2006 Election Predictions

With the help of my enormous prescience and suave good looks, I predict Democrats will continue to divide America by claiming Republicans stole the midterm elections.

Naturally, when Democrats fail to retake congress they’ll need someone to blame. Too bad dividing America is an organic side effect of alleging campaign fraud at every turn.

To tell you the truth (as I always do), I get a kick out of liberal conspiracy theories, the breathless calls for investigation, the imagined Republican dirty tricks. For instance, Greg Palast's, "Winning the Election The Republican Way: Racism, Theft and Fraud in Florida" is downright hilarious; a study in half-truths and downright fabrications.

Self-revealing contradictions

Why would Democrats ever lose an election? After all, they always run against corrupt, evil, and hateful opponents. They have all the answers. They and only they have all of our best interests at heart, so why would they ever lose an election? Obviously the only answer is that Republicans keep stealing the elections...

No less than Robert F. Kennedy Jr. himself is claiming forthrightly, that Bush stole the 2004 election. Of course he also said Bush was a Nazi and a fascist.

...what is most anomalous about the irregularities in 2004 was their decidedly partisan bent: Almost without exception they hurt John Kerry and benefited George Bush. After carefully examining the evidence, I've become convinced that the president's party mounted a massive, coordinated campaign to subvert the will of the people in 2004. Across the country, Republican election officials and party stalwarts employed a wide range of illegal and unethical tactics to fix the election. ~Updated: Kennedy: 2004 Election was rigged

So we know that Democrats should have won but didn't. We know that Republicans are corrupt and will commit any crime in order to stay in power. We know that every time someone is unable to vote for whatever reason it would have been a vote for Democrats. Can it be more obvious? The nation has been highjacked by right wing extremists!

"I'm running because I don't like extremism, and I think extremism has taken over our country." ~Howard Dean

* * *

Since taking over as chairman of the Democratic National Committee earlier this year, the former presidential candidate has been quoted in newspapers making unusually caustic remarks about Republicans.

Dean has suggested that they are "evil." That they are "corrupt." He called them "brain-dead" during a stop in Toronto -- and while the Terri Schiavo case was still in the news. He has tagged Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) as a "liar." Last week, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that he mimicked a "drug-snorting Rush Limbaugh" at an event there. ~washingtonpost.com

Helpful hints and campaign tips

If Democrats want to win elections they need to be more like Joe Leiberman and Hillary Clinton. A strong tack to the right might actually turn the Democratic Party's electoral fortunes around. They can always go back on their word once they're in office. (Isn't that normal operating procedure for them anyway?)

If Democrats wanted to win they would neutralize their biggest weakness. But they won't. Which means that they are stuck on stupid, believing their own propaganda about how corrupt and wicked Republicans are and expecting that to be a winning campaign issue.

No less than the master himself has laid out the winning strategy for Democrats if they cared to see it.

ROVE: Like too many Democrats, it strikes me that they’re ready to give the green light to go to war but when it gets tough, and when it gets difficult, they fall back on that party’s pattern of cutting and running. They may be with you on the first shots, but they’re not going to be there for the last tough battles. They are wrong and profoundly wrong in their approach. exposetheleft.com

If Democrats want to win they must be there for the last tough battles. They must support the war they voted for. Instead of continuing to demand our surrender, maybe they could try rooting for America for a change.

America united cannot be defeated...

So why do Democrats keep on insisting on dividing America?

Posted by Eric Simonson at June 20, 2006 5:18 PM
Comments
Comment #159657

you are so right on!

they can’t run a can opener must America.


Posted by: lm at June 20, 2006 5:35 PM
Comment #159658

Simonson, my prediction;

Enough people are smart enough to recognize that the lying pieces of shit in Washington DC who have abused what once the honorable name of “Republican” will be tarred and feathered this cycle. They will lose more than 80% of contested elections. And Bush and his cronies will finally be sidelined to the failed garbage bins of history.

People of true good will and good concience will be standing up and fighting against the perverting influence of evil and corruption that infests the GOP. They will remember it was not the Democrats who embraced divisive politics for their own gain, it was KKKarl. They will see past the inevitable political bullshit of partial or promised withdrawls from Iraq and enviormental ploys of commercially unviable preserves. It will be the American people who unite against the common enemy of Bush and his party.

Posted by: Dave at June 20, 2006 5:41 PM
Comment #159659

There is obviously evidence that there was tampering in FL in ‘00 and OH in ‘04. Blatant examples, such as the phone blocking in NH, are already being decided in court, and more will come. Someday soon you will all be ashamed to call yourselves Republicans, just as you were after Watergate. The culture of corruption is falling apart at the seems. Party’s over, time to pay the check.

Posted by: David S at June 20, 2006 5:41 PM
Comment #159667

When the shoe is on the other foot, we see who brays like a jack ass, Eric. New boss, same as old boss, just different brayers under their thumb.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 20, 2006 5:52 PM
Comment #159671

David S

Yet if you look at actual indictments, you find more Dems than Republicans. If you know of actual evidence of tampering, you should bring it to the attention of the authorities.

You are angry because your guy lost. I understand how you feel (I can still remember when we didn’t win). Many people felt there was tampering. But actual investigations have found essentially nothing.

I am not saying it is all truth and beauty. There is a lot at stake in elections and a lot of passion. Some people will cheat. We all have heard of the Dems paying homeless people to vote thier way, collecting absentee ballots in Alzheimers wards, and having the dead vote. But these things have not been enough to change the outcome of any but local elections.

This culture of corruption things is cute. You might have mentioned to Harry Reid not to take that Indian money or those tickets and William Jefferson with his “cold cash” is just too funny.

Dems have a chance to take the House, but probably not the Senate. And they have a chance of taking neither. If you lose, you will cry foul again. There is no way to convince you. Absence of evidence can be explained away and it is impossible to prove a negative to a true believer.

You may want to get your excuses ready now, just in case.

Posted by: Jack at June 20, 2006 5:57 PM
Comment #159673

Eric:

Ya nailed it pal.

But, my guess is that in no time at all my post will be followed by the indignant howling of libs/lefties saying:

“We don’t divide, we debate. Its the evil right-wing evangelical Christaban GOP that is calling anyone who disagrees with their chicken hawk neo-con ideology unpatriotic. So, who are the real dividers? Hmmmm?”

Swarm forms to the left. :-)

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 5:57 PM
Comment #159675

The answer to Eric’s final question in the blog is quite simple.

Dems divide because they can’t win. They don’t win because they don’t lead… at least not to anyplace the average American wants to go.

Want proof? Ask a Dem to explain their party’s Iraq War plan.

Dr. Demento Dean did… but, only once.

Dean effectively told Tim Russert Potato on MTP, ‘We’re not the majority party. Plan? Plan? We don’t need no stinkin’ plan!’

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 6:03 PM
Comment #159678

Give your definition of fascism, and explain to me why the Bush administration isn’t by definition fascistic. Mussolini and Hitler were monsters, Bush isn’t. That doesn’t make him any less a fascist.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 6:10 PM
Comment #159682

And just because Dean hates Bush to the extreme doesn’t make him an extremist.

If someone infuriates you, you ought to be able to say why.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 6:14 PM
Comment #159684

David S:

I guess you didn’t hear… or more likely conveniently forgot… about the DEMS convicted in Milwaukee WI for slashing tires on voter vans at Bush-Cheney HQ. Two of those convicted were paid staffers for the city Dem Party and relatives of the party Chairman!

How many seniors were denied their Constitutional right to vote because their ride to the polls was sabotaged?

Perhaps, you didn’t read… or more likely conveniently forgot… about the DEMS in the city of East St. Louis IL who were convicted of forging hundreds of voter registrations and then caught voting multiple times? In this case as well, it was paid DEM staffers and relatives of party leaders committing the criminal acts.

And don’t get me started on the DEMS who registered homeless drug users to vote in Washington DC. They paid them with crack cocaine and told them NOT to try and vote on Election Day. Now why do you suppose that was?

The difference is that when GOPers are proven guilty we join in the chorus of “they got what they deserved” (i.e. Rep. Cunningham in CA-50), but, when Dems are caught its “stonewall, obfuscate and deny”.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 6:16 PM
Comment #159689

Let me get this right, Democrats are the ones dividing America?!!!

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 6:21 PM
Comment #159690

Loren said:

Give your definition of fascism, and explain to me why the Bush administration isn’t by definition fascistic. Mussolini and Hitler were monsters, Bush isn’t. That doesn’t make him any less a fascist.

Right-of-Way responds:

Nor does your contention that he… or anyone else… is a fascist prove that they are in fact fascist.

You’re confusing feeling with fact. You feel Bush is fascist, therefore, Bush must be fascist.

That type of illogic seems to be a common side-effect of liberalism.

Someday we’ll have the evil pharmaceutical (sp?) companies develop a vaccine against that. :-)

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 6:23 PM
Comment #159691

Good post. I do believe that Hillary will be the dem candidate. As much as I dislike her she has more political skill than all the other dem candidates combined. The mistake the Republicans will make is trying to position themseves just to the right of Hillary and then being afraid in the election of looking mean if they attack her.
As for vote fraud Republicans are amatures. The dems have the real skill at this using strategies like vote early and vote often, dead voters, and non citizens voting. Being a Chicago native I may be a bit jaded about this but come on, try as they might the Republicans will never have what it takes to match the Dems in this area.

Posted by: Carnak at June 20, 2006 6:24 PM
Comment #159692

Who uses wedge issues like a hammer? Who plays to the lowest common denominator in election ads? Who refuses to retract falsehoods when called on them? Who issues creatively edited talking points to read completely opposite the voiced statement?

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 6:25 PM
Comment #159693

There’s no way the Dems will get close in the House; no one wants to have Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House. And, I could give two shi*ts about the Senate; their worthless anyway.

Posted by: rahdigly at June 20, 2006 6:29 PM
Comment #159697

Did you look at the link above that Eric posted about RFK Jr?

