chi at July 25, 2006 5:06 PM
Comment #170631

“We live in the most partisan times I can remember. Issues no longer matter. Just blame, finger pointing, bet hedging, partisanship and re-election.”

Chi Chi, well said…. generalizations are easy and I must admit I fall into them. I would probably be pigeon holed as a Reagan Conservative Libertarian. I like the way you think. Serve America and foget how your party might react.

Posted by: Curmudgeon-at-large at July 25, 2006 6:13 PM
Comment #170874

RGF,

You’re right Kerry never waffled. I voted for a measure admitting Kerry never waffled right after I voted against it.

Why don’t you talk about something more pressing, you know, like Watergate or something.

Posted by: Ken Strong at July 26, 2006 4:52 PM
Post a comment