Politicians can be labelled if they meet certain criteria:
1.Fascists are corporate plunderers of the commons
2.Mussolini and Hitler were from the fringe radical right, and were irrelevant until corporations bolstered them
3. Bush is a corporate plunderer of the the commons

These are not my feelings, but my application of a definition. If you disagree with the definition, tell me why.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 6:37 PM
Comment #159699

Fascism: A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

Although not a fan of proving a negative, I guess all I need to do here is to show even a single way in which President Bush does not satisfy my above definition.

I define dictator as “an absolute ruler”. Since the executive branch is checked by the other two branches of government, George Bush cannot be a dictator. I presume that a real dictator would not give up the presidency after two terms of office. Noone will be more surprised than me if the president refuses to vacate the Office in 2008.

Well. That was easier than I thought it would be.

Posted by: Sean Fornelli at June 20, 2006 6:37 PM
Comment #159702

Loren:

I looked up “fascism” in The American Heritage Dictionary. I know its not in French, but, I think it should do for our purposes. :-)

The AHD definition of fascism is:

“A philosophy or system of government that is marked by stringent social and economic control, and a strong centralized government usually headed by a dictator or military leader.”

I know yours eyes widened at “stringent social and economic control”. But, relax that means the GOVERNMENT determines all social and economic policies. That would be in direct contrast to the democracy and capitalism which flourish in the USA.

When you add “strong centralized government” to the above, I think you have the the crux of the Democratic platform. Dem Party leaders and candidates seem to offer new or more government intervention at every level as the answer to every issue America faces.

We conservatives just call them “liberals” or “lefties”. Which does seem to drive y’all crazy for some reason.

You might want to stop calling Bush a fascist, just to avoid looking foolish… and being wrong.

But hey, thanks to the great folks in uniform, you can go right on debasing, gegrading and dividing America.

Its your right.

They earned it for you.

Swarm forms to the left.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 6:39 PM
Comment #159703

People of true good will and good concience?

Nothing quite like hearing the opinions of religious fundamentalists. Thank you again for proving that liberalism is far and away the most extreme and hateful religion in the world. They already wish rape upon one conservative, do you also wish A.I.D.S. on the rest of us? or do you consider yourself compassionate enough to only wish a quick death for conservatives?
Your hateful religious fundamentalist attitude is only one reason you keep losing elections. When you hate the majority of the people in your own country more than you hate the people who want to kill you, nobody who is not a religious fanatic(liberal), will ever trust you or anyone like you.
But, please don’t take my word for it. Keep right on doing what you’re doing. You keep following the psychotic ramblings of Traitor Jack and see how weel you do.

Posted by: Bob at June 20, 2006 6:40 PM
Comment #159704

Fascism is a radical authoritarian political philosophy that combines corporatism, totalitarianism, extreme nationalism, militarism, anti-communism and anti-liberalism.
(from wiki)
W’s affection for corporatism is best illustrated by the “incentives” to the drug companies in the medi drug plan and the “incentives” for exploration in his energy budget, not to mention the hiring out of our port security placing corporate interest over nat’l security. His constant calls of giving comfort to the enemy and accusations of anti-Americanism to dissenters illustrate the extreme natiionalism. (Although he has backed away from these tactics of late.) His militarism hardly needs explanation with a Iraq-9/11 fabracation. His totalitarian bent is seen in the NSA program and his ever increasing desire to unify executive powers to a nearly unprecedented level (Lincoln during civil war being the highest) and stocking the courts with like minded federalists. His anti-liberalism fuels the Gay Marriage amendment and intelligent design support. His attempt to privatize social security describes his anti-communism. Golly, he’s more of a fascist than I thought.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 6:40 PM
Comment #159705
If Bush is a facist, why are you still around to protest? Which freedoms is it exactly you have lost?

I sorry, I don’t deal in absolutes. Just because GW is a fascist doesn’t mean that we have become a fascist state. Not yet. Do I have to wait to lose my freedom to begin to fight against a govt that plans to take it away?

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 6:43 PM
Comment #159706

How many of your fellow Republicans hated Clinton? It was the neoconservative movement that started this divisiveness back in the early 80’s by pandering to the christian fundamentalists in order to build up their base. They were the ones that started the war against progressive liberalism (otherwise known as the common sense approach to governing in the best interest of the majority) by implementing trickle down economic theory and christian conservative social policy. When the neocons were betrayed by Bush 41 when he decided against invading Iraq, and therefore putting a halt on their new post cold war agenda of continuous war against oppressive regimes in regions of valuable natural resources, they decided to attack the very existence of progressive liberalism in order to discredit or eliminate opposition so that they could someday regain power. Bill Clinton became the focal point of their new plan, and the use of hateful rhetoric against him became the hallmark of the Republican party. Today however, people are starting to come to the realization that the neoconservative agenda is not in their best interest, and the 2006 elections will show a large drop in Republican support. Whether or not that turns into a Democrat victory remains to be seen, but I for one will certainly be keeping an eye on the exit polls and their proximity to the actual results.

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 20, 2006 6:45 PM
Comment #159707
Mussolini and Hitler were monsters, Bush isn’t. That doesn’t make him any less a fascist. Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 06:10 PM
Says you. I think the Shrub is really the monster. The worst monster is the one who make some think he’s a good guy. See: “BTK” Posted by: Dave at June 20, 2006 6:45 PM
Comment #159708

from Webster’s: fascism- any authoritarian, anti-democratic, anti-communist system of government in which economic control by the state, militaristic nationalism, propoganda, and the crushing so opposition by means of secret police emphasize the supremacy of the state over the individual.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 6:46 PM
Comment #159711

progressive liberalism (otherwise known as the common sense approach to governing in the best interest of the majority as many people as possible)

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 20, 2006 06:45 PM

Posted by: Dave at June 20, 2006 6:50 PM
Comment #159712

psiniq:

Are you really using wikipedia as a source for a definition?

That’s the “encyclopedia” people get to write themselves.

No thanks psininq, I’ll stick to the American Heritage Dictionary. It isn’t electronic, but, it is accurate. Unlike wikipedia.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 6:51 PM
Comment #159716

imperial presidency = absolute ruler

Our checks and balances are going out the window, with our rubber stamp leglislature and executive signing statements.

Call any judge who tries to check this administration an activist judge.

Also, there is no reason why the absolute ruler has to be the same person, just someone with the same philosophy.

strong centralized government only means that the states lose their power.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 6:55 PM
Comment #159717

Sean—- so only God could be a dictator? Absolute ruler. Thats such a glib and simplistic post. Its downright insulting. Do you really think like that. ” He can’t be a absolute ruler so he can’t be a fascist.” durrr.. nyaaah nyaaah

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 6:56 PM
Comment #159720

What, the other encyclopedias write themselves? Or are they divinely self-evident?

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 6:58 PM
Comment #159721

BFF:

History lesson time boys and girls…

Wasn’t Carter trying to divide America by claiming Reagan was a lunatic cowboy who’d start WW3.

Thank goodness, Reagan’s leadership ensured WW3 didn’t happen.

Was the NAACP trying to divide the races by claiming GWB was responsible for the dragging death of James Byrd.

Were the Senate Dems from the South who delayed enactment of the Civil Rights Act for nearly 30 years dividing America?

How about the Dems who battled Lincoln on slavery?

How about Andy Jackson… a Dem… who pursued a policy of destroying the Indians?

You libs have very convenient memories… which tend to be very imperfect.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 6:59 PM
Comment #159723

psiniq:

Just so ya know… I ain’t a fundamentalist… not that there’s anything wrong with that… see even conservatives can laugh at Seinfeld… so your anti-religious insult only proves that libs are the kings of intolerance… some might even say, fascism…

My problem with wikipedia is that I… or anyone else could post a definition of traitor as “anyone who holds and or promotes liberal views”…

But, that don’t make it true.

At least the AHD was written by people who have some expertise in the development of the English language. I don’t think the same can be said of wikipedia.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:04 PM
Comment #159724
Wasn’t Carter trying to divide America by claiming Reagan was a lunatic cowboy who’d start WW3. Thank goodness, Reagan’s leadership ensured WW3 didn’t happen.
Holy revisionism Batman! No wonder the rightwing hates the school system…

(I have my troll hat on tonight, I’ll take it off tommorow)

Posted by: Dave at June 20, 2006 7:04 PM
Comment #159727

Right-of-way,
I think you see I anticipated your exception to wiki so included Websters. However since language is not a dead thing and is ever evolving depending upon usage wiki definitely has relevence in this instance. Websters definition varied very little in spirit. Bush is indeed Fascist.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 7:07 PM
Comment #159729


I encourage the extreme leftist element in this country to continue to throw around the word Nazi…Other than a delusional looney leftist, the average Ameican (who follows little of all this) doesn’t make the connection…When Joe Electorate hears the word Nazi, he (or she) associates it with concentration camps filled with dead bodies and a military gone beserk …Failing to relate this to anything they see in America, they identify the user of the word as a wacko….

LOL..As per usual, the liberals are their own worst enemy….(shhhhh…but let’s not tell em that)

Posted by: status whoa at June 20, 2006 7:09 PM
Comment #159730

OMG, the level of historical inaccuracy libs display…

BFF said:

When the neocons were betrayed by Bush 41 when he decided against invading Iraq…

Were you asleep during the Gulf War?

I mean it is possible it ended so fast… but, cmon!

Bush 41 DID INVADE IRAQ!

I think John Kerry even voted in favor of that one. Of course it was over so fast he didn’t get a chance to vote against it later.

Do you get your history from wikipedia?

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:10 PM
Comment #159731

Right of way
I did not insult you, I asked a question. I asked a question with the intent to provoke you into taking another look at your question of me. Do you really think I don’t know how wiki forms its content, or were you hoping to make me look ridiculous?

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 7:10 PM
Comment #159733

ROW,

Reagan’s antagonist approach with the Soviet Union brought us closer to WWIII than we had been since the Cuban missile crisis. You guys give Reagan way to much credit for ending the Cold War, when it was destined for an economic collapse no matter who are leader was.

As far as your comments on civil war era Democrats, you do realize both parties are completely different today than they were 150 years ago?

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 20, 2006 7:12 PM
Comment #159734

Bush is indeed Fascist.
Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 07:07 PM

I think you have to click your heels together and say it three times to make it true.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 20, 2006 7:13 PM
Comment #159735

status whoa:

You are soooooo correct.

But, its sooooo much fun to spur them on!

And, they commit hari kiri so willingly.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:14 PM
Comment #159736

Good one goodkingned…

They do live in a fantasy world, don’t they.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:15 PM
Comment #159737

ROW,

I don’t recall us toppling Saddam, occupying Iraq, and creating a new government during the Gulf War. That was the neoconservative goal, and Bush 41 betrayed them by going along with the UN and leaving Saddam in place with sanctions.

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 20, 2006 7:16 PM
Comment #159738

GKN-
A Fascist President is not something I would ever wish for, just something I have to deal with. It’s good to know his propoganda is working though. I’d hate for him to be ineffectual.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 7:17 PM
Comment #159739

psiniq said:

Do you really think I don’t know how wiki forms its content, or were you hoping to make me look ridiculous?

Right-of-Way

It never even occured to me that you might need help to look ridiculous.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:18 PM
Comment #159740

ROW
OK I walked into that one.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 7:19 PM
Comment #159742


The democrats think the election will be about the war in Iraq and on the republican coruption. It won’t be. The big issue this fall will be illegal immigration. The republicans are going to talk big on illegal immigration and promise to do something about it if they are reelected (which they won’t.) Unfortunately, this strategy will work and the democrats will lose. This saddens me greatly.

Posted by: jlw at June 20, 2006 7:21 PM
Comment #159744

BFF:

Its really strange that no lib every said “The Soviet Union is destined to collapse anyway, so just leave them to it.”…

Until, AFTER it happened!

I was alive then, so I remember the Dems were apoplectic about Reagan leaving the Reykjavik summit without an agreement with Gorby the Great.

If it was so obvious that they were going to collapse, why did the Dems want to negotiate a treaty with them so badly? Hmmmmm?

Geez, you guys can’t even keep your lies straight.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:23 PM
Comment #159745

Roger

I almost always vote REPUBLICAN, and am restered as a REPUBBLICAN because most of the time the only good choices are REPUBLICANS, and because most of the time the only CONSERVATIVES on the ticked are REPUBLICANS.

I will continue to vote REPUBLICAN as long as I can fine a GOOD CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN.

With all that said, I don’t think it is going to make a differance this coming election or the President election who the REPUBLICANS run….anyone the Democrates run on their platform will win; and I think that will be a shame, because then we will see all the good that has been done by the CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS fleshed down the tolet.

In fact it may get so bad that even Mrs. Clinton could be our next President… and I don’t think it could ever get worse then that. I’d reather see Bill back then to see his wife as President.

Posted by: Roger at June 20, 2006 7:23 PM
Comment #159746

Status whoa,

So I guess if it’s just on this blog, we’ll be safe.

BTW, Nazi doesn’t equal Fascist, which is the word being used. It’s a sad statement that you don’t know the difference.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 7:24 PM
Comment #159747

psiniq:

You may be dead wrong about everything… but, at least you have a sense of humor. :-)

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:25 PM
Comment #159748

Illegal immigration divides the highly corporate repubs from the nationalistic repubs. They can’t win on that, especially with the Reagan immigrant amnest as a heritage. Despite in-fighting and an extreme party chair, the Dems will gain a lot of ground in congress, enuf to take the majority, I dunno, it depends upon local issues in some areas. That’ll be the repub strategy, don’t look big, look at your yard and your pocketbook.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 7:26 PM
Comment #159750

Loren:

If you visualize the political spectrum as a circle and not a line, then communism and fascism meet up.

Think about it.

They share much in common.

Militarism… Totalitarianism… Centralized economy… State-Party symbiosis…

It isn’t coincidence that Hitler and Stalin got along well enough to sign a friendship treaty.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:31 PM
Comment #159751
Yet if you look at actual indictments, you find more Dems than Republicans. If you know of actual evidence of tampering, you should bring it to the attention of the authorities.

I call Astroturf, in addition to shenanigans on that charge.

The originator of that charge, the American Center for Voting Rights:

1)Has a spokesman (Jim Dyke) whose job during the 2004 elections was Director of Communications for the RNC.

2)Has a Chairman (Brian Lunde) who worked for Bush in 2000 and 2004 mining for Democratic votes for Bush.

3)Has a Legislative Fund Counsel (Mark “Thor” Hearne II) who a)Was a Republican observer in the Bush/Gore Recount, b)A Lawyer in The Missouri redistricting fight on the GOP side c)Advocated for the nomination of a right-wing judge to the court d)and whose brother was backed for a legislative seat by a conservative PAC.

The most significant of these facts is that we have somebody working on behalf of Bush in the 2004 election leading a group whose reports are supposed to validate the greater relative fairness of the Republican voting efforts. That is a definite conflict of interest. The others go to illustrate ideological slant.

The GOP has become intellectually lazy, assuming dogma where it should be keeping a lively debate going on principles and ideas. This tendency towards astroturfing has become a major credibility problem for policy points of the president.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 20, 2006 7:31 PM
Comment #159753

Oh, the spokesman has a conflict of interest, too.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 20, 2006 7:33 PM
Comment #159756

The GOP should retain both chambers of Congress because they are for most of the things most of the voters in this country are for.

Thats the only way any party wins elections.

The only way the GOP loses is if the base stays home.

Even though they are mad at GWB for his response to illegal immigration, his plan hasn’t been passed into law.

If the Senate version holds… which I don’t think it will… then all heck may break lose in the base.

Then we may have a horse race.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:37 PM
Comment #159759

ROW—-
I don’t believe that “most” and “most”. I do believe enuf people will wake to see that tax cuts for the wealthy financed by loans from China really don’t benefit them even it they get to wave an unmolested flag and pass hate amendments against queers. I know that sounds vitiolic but claiming a mandate where one does not exist angers me.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 7:44 PM
Comment #159761


QUOTE: “BTW, Nazi doesn’t equal Fascist, which is the word being used. It’s a sad statement that you don’t know the difference:

Sad?…No…..I’ll tell ya what’s sad Loren…

Google……… Bush Nazi……I got 15.5 MILLION hits….Maybe I’m reading something into this, but it would seem as if more than a few of our leftist brethern are associating (and verbalizing)the two……..

I could be wrong…….

Posted by: Status Whoa at June 20, 2006 7:45 PM
Comment #159762

ROW,

Wow, you are very good at twisting my words to make up bullshit.

If it was so obvious that they were going to collapse, why did the Dems want to negotiate a treaty with them so badly? Hmmmmm?

I never said it was obvious at the time. Nobody really knew what was going on inside the Soviet government. After the collapse however, we were able to find out that their entire system had been messed up for quite a while, and that collapse was inevitable no matter who was in the White House. But you guys try to portray Reagan as a modern day messiah, when he was really just a neoconservative puppet lucky enough to be President at the right time.

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 20, 2006 7:45 PM
Comment #159763

SD:

Next you’ll tell us the libs running People for the American Way or MoveOn.org or Planned Parenthood never helped any Dems run for office.

Hey the HTML really works! :-)

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:46 PM
Comment #159765

golly

Posted by: p at June 20, 2006 7:53 PM
Comment #159767

BFF:

I don’t claim Reagan himself conceived of SDI as the way to bankrupt and collapse the Soviet Union.

But, he did support the idea of a missile defense shield.

And, he pushed for it in Congress.

And in case you (conveniently) forgot, a Democratic-majority House voted to fund it.

So, I guess RR was a bi-partisan President after all!

And, the result of our funding the research… the research mind you… not even building it!… was enough to make the Soviets fall on their swords.

BTW: That’s according to a Frontline report I saw… PBS, ya know… a hotbed of GOP propaganda… as stated by a former Soviet general.

If Dems are going to credit Slick Willie with welfare reform… which he vetoed twice… before he signed the exact same bill!… then Reagan gets credit for the end of the Cold War.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 7:57 PM
Comment #159768

Status Whoa:

Its the Loren Principle at work…

If a lib says it, it is true.

And, can’t be questioned.

Ever.

Or, its a hate crime. :-)

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 8:00 PM
Comment #159769

R-O-W: if you keep telling yourself and everyone around you that all your beliefs are backed by the majority of Americans…heck, who knows? It might even become true, right?

Status Whoa: free speach is a real bitch ain’t it? Give people a means to communicate ideas, and they start doing just that. The net is international, so it is nice for some sheltered folks here at home to get an idea of how the rest of the world thinks. I’m just waiting for some crackpot to claim Google is conspiring with democrats. R-O-W?

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 20, 2006 8:01 PM
Comment #159772

ROW:

Your bomb throwing reminds me of Ann Coulter. The problem is agree with you both most of the time. I feel kind of guilty about that, but it is fun to watch the libs lose it.

Posted by: JimmyRay at June 20, 2006 8:07 PM
Comment #159773

psiniq wrote:

…but claiming a mandate where one does not exist angers me.

Right-of-Way responds:

I looked up “mandate” in the American Heritage Dictionary…

print version, not electronic… so as to avoid a wikipedia falsity virus…

and mandate is defined as:

“The wishes of a political electorate, expressed by election results to its representatives in government.”

Lets review the facts:

Bush majority in 2004… popular and electoral vote…

GOP majority since 1994 in the House of Representatives (what Dems used to call “The People’s House” when they were the majority!)

GOP majority in the Senate…

Yes psiniq, by definition the voters did give the GOP a mandate.

You can quit being angry now. :-)

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 8:10 PM
Comment #159776

Jimmy Ray:

Never feel guilty about being right.

The libs never feel guilty about being wrong.

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 8:13 PM
Comment #159777


What have the republicans done for the religious right? Have they stopped abortion? Have they done something about the queers? Have they made Christianity the religion of the land?

Have the republicans raised the minimum wage to help the workers?

Has the administration said that BinLaden is irrelevant?

Are the republicans going to do something about the illegal immigrants or are they going to promise to do something if they are reelected?

Are conditions going to be right in Iraq so that we can start withdrawing troops in October?

What is the Presidents 1% policy and how will it be implemented in the future?

Posted by: jlw at June 20, 2006 8:15 PM
Comment #159778


QUOTE: “Status Whoa:

Its the Loren Principle at work…

If a lib says it, it is true.

And, can’t be questioned.

Ever.

Or, its a hate crime. :-)

How “insensitive” of me…..Maybe I should give myself a “time out” for that one….

HOWEVER….Giving it just a tad more condideration I believe I have Loren trumped…

I’m a “decorated Vietnam Veteran”…..and EVERYONE on the left knows that that’s a walk off title…HOW DARE anyone challenge me after what I did THIRTY SEVEN YEARS AGO…..LMAO….

(there is however a slight difference)…I’m not Jack Murtha or John Al Kerry)…..


Posted by: Status Whoa at June 20, 2006 8:15 PM
Comment #159779

Kevin23:

Unlike libs I don’t claim to have ALL the answers…

Just ALL the RIGHT ones! :-P

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 8:15 PM
Comment #159781

R-O-W

I’m afraid experience and paying attention in life are more valuable in this instance than your dictionary. You see, in American Political discourse, a mandate is something more than a simple majority. It is a clear expression of the will of the people. CLEAR. Now can you..wait…somebody with credibility please explain to me what CLEAR expression of the will of a great percentage of Americans elected Bush?

I’ll argue that out of the 2 options, he sucked less. So what’s his mandate then (use the term in its correct context please)? Not exactly clear is it?

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 20, 2006 8:19 PM
Comment #159784

ROW,

SDI didn’t end the cold war. All it did was waste billions of taxpayer money during a time when we were racking up huge government debt to build a nuclear defense system that doesn’t work.

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 20, 2006 8:20 PM
Comment #159787
If you visualize the political spectrum as a circle and not a line, then communism and fascism meet up.

So what’s your point? That if GW goes any further right he’ll be a communist?

Hey you guys on the right are on the internet. Maybe some of you are accidently calling GW a Nazi?

It ain’t me.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 8:25 PM
Comment #159789

jlw: “Have they done something about the queers?”

HAHA…this guy for real?

Yeah, they’ve been considering a gay Holocaust, but they can’t quite seem to get past that damn democratic filibuster. Stupid Libs.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 20, 2006 8:26 PM
Comment #159790

I love hearing all the dire predictions of Republicans loosing big to the Democrats in November. By the time it comes to vote many Dems and middle-of-the-roaders will stay home because you will have convinced them of the outcome. Meanwhile, conservatives will be working their base and gathering voter registrations.
And, keep those big-name Dems on the TV and working the rubber chicken circuit. Every time Dean, Kerry and Gore open their mouths adds a few thousand votes to the conservative side.
While you guys are busy demonizing President Bush, the conservatives will be talking about issues that count such as illegal immigration, electing judges who follow the constitution and ways to increase our economy, reduce government by lowering taxes and defeating terrorism around the world. Keep it up and don’t forget to talk to a friend. Come November none of you will need to vote as you’ll be convinced of the outcome already. Have a nice day! Jim

Posted by: Jim Martin at June 20, 2006 8:28 PM
Comment #159791

ROW—
So Gore had a mandate? I don’t have an AHD (it sounds too much like the Heritage Foundation) but Websters says an instruction frome the electorate to a legislator or legislative body to follow a certain course of action. Just getting elected does not necessarily mean a mandate. If there were one or two issues that motivated the electorate to overwhelmingly favor candidates who held that view on those issues it would be a mandate. Using gay marriage bans and sloganeering (the omnipresent and mindless repetition of flip flop) not to mention character assassination by proxy, does not a mandate make. Yes, I’m still pissed. uhhhh… is that the NSA on the line?

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 8:29 PM
Comment #159792

Kevin23:

You “argue” like a lib.

When in doubt… or wrong… rewrite the definition… facts… issues… to suit your personal views.

Well Kev, I reject your definition just as you rejected the American Heritage Distionary’s.

And, declare you to be wrong.

Just as you declared me wrong.

Tie goes to the original poster.

So, I win! :-)

Posted by: Right-of-Way at June 20, 2006 8:30 PM
Comment #159794

Zelsdorf Ragshaft III, your comment at 6:32PM does not comply with our participation rules. This will be your only warning. Please comply with our participation policy.

Posted by: WatchBlog Managing Editor at June 20, 2006 8:32 PM
Comment #159795
I love hearing all the dire predictions of Republicans loosing big to the Democrats in November

I would never say that. Might jinx it.

Actually, as long as the GOP rigs elections, the people will never have a candidate that serves them, so I’m not so optimistic.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 8:33 PM
Comment #159797


If there was a viable independent party that could field a candidate in every congressional district and every state, both the democrats and the republicans would be out on their fat hind ends. Alas there is not because both the republicans and the democrats have rigged the election process to insure that there will never be a viable third party.

Posted by: jlw at June 20, 2006 8:33 PM
Comment #159798

ROW—
reject any definitions yourself lately?

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 8:34 PM
Comment #159799

Kevin23

You made me snort my coffee.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 20, 2006 8:36 PM
Comment #159800

R-O-W

Ummm…ok. Your saying things doesn’t change the reality at all. I didn’t make it mean what it means in American politics. 200+ years of history did it.

But I’m all for the freedom for ignorant people to look like an ass. And you argue very much like my daughter…she’s 4…congrats!

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 20, 2006 8:36 PM
Comment #159802

The Republicans are going to have to fight to keep their seats, and the more they have to fight, the more you on the Right should worry. A Legislature and an executive with a true mandate should not have to fight public opinion to truly determine public policy and opinion. Don’t look to past elections for your current state of affairs. It’s a whole new ballgame.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 20, 2006 8:41 PM
Comment #159804

bravo SD concise as to the invalidity of the mandate without stooping to semantics.

Posted by: psiniq at June 20, 2006 8:43 PM
Comment #159806

Kevin 23, your last comment violates our policy. Comply or lose your privilege to comment here.

Posted by: WatchBlog Managing Editor at June 20, 2006 8:47 PM
Comment #159808

Good point Stephen

I grant that using polls to make decisions is not leadership, but constantly having to defend your policies against polls should make you at least start to rethink your direction.

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 8:49 PM
Comment #159815

I predict we will cross the 2800 dead GIs mark by Election time.

Who will bet against me?

Posted by: Aldous at June 20, 2006 8:57 PM
Comment #159817

How dare you dishonor the troops by admitting they’ve died…

Posted by: Loren at June 20, 2006 9:04 PM
Comment #159818

My apologies. Life has infinate opportunities for restraint and I missed one.

I really do hope that there is a candidate on either side in 2008 who can rally more than partisanship. 2006 is lost I’m afraid…I think any good gambler will be taking the incumbents.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 20, 2006 9:06 PM
Comment #159820

I predict brainwashed voters will keep re-electing the very same irresponsible , bought-and-paid-for, incumbent politicians.

Just based on track-record, why should anyone think anything different will happen ?

Sure, it would be greate to see most (if not all) of incumbent politicians ousted from their cu$hy, coveted seats of power.

But, that’s not likely until there is sufficient pain and misery to motivate voters to act. And it may take quite a while for things to get better after they get bad. And, things are not as bad as they will get. The cards have been dealt, but the hand is not finished playing out yet. But, the voters got crappy cards. The nation is not headed in a good direction. Only something very painful (such as a Great Depression or Civil War) will provide the sufficient pain needed to motivate voters to oust corrupt government.

For example, of the 199 million eligible American voters in 2004, 78 million (40%) did not even bother to vote.

That’s because they don’t like their choices, don’t care, or don’t see how voting will make any difference. And they are right, if that’s their attitude every election.

And, many of those that voted were seduced into the petty partisan warfare. They were divided on unimportant issues that were fueled by incumbent politicians that love to fuel the petty partisan warfare.

And, many voters say they were voting for the least of two evils. How many times have you heard that?

Unfortunately, things can’t get better until they get much worse, first.
_________

  • Stop Repeat Offenders.

  • Don’t Re-Elect Them !

Posted by: d.a.n at June 20, 2006 9:29 PM
Comment #159826

d.a.n:

You do 78 million Americans a disservice. You do know Election Day is NOT a Holiday? Some people either cannot afford the day-off or not allowed to. This is the reason why the GOP tries so hard to limit Voting Machines in poor regions. Time literally is money.

I personally know people whose bosses won’t let them leave work to vote.

This should change.

Posted by: Aldous at June 20, 2006 9:41 PM
Comment #159828

Election Day be a national holliday. I can’t believe something so vitally important in such an influential nation is widely ignored and even ridiculed. And the fact that half of the ridicule is well-deserved and the other half at least reasonably feasable makes matters worst.

This begs the question of: do we really want to hear what the discontent have to say? I say yes. But I’ll admit it may be surprising to actually find out what kind of nation we live in.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 20, 2006 9:55 PM
Comment #159830

Let me re-start: Election Day SHOULD be a national holliday…

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 20, 2006 9:57 PM
Comment #159831


Dan: I will be following your advice this fall. Fortunately I live in Ohio and it will be easy for me. I can’t vote against Taft because fortunately he won’t be around to screw the people any longer. However I will not be voting for his buddy Ken (I not really a republican) Blackwell. I’ll also be voting against Sen. Dewhine and the wicked witch of the west.

Posted by: jlw at June 20, 2006 10:02 PM
Comment #159832

Amen Aldous. We’re in desperate need of some election reform. The bottom line is, our nation is stuck in a cyclical swing from left to right because of a number of factors. As much as the repugs here think they will be in power forever, it’s not going to happen that way. They’ve proven themselves capable of the same missteps anyone is prone to when drunk with power, and they’ve proven to the American people that while Russia can put a chimp in space, Repugs can put a chimp in the oval office. (In your FACE, dirty commies!) The Repugs sheer infatuation with bowing to the whims of gay closeted christians will eventually backfire right in their face. But even when the dems eventually gain the majority again, they will inevitably make mistakes of similar gravity. Our nation will not get out of this rut until a viable means to introduce a third or fourth party into the process comes to fruition.

Posted by: Taylor at June 20, 2006 10:03 PM
Comment #159836
I personally know people whose bosses won’t let them leave work to vote.

This should change.

Posted by: Aldous at June 20, 2006 09:41 PM

I agree that voters should have time to vote.
But, voters not taking time to vote is costing them more than they know. Voting is a choice. It’s a responsibility. It’s not a requirement. But voters should feel a duty to vote. It is for their own good.

And blaming it on the GOP is so transparently partisan.

It seems that no matter what anyone says or does, someone will try to turn it into a partisan issue … proof that some are all too fond of wallowing in the petty partisan bickering.

But, your point is a good one.
How about voting on weekends ?
How about a holiday for voting ?
How many still would not vote ?

Posted by: d.a.n at June 20, 2006 10:18 PM
Comment #159839


QUOTE: “Let me re-start: Election Day SHOULD be a national holliday”……….


Odd to have a National Holiday fall on the same day as the liberal National Day of Mourning….

Posted by: Status Whoa at June 20, 2006 10:33 PM
Comment #159844


If the republicans remain in control of the government after the election, This nation will eventually be in mourning not just liberals.

Posted by: jlw at June 20, 2006 10:53 PM
Comment #159845

Status Whoa-
Don’t count your chickens until they’re hatched, especially if there’s a skillet and cracked shells nearby.

But more to the issue:
What’s wrong with getting the day off for Democracy? We honor what we set aside things for. If voting is just one more thing we forget on a working day, then it’s all the more to our shame as a nation.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 20, 2006 11:01 PM
Comment #159850

jlw,
Yep. The only thing worse than letting both main parties take turns using and abusing the voters is letting one party grow too powerful and do it for too long. So the Republicans are most likely going to loose some seats.

Good.

But the bad part is, as Taylor and a few others correctly point out, the other party (i.e. the “In-Party”) will promptly begin to grow corrupt too.

Both are corrupt. The “In-Party” is usually a little more corrupt, but both are always growing more corrupt all the time. That is because both parties consist of people and power, and power corrupts when there is insufficient education and transparency.

Posted by: d.a.n at June 20, 2006 11:26 PM
Comment #159855

QUOTE: “But more to the issue:
What’s wrong with getting the day off for Democracy? We honor what we set aside things for. If voting is just one more thing we forget on a working day, then it’s all the more to our shame as a nation”


I can’t say that I’d totally disagree with election day being a holiday Stephen, however I personally find exercising my right (as well as my responsiblity) as a citizen to be motivation enough..(as should all)….

As to counting chickens….You’re probably right….But with a “cluck” like Howard Dean, it’s hard not to imagine the Democrats “brooding”…..

Posted by: Status Whoa at June 20, 2006 11:41 PM
Comment #159858


Dan: I agree 100%. But, the problem is that the republican party and the democratic party have rigged the system. There was a time when you could easily tell the difference between the parties. The democrats were for the workers and the republicans were for the rich. NAFTA changed all of that. The democrats were finally bought off. Now, both parties are for the rich. Both parties claim they want to keep America safe and secure. In reality, in my opinion, they have sold America out. We are now dependent on other countries for our manufactured goods. In the near future, I fear that China will be dictating policy for us.

The democrats will continue to use the workers and the republicans will continue to use the religious right. The capitalists will continue to use the rest of us in their conquest of the world.

Posted by: jlw at June 21, 2006 12:20 AM
Comment #159864

An innocent Republican who is pressured by the leftist media will resign from his her office to private life. We have a thing called respect for family.

the Democrats on the other hand have no shame and will stand knee deep in their corruption (sh*t) and brag about how they have risen above it.

I think GW has stepped in it with the shameless Democrats on Immigration but as far as the war in iraq, well if we don’t fight them there it will be coming to a town near you.

for all those dingy dems out there where is your outrage of the murder of our soliders in iraq. It it had been a poor dumb mexican dying while trespassing or some poor bastard wearing panties or lip stick in some prison then you would be all over the news.

you sick shameless, well walt garrison describes it best. just a pinch between your {checks} at the top of your legs.


Posted by: lm at June 21, 2006 12:47 AM
Comment #159865

I predict that if it gets real tight this November and looks as if the repubs will lose the majority in Congress, that Osama Bin Laden will be caught or killed in late October in Pakistan.

Posted by: j2t2 at June 21, 2006 12:53 AM
Comment #159867

lm-
Was there a point there somewhere?

It horrifies me what happened to the soldiers. I hope the murderers, sick bastards that they are, get it for what they did. Of course, I’m not going to say that so much, because I assume other people share my outrage at what has happened. Not every agreement has to be spoken out loud. If Republicans were willing to trust that folks shared their values and virtues, they might get broader support

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 21, 2006 1:04 AM
Comment #159868

I agree that Election Day should be a national holiday.
I also think that if the Dems were really smart, they would anonymously host “Girls Gone Wild” Free BBQ ‘n’ All You Can Drink-a-thon’s all across the Southern States on that day. Yep — all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol’ boys can handle. Their would be Nascar Star Autograph Signings, and for the gals, some famous country singer like Toby Keith as entertainment.
The Upshot? HUGE number of Southerners in those states would never make it to the polls!
Perhaps there could also be something geared specifically toward the Evangelicals…

Good idea, eh? :^)

Posted by: Adrienne at June 21, 2006 1:06 AM
Comment #159874

What is this, pick on the South Day?

Adrienne, in her charming Old World way, is illustrating why the Democrats don’t win elections. I refer to her snotty assertion that “HUGE number(s) of Southerners” could and should be distracted from voting by “Girls Gone Wild” Free BBQ ‘n’ All You Can Drink-a-thon’s” featuring ” … all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol’ boys can handle.”

That statement is offensive to Southerners, women in general, and Southern women in particular. If any other culture was maligned in this fashion, such as a watermelon and fried chicken festival featuring ‘hos for blacks, or a burrito fiesta with puntas for Hispanics, decent people would object.

WatchBlog readers: You know that I am right and I am waiting to see who objects and who sits on their hands.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 1:29 AM
Comment #159875

Dear God…is it possible. I find myself agreeing with Stephen and Kevin23…election day SHOULD be a national day off. In fact, I’d go so far as to posit that there should be a tax credit for anyone who can prove they voted.
I’d also like a national id database, so as to eliminate fraud voting by dead people, criminals, illegals and so forth. In Washington, of course, we have mandated vote-by-mail, which makes it so much easier for the democratic party dominated elections office to declare dems the winner, even if it takes two or three “re-votes” until they get the result they are looking for. Seattle has apparently learned from the masters of fraud in Chicago. Way to go guys!!!

Posted by: HardHatHarry at June 21, 2006 1:31 AM
Comment #159876

Adrienne, that post was completly disgusting. Have you ever been to the American South? I grew up there, and I guaruntee you that there are just as many intemperate and dumb rednecks in northern and western states as there are in the south. Nascar types may vote Republican in droves, but the welfare and no responsibility crowd that votes democrat would be hard pressed to step away from your “Suds, Ribs and Sluts” for even a moment, much less vote.
I do agree it should be holdiay…I just don’t think that dems would like the results very much.

Posted by: HardHatHarry at June 21, 2006 1:37 AM
Comment #159878

Me too HardHat. Cannot believe it but I cannot se any reason not to give everyone a day off on election day. Have to agree with Kev and Steve. They need a morning show!

Posted by: scott at June 21, 2006 1:43 AM
Comment #159879

I am also in agreement that Election day should be a national holiday.

I’d also like to see an adequate number of voting machines in every precinct across the country. The Federal government should require a ratio of one machine for every 500 or so adults in every precinct. It shouldn’t be decided by the states which counties get more or less machines.

I think the Fed. should also require voting machines on college campuses. Most college kids have to fill out absentee ballots, or if they live off campus they have to go to polling places away from the school and might not have the transportation to get there. Allowing them to vote on campus would dramatically increase their participation.

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 21, 2006 1:47 AM
Comment #159887

WatchBlog:

In the tradition of mudslinging politics I say a good slur bears repeating. So for your edification, please read again Adrienne’s contribution of appropriate election day rituals and my response.


Adrienne said:
I agree that Election Day should be a national holiday.
I also think that if the Dems were really smart, they would anonymously host “Girls Gone Wild” Free BBQ ‘n’ All You Can Drink-a-thon’s all across the Southern States on that day. Yep — all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol’ boys can handle. Their would be Nascar Star Autograph Signings, and for the gals, some famous country singer like Toby Keith as entertainment.
The Upshot? HUGE number of Southerners in those states would never make it to the polls!
Perhaps there could also be something geared specifically toward the Evangelicals…

Good idea, eh? :^)
Posted by: Adrienne at June 21, 2006 01:06 AM


I replied:
What is this, pick on the South Day?

Adrienne, in her charming Old World way, is illustrating why the Democrats don’t win elections. I refer to her snotty assertion that “HUGE number(s) of Southerners” could and should be distracted from voting by ⇩rls Gone Wild⠆ree BBQ ⮢ All You Can Drink-a-thon⳦#8221; featuring ” … all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol⠢oys can handle.”

That statement is offensive to Southerners, women in general, and Southern women in particular. If any other culture was maligned in this fashion, such as a watermelon and fried chicken festival featuring ‘hos for blacks, or a burrito fiesta with puntas for Hispanics, decent people would object.

WatchBlog readers: You know that I am right and I am waiting to see who objects and who sits on their hands.
Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 01:29 AM


Nice ‘huh? I’m taking a poll. Who thinks that Adrienne’s attitude in appropriate and “Spot On”. Weigh in with your opinion.

Sincerely,

GoodKingNed

Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 2:03 AM
Comment #159889

WatchBlog:

In the tradition of mudslinging politics I say a good slur bears repeating. So for your edification, please read again Adrienne’s contribution of appropriate election day rituals and my response.


Adrienne said:
I agree that Election Day should be a national holiday.
I also think that if the Dems were really smart, they would anonymously host “Girls Gone Wild” Free BBQ ‘n’ All You Can Drink-a-thon’s all across the Southern States on that day. Yep — all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol’ boys can handle. Their would be Nascar Star Autograph Signings, and for the gals, some famous country singer like Toby Keith as entertainment.
The Upshot? HUGE number of Southerners in those states would never make it to the polls!
Perhaps there could also be something geared specifically toward the Evangelicals…

Good idea, eh? :^)
Posted by: Adrienne at June 21, 2006 01:06 AM


I replied:
What is this, pick on the South Day?

Adrienne, in her charming Old World way, is illustrating why the Democrats don’t win elections. I refer to her snotty assertion that “HUGE number(s) of Southerners” could and should be distracted from voting by ⇩rls Gone Wild⠆ree BBQ ⮢ All You Can Drink-a-thon⳦#8221; featuring ” … all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol⠢oys can handle.”

That statement is offensive to Southerners, women in general, and Southern women in particular. If any other culture was maligned in this fashion, such as a watermelon and fried chicken festival featuring ‘hos for blacks, or a burrito fiesta with puntas for Hispanics, decent people would object.

WatchBlog readers: You know that I am right and I am waiting to see who objects and who sits on their hands.
Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 01:29 AM


Nice ‘huh? I’m taking a poll. Who thinks that Adrienne’s attitude in appropriate and “Spot On”. Weigh in with your opinion.

Sincerely,

GoodKingNed

Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 2:04 AM
Comment #159890

Boy, you guys sure can sure dish it out but you can’t take a joke, can you? I’ve LIVED in the South — and yes I know it was a caricature. Much like the caricature of San Francisco on South Park that you all loved so very much.
Get over yourselves.

Posted by: Adrienne at June 21, 2006 2:07 AM
Comment #159893

Right on Adrienne, Go, Girl, Go! You are Spot on!

Just like the Taxi driver murder story from your ‘Award Winning Indy paper from Scotland that happened but can’t seem to find its way into mainstream media.

Posted by: scott at June 21, 2006 2:12 AM
Comment #159894

Adrienne,

If the dems actually did something smart they would be repubs. Being from the south and a conservative christian, your comments disgust me. If you are trying to be funny you did as good of a job being a comedian as a liberal does making an intelligent arguement.

Posted by: lllplus2 at June 21, 2006 2:12 AM
Comment #159895

Adrienne:

I don’t know what’s customary in your background but I fail to see the humor in your crass insults. I am sure that you wouldn’t appreciate any other group in your big blue umbrella being trashed. Also, the denigration of women is not justified for a cheap laugh. At least not in the circles I run in.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 2:15 AM
Comment #159897

Adrienne,

I’m not offended baby! It’s just not very politically correct!

LMFAOL

Posted by: scott at June 21, 2006 2:18 AM
Comment #159902

Dems are wearing out their base. They have ticked off african americans by claiming “civil rights” status for illegals. I’m sure Labor is listening when they talk about illegals first in line for jobs with prevailing wage. The heart of the Dems for decades was a solid defense, Murtha and the Surrendellas have cooked that goose! As they lose what used to be mainstream America, they are forced to gobble up any money they can from George Soros (CRIMINAL)and his pet rocks MoveON.org and the rest of the anti-HeeHaw gang of liberal Hollywood cranks. Unless Old Joe Kennedy can fix it from his grave, maybe with ghostly help from Mr. Mayor R. J. Daley, Dems are gonna have a tough time convincing flyover country that they have a plan for America. Viva los Elephantes!!

Posted by: JR at June 21, 2006 2:32 AM
Comment #159905

You can take a dog, even the sweetest dog, and turn them into a ravid beast with enough abuse. The post by Adrienne is a great example that I think. The pro-Bush and pro-military people have really taken it to her for any little thing for the past few weeks. I think they can handle a little bit of crap-spewing. She’s got to deal with the backlash of course, but I’ve never been easily offended. Except of course by easily offended people.

See what I did there? Keep government out of it, and personal accountability.

Hey Adrienne…I say keep on swinging, I love watching you bring it…and you’re usually fighting the mob all by yourself. Just try to telegraph the punches more.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 2:57 AM
Comment #159908

Adrienne

Passion in the pursuit of electoral dreams, admirable.

Passion in protecting the “image”, humane.

Passion in defense of the Democratic Party of today….

Priceless!

For everyone else, there’s CONSERVATISM!!!!

Posted by: JR at June 21, 2006 3:16 AM
Comment #159911

Kevin23:

Re: Adrienne fighting the good fight.

Boo-Freaking-Hoo. I don’t think you would be as blase if she had slurred a different group. Southerners are apparently fair game and Southern women are lower than dirt, creatures who love nothing more than listening to country music, that is when they aren’t off slutting around.

How long would someone last here if they peppered their posts with amusing anecdotes about spear chucking darkies?

But this is just one person’s opinion. For Adriennes opinion, let’s just repeat her post.

“I also think that if the Dems were really smart, they would anonymously host “Girls Gone Wild” Free BBQ ‘n’ All You Can Drink-a-thon’s all across the Southern States on that day. Yep — all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol’ boys can handle. Their would be Nascar Star Autograph Signings, and for the gals, some famous country singer like Toby Keith as entertainment.
The Upshot? HUGE number of Southerners in those states would never make it to the polls!
Perhaps there could also be something geared specifically toward the Evangelicals…
Good idea, eh? :^)”
Posted by: Adrienne at June 21, 2006 01:06 AM


My poll is still open. Anyone else care to stand up and be counted? Tawdry, denigrating cultural and sexist slurs, OK or not?

Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 3:37 AM
Comment #159915

Adrienne is simply stating the facts as reported by the newest DNC reps - the Dixie Chicks. They know all about how to alienate a HUGE voting block (and concert goers too!) Keep up the good work! Flyover country thanks you for your support in getting out the conservative vote!!!

Posted by: JR at June 21, 2006 3:45 AM
Comment #159917

goodkingned-

I’m just not easily offended period. No need to go any further because its that simple. And my whole family lives in Tennessee and Missouri…so stop howling at the moon. No need to alienate someone because you’ve assumed too much.

JR-

Dixie Chicks album debuted at #1 and the radio stations that people who dress for the 21st century listen to picked up the slack for their sister country stations. They aren’t complaining one bit. Check out the latest interviews.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 3:52 AM
Comment #159919

I don’t really have a dog in this Dixie Chicks fight, but in the interest of completeness, The chicks album, after topping the charts briefly, slid precariously in sales. Also, The Chicks started a European tour early after postponing several shows in their ongoing American tour due to low ticket sales.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 4:03 AM
Comment #159921

Some localities are going to treat them worst than others. I’m not surprised at that actually. Curious to see where the sales were low enough to justify cancelling shows. I have guesses.

They are certainly not marginalized in anywhere near the way the country music industry had hoped.

Anyway, demonizing them of all people is just silly.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 4:13 AM
Comment #159922

Kevin23:

Shows not cancelled yet. I can’t remember the cities that were postponed.

I agree that holding musicians accountable for anything but their music is largely a waste of time.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 21, 2006 4:17 AM
Comment #159924

By the way,

Adrienne…judging from your descriptions of stereotypical southerners, I’d have to believe you’ve met some of the members of my family. I’ll just ask that you keep my Uncle Bubu out of it…he was my favorite and it wasn’t his fault that he spit tobacco indoors and played banjo like the dickens.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 4:20 AM
Comment #159926

I’d argue that the athlete/musician as a role-model for our youth is one of the best examples of what you get when you let the bottom line make all your decisions for you.

A lot of money now, a whole lot of cleaning up to do later. Sorry kids, your hero is a womanizing, drug abusing, alcoholic who cheats on his taxes.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 4:28 AM
Comment #159936

It is funny liberals are not offended when southern conservatives are stereotyped, but sterotype islam in a few cartoons and they are up in arms. Make a comment about four dem mouthpieces and it is a “mean atack”. Yep, a Godless religion that is intolerant to other points of view.

Adrienne, it is not a case of not being able to take what you dish out, it is ,what do libs always say, practice what you preach. If I said have a repub. drop off bails of weed in the projects on election day to take away the black vote for the dems., that would be racist and racial profiling. Of course the repubs don’t have to do that since most black people don’t turn out after our grandparents and great grandparents gave up their lives for quite a few of us to be able to vote. How about all the illegals who are raping, robbing, and murdering our citizens. A statement like that pisses off the libs. Don’t stereotype our base because we will boo-hoo you to death but yours is fair game.

Posted by: lllplus2 at June 21, 2006 5:49 AM
Comment #159941

Definitely MOST people are offended by the slurs that come out of some(not most) conservative mouths, but it doesn’t seem to do anything to reduce the number of times it happens.

FTR no one I know was offended by the caricatures in the political cartoons of muslims or their leaders.

I lived in the south for 5 years and my entire family is from the Ozarks. Here in nyc I hear jokes about trailer trash and the south all the time. My philosophy is that every one of those jokes truly applies to a certain population. Admit it, they really do exist in great numbers, but if you aren’t one of them, ignore it. Maybe your offense is that you pride yourself in not being like that, or you are so annoyed by those people that you don’t want to hear jokes about them.

Posted by: Loren at June 21, 2006 6:29 AM
Comment #159946

Tell me , what is left of the true Republicans? Today we have a government telling people whom to marry, whom to have sex with, ever growing government payroll all the while they are listening in our our telephone converstaions.

Sounds like big government to me. Wasn’t it suppose to be the Dems who did these kind of things?

Where is fiscal responsibility and lower taxes promised by the Republicans? You may say that Congress lowered taxes on the upper 5% but the rest of us are paying through the nose with higher real estate taxes, gas taxes, sales taxes, SS tax, etc. And I live in a state with a Republican governor, Republican majority in the State house, etc. So do blame on the Dems for our tax woes.

Bush has increased the size of the Federal government faster than any president since Roosevelt!! In 1997 the INS arrested 19,000 illegal migrant workers. In 2004 they arrested only 400! Wow. Now that is a great Conservative landmark to be proud of.

So what are you die-hard Republicans so proud of? War? Gay Bashing? Hispanic Bashing? White Supremacy?

I simply want lower taxes, less government and honest politicians. Republicans have failed on all 3 accounts (and I am not praising Dems here either).

Posted by: Acetracy at June 21, 2006 8:46 AM
Comment #159950

Don’t look now, but it seems like the Red Column’s become the new purveyors of political correctness!

The South is not the morally conservative place it once was, thanks to the liberating influence of the Republican political incorrectness movement. Religion has gotten more megachurchy, and telecommunications has ensured that the average person is getting no different a feed from a man in the Bluest of Blue States.

I see a bunch of predictions of the Democrats defeat, but the fact is, the Republicans have spent far too much time paying heed to their contributors and placating their base, and far too little time dealing with the rest of us. Result? They’re in trouble. Will they lose the next elections? If we can help it. But the point is, you’re having to fight for your mandate, and the moment you lose that fight, the ground will shift pretty quickly.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 21, 2006 9:07 AM
Comment #159952

Right on Acetracy. True conservatives have some great ideas, just as do true liberals. Most of the time there isn’t a conflict of interest here, and there is a lot of overlap in goals and objectives— however it has become a name calling insult laden trash fest on both sides. One trying to keep power, the other trying to take power and we are left in the dust. Now, there is no dialogue or statesmenship between the parties and you can say it is dysfunctional at best.

Posted by: tree hugger at June 21, 2006 9:14 AM
Comment #159959


Acetracy: Good post. I live in a state where republicans have ruled for 16 years. They have reduced the tax rates especially for the rich and passed the burden onto the workers with sales tax (7.5%) and huge increases in user fees. The only thing they haven’t taxed is food. If the people continue to vote them in food will be next. It amazes me how some in the lower income brackets could vote republican. I guess it is a testiment to the effectiveness of their propoganda. If I were a born again Christian I would be wondering what the republicans have done for me, other than retoric.

Even though our president has done things that remind many of the Nazis ( Muslem extremists kill three thousand inocent Americans, we kill 100 thousand inocent Muslems sounds just like something the Nazis would do) Bush is absolutely no Nazi. Hitlers attitude toward the business community was play ball with me or else. In America, it is the opposite that is true.

Posted by: jlw at June 21, 2006 9:55 AM
Comment #159960
Dan: I agree 100%. But, the problem is that the republican party and the democratic party have rigged the system.

Yes, they have … because they both consist of too many corrupt incumbent politicians that enjoy a very high re-election rate due to brainwashed voters that keep re-electing them.

Hence, the problem is not really parties. It is what each party consists of. Parties are neither the problem or the solution, despite the partisan warfare fueled by irresponsible incumbent politicians in all parties.

The fundamental problem is more basic than most think, which is that most people, naturally, seek security and prosperity with the least amount of effort and pain, but some (cheaters) resort to unethical or illegal methods. They have surrendered to , and it can be contagious, and in excess, it breeds Corruption.

Only Education, Transparency, Accountability, and Power can yield Responsibility, and reduce Corruption.

A lack of Education creates an environment ripe for growing Corruption, which is exactly what we have, and what has been seen for thousands of years. While there have been tiny steps forward in civilization, it is more like two steps forward, and 1.99 steps backward. A lack of Education is where it all goes wrong, which results in a lack of Transparency, which creates opportunities for self gain, which creates a lack of Accountability, which means there are no consequences. Hence, there is no Responsibility, and Power amplifies the problem.

So a few rule and most of the rest are ruled.
We have a chance at democracy, but we squander it.
Our own greed and corruption sabotages democracy.
The problem is us.
We are crappin’ in our own nest.
How long before the branch it rests upon snaps?

Posted by: d.a.n at June 21, 2006 10:03 AM
Comment #159968


Dan: agreed.

Posted by: jlwilliams at June 21, 2006 10:45 AM
Comment #159969

Politicans have always been corrupt, its the nature of the beast, I’m afraid. There is and always will be corruption on both sides. Anyone who tried to make too much of one sides problems risks looking dumb when his/her own sides problems come out (Are you listening, Howard?)

I think the greatest enemy the Democrats have is Soros, who is funding the looniest fringe of the party. No electible Democrat and win the nomination, and anyone who wins the nomination isn’t electible.

Just my two cents!

Posted by: Duane at June 21, 2006 10:45 AM
Comment #159970

jlw

I will add you to the list of contributors to the RNC. When you take the time to call the President “Hitler” and fall back on the “taxcuts for the rich” play you fall into your own trap. Sales tax are paid by anyone who buys something, what are usage fees? The tax burden on the wealthiest 25% among us is @ 80+ % of total revenues for the country, where’s the break? What % of low income taxpayers get money back for NOT PAYING TAXES? Those two arguments and a stubborn refusal to stop killing babies has made your party wither on the vine. C-ya in November!

Posted by: JR at June 21, 2006 10:46 AM
Comment #159973


Education is going down hill fast. The no child left behind policy is leaving them behind in droves. The dropout rate in our high scools is more than 30% and five republican controled southern states have a dropout rate of more than 50%. I guess the republican responce will be that the teachers in those states are the only liberals in those states. I do find fault in some of the liberal education policies. Especially the attitude towards discipline ( if we just pamper and love them they will turn out to be good citizens is crap but, the parents are just as culpable for the discipline problems).

I tried substitute teaching for a while, till I became frustrated with the system.

Posted by: jlw at June 21, 2006 11:02 AM
Comment #159977

Acetracy - Agreed.

Here’s another idea:

Eliminate ALL income taxes. Legalize all victimless crime (civil liability would still exist if you caused anyone harm, as is criminal liability if foreseeable harm is caused by your negligence).

Now, instead of allowing billions of dollars to fall through the cracks and into the hands of criminals every year, I say we start tracing it. Furthermore, put a consumption tax on EVERYTHING. Leave food alone if you think it’s better policy, but I’m not going that far.

Now you can have economic indicators that are actually meaningful and account for every type of spending. Now a poor struggling family can avoid high taxation by simply not buying anything unnecessary. Isn’t that free choice?

On the flip side, a spoiled rich kid who buys starbucks, jamba juice, goes shopping at the mall and goes clubbing all night buying alcohol and extasy: he gets taxed like crazy.

If the government ever runs into the problem of needing to deter behavoir for the universal good of the nation, don’t eliminate it, just tax it more and use the extra money wisely to cope with the problem or solve it.

when people begin to realize that it is not the role of gov’t to shape the behavoir of its citizenry, but rather to facilitate it, and grant us as much freedom as possible. A man visiting a prostitute, while not an ideal situation, is not going to cause our society’s collapse. Tax the guy and use the money to perfect medical treatments for VD’s and making them readily available. Also test those prostitutes early and often. It’s not perfect, but its so much better than how things work today (some guy goes in a back alley with some skank who uses the money to buy crack from a gang member who then uses it to buy illegal weapons to commit murders with).

So, any big gov’t Bush republicans or organized religion peddlers want to take issue? Just explain to me why we need government intervention to regulate behavoir? I’m not advocating eliminating, but rather strengthening personal responsilbility. You harm someone, you fix it. Can’t fix it? Go to jail and perform work for the public good.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 11:30 AM
Comment #159978


JR: I did not call Bush Hitler, read that part of my post a little more attentively. I critize my party nearly as much as the republicans. Do you? If 25% of our citizens are paying 80% of the taxes, why don’t they just pay the other 20%? They can afford it and if they did they would be considered great citizens and they would prove how great capitalism is.

The wealthy will still pay more if we would go to sales tax to finance the government because they can afford to by more and better. Ohio state and county sales tax is 7.5%. How high would it be if we also financed the federal government with sales tax? Another 20%? If so, that would be 27.5%. What effect would that have on the wealthy? What effect would it have on the worker who makes less than 20,000 per year? What effect would it have on business if people started buying less because of the high sales tax? User/usage fees are fees paid to the state for licences and other things that the state charges a fee for. If they did not have such a disproportionate effect on the poor, I would be all for financing the government with sales tax because it would help control consumption that has no reguard for limited resources.

Posted by: jlw at June 21, 2006 11:45 AM
Comment #159981


JR: As I said, I wasn’t calling Bush a Hitler. I was calling him a lackey for the corporations and the wealthy just like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are.
_
Lackey (lak’e) 1. a servile follower.

Posted by: jlwilliams at June 21, 2006 11:56 AM
Comment #160002

Kevin,

Eliminate income tax and move to a VAT instead, I am 100% on board with you. Legalize all “victimless” crimes? Depends how you define “victimless”. To say that things like drugs, “gaming”, and prostitution are victimless is overly simplistic. What you consider victimless is not the same as what the next person thinks. For example I recently read that there is a political party forming in Holland that is pushing for legalization of adult-child sex down to age 12. They argue that it is victimless. I (and I assume you) would think they are crazy but the point is peoples definition of victimless varies. One other quick example I heard on the news about a week ago, a man convicted of having sex on a regular basis with some horse. The defense was that it was a victimless crime. You may agree with him as did the radio host but call it my religious bias or whatever you want but I don’t want such a sick person loose in my community. Contrary to what many believe there is a slippery slope with moral behavior. Society does end up paying a price in tems of additional cost in social services, police, etc. I realize that you can’t hold peoples hands throughout life to make sure they make good decisions but neither do we need to be enablers of destructive behaviors.
That’s just my take. You are free to feel differently.

Posted by: Carnak at June 21, 2006 12:51 PM
Comment #160013

Oh the High Dudgeon!!!
What could be so offensive, I wonder? Was it the BBQ and Beer? No, it can’t be that! Southerners consider BBQ a high art — and rightfully so, I might add. Almost everybody drinks beer — so the idea of free beer is unlikely to be offensive. Nascar? Nah — who gets offended by race car driving? Toby Keith? I doubt it — he’s conservative and is extremely popular with conservatives. So it must be the “Girls Gone Wild”, right? What — aren’t conservatives all red-blooded American guys? Is any mention of your normal urges a no-no? Seems like it must be that…

Kevin:
“You can take a dog, even the sweetest dog, and turn them into a ravid beast with enough abuse. The post by Adrienne is a great example that I think.”

Hey, I’m no beast here. It was only a joke! I always make sarcastic jokes in the threads after one of Eric’s articles. His over-the-top demonization of all things Liberal always brings out that side out of me.

“The pro-Bush and pro-military people have really taken it to her for any little thing for the past few weeks.”

Actually Kevin, it’s been a lot longer than that.

“I think they can handle a little bit of crap-spewing.”

Ha! It seems I’ve offended them deeply, and in the process, shown just how often Political Correctness works in either direction.

“She’s got to deal with the backlash of course, but I’ve never been easily offended. Except of course by easily offended people.”

If by backlash you mean all the outrage garnered by my silly joke — I’m loving it. They’re constantly making nasty cracks and comments about all of us, calling us all sorts of names, and then when you shoot them off a wee bit of conservative stereotype, they completely freak out.
But maybe by backlash you mean how I’ll be treated here as a result? I don’t worry about that. I’ve got an extremely hard shell — besides don’t think I could be any more disrespected than I already am in this blog. I was painted as a far-left-loony (even though I’m not) a long time ago, and so, I’ve gotten rather used to it.

“Hey Adrienne…I say keep on swinging, I love watching you bring it…and you’re usually fighting the mob all by yourself.

Well, Thanks! I’ll certainly try. But I don’t feel I’m fighting the “mob” all by myself — there are many good posters on the left here who bring it everyday — and even more frequently and better than I do.

“Just try to telegraph the punches more.”

No punch, only a joke — honestly.

Ned:
“That statement is offensive to Southerners, women in general, and Southern women in particular.”

Hilarious! Listen ned, I’ve got a whole bunch of relatives who left Scotland at the turn of the last century and settled in North Carolina — the whole extended family still lives in that state to this very day. My sister and brother-in-law have lived in the South (Florida and North Carolina) their entire adult lives. My niece and nephew were both born and raised in the South. All the years I was growing up my family’s best friends were people who were born and raised in Texas. One of my closest friends was born and raised in South Carolina. My husband and I lived in Georgia for a few years and made many friends there. I love Southerners — but ones that I know and love all have a sense of humor!

scott:
“Just like the Taxi driver murder story from your ‘Award Winning Indy paper from Scotland that happened but can’t seem to find its way into mainstream media.”

This is totally off topic. Read the new Rules for Participation — it will inform you that you really must keep your troll-like hounding on any given subject to the proper thread.

Posted by: Adrienne at June 21, 2006 1:17 PM
Comment #160014

Carnak,

You are correct in that lines must be drawn eventually. Then we leave it up to the states and local governments to decide the definition of “victimless” and they can create a system of personal liability. A person should not be a criminal unless the act they have committed is, in and of itself, a danger to society. The potential dangers to society by gambling, prostitution, and drugs are all indirect, and have just as much to do with the fact that the industry itself has been forced underground. Fact is: where there is demand, someone will supply. Who should it be? Criminals or tax-paying businesses? I’m also against product liability in cases where people know of potential dangers.

Personally, I find the idea of having a full time enforcement officer going around looking for acts of beastiality sorta silly. He’d be effectively (hopefully) outcasted from his social betwork for getting caught doing that. Much more incentive to refrain from behavoir than a criminal penalty.

Informal controls are vastly under-rated in this country. It is the true glue of society. Not the Criminal Code.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 1:19 PM
Comment #160016

You know Eric, you can pretty much get away with anything if you have enough loyalists to yell conspiracy theory everytime you get called on something. The party of illogic is thriving.

Posted by: Schwamp at June 21, 2006 1:23 PM
Comment #160046

Tell you what. All you on the Left, You want a Liberal Goverment, The keep watch on the Mexican election, and if it goes the way it looks, the you got a place to go. It will be full of liberalism and corruption. Even worse then their goverment now. Why can’t you people realize that liberal goverment won’t work. You can’t have a goverment that wants to meddle in every aspect of the peoples lives like they want to.

Posted by: Mike at June 21, 2006 2:47 PM
Comment #160074

jlw

Nice try! You don’t call the Pres Hitler, just his policies nazism and his business feelings Hitler like. Huh, you don’t mean it though. What will become of the millions you pay for, they get free housing? See deteriorating inner cities. Free food? See fraud. Free education. See “dumbing down”. If you take all the responsibilities of life away from the man and place it in the hands of government, you take away personal dignity and freedom. Do you really believe that with more government oversight as to what you eat, drink, wear - where you work, sleep and go to school - how much you are ENTITLED TOO - will really make this country better? Wake up and smell the coffee comrade. Tell that story to the millions of former slaves to the Soviets - they’ll pick America anytime and warn of your GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS. A free ride ain’t freedom, it’s governmental slavery!

Posted by: JR at June 21, 2006 4:15 PM
Comment #160106

As a follow-up to the joke I made yesterday, I’d like to direct you all to this webpage — the only thing really missing is the BBQ!

Posted by: Adrienne at June 21, 2006 5:38 PM
Comment #160171

Victimless crime? What in the world is that? Every crime has a victim. Sounds like somebody has been in the kool aid.

Posted by: tomh at June 21, 2006 8:00 PM
Comment #160179

Tomh-

A crime is whatever the legislature decides to make punishable. There is no pre-requisite that there must be a victim.

You must REALLY trust in your elected officials.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 8:28 PM
Comment #160205

That’s my girl, Adrienne. Well, not my girl exactly but thanks again for all you do. I lived in the south too (hasn’t everybody?) and if it wasn’t all just a little bit true, it wouldn’t be funny. Getting the king ned worked up, well you were even better this thread than usual. And Kevin 23, as someone who reads this blog rather religiously except for the occasional week or so break before I pore over everything again, you’re new to me and welcome aboard. If you’ve been around forever, pardon me I don’t always look at the names of people. And if any of you have 3 or 4 BIG numbers on the back of your truck or SUV or the number 3 with wings around it, deal with it, it’s funny. Hey Kevin 23, that wouldn’t happen to be a motorcycle racer number would it? Cause Kevin Atherton (#23) is THE MAN!!

Posted by: ray s. at June 21, 2006 9:20 PM
Comment #160213

What trust a democrat or liberal? How much koolaid is left?

Posted by: tomh at June 21, 2006 9:30 PM
Comment #160232

Polls show most Americans want a democratic congress, not republican. To say that everyone hates the “far left” lunatics as neocons call the democratic party is simply a lie.

If the republicans magically keep control of congress against most voters’ wishes, then that would definitely be because of election fraud.

Posted by: john at June 21, 2006 9:58 PM
Comment #160243

Ray S-

Not Atherton…although I saw him in an interview once and he was wearing a red 23 hat so I immediately liked him. 23 is my birthday, baseball number, football number, lucky number, and the age which I’d most like to re-live.

There were more than a few sports icons when i was growing up who sported the all-mighty 23 as well.

Posted by: Kevin23 at June 21, 2006 10:13 PM
Comment #160306

We all must stand up as americans war is not pretty nor is it apealing to all people liberals democrats and republicains!!! Many actions taken in war are not for those with weak stomachs or wills.WE DO NOT RAISE OUR CHILDREN TO HATE EACH OTHER.SO BE CARFUL WHEN YOU POINT FINGERS WARS ARE NOT FOUGHT IN NEWS PAPERS OR ON TVS IN WW2 WE AS AMERICANS DID NOT SEE EVERY DAY STRUGGLES JUST TO LIVE FAR MORE DID NOT LIVE BUT AMERICANS UNITED AND TOOK A STAND!AND OUR WORD AS A NATION MEANT SOMTHING.We gave euorpe there freedom to live and overcome extreams just like we face today!!! To face it diferantly today would lay waste to all we stand for.We need to pull out the stops and think of security for our young fighting people take off the gloves and finish this mess and take the desire to make war more distastful to all nations. we put our own kids on trial for murder but will not prosacute those folks in g bay quba!HOW MANY SONS AND DAUGHTERS DID THEY KILL AND HOW MANY WOULD THEY KILL AGAIN !THINK ELECTION TIMES A COMIN ARE YOU TRULY READY FOR IT?

Posted by: allen stephens at June 22, 2006 12:31 AM
Comment #160335

Adrienne:

What part of the attitude expressed in this quote from your post is something to be proud of?

“I also think that if the Dems were really smart, they would anonymously host “Girls Gone Wild” Free BBQ ‘n’ All You Can Drink-a-thon’s all across the Southern States on that day. Yep — all the Sluts, Ribs, and Suds the good ol’ boys can handle. Their would be Nascar Star Autograph Signings, and for the gals, some famous country singer like Toby Keith as entertainment.
The Upshot? HUGE number of Southerners in those states would never make it to the polls!”


I don’t care if you have relatives in the South. If you had black relatives would you feel justified in making tasteless remarks about distracting black voters with crack, fried chicken and whores? Also you said that HUGE numbers of Southerners would be drawn by these creature comforts.

Aside from the regional slur, I find it very hypocritical to claim the high road on cultural issues, as is your wont, and refer to women as sluts. Is this an example of the vaunted Democratic empathy for women?

Posted by: goodkingned at June 22, 2006 1:54 AM
Comment #160470

goodkingned, Don’t Fret to much, you remember all the Liberal Women who came out Against Another Southener, Bill clinton, when he was Humping Everything in sight. North or South He did not Discriminate! he also has a wife who is in denial, and Makes Outlandish comments. consider the Source.

Posted by: Mb at June 22, 2006 1:22 PM
Comment #160492

ned:
“What part of the attitude expressed in this quote from your post is something to be proud of?”

The part where I can show all you righties just how politically correct you can be. The part where I get to make a satirical joke out of a conservative stereotype the way you all do with us liberals living on either coast. The part where I get to do all of the above in one of Eric’s threads — because all he ever does is demonize liberals.

“I don’t care if you have relatives in the South.”

Well, I do. I love those people.

“If you had black relatives would you feel justified in making tasteless remarks about distracting black voters with crack, fried chicken and whores?”

Probably. My black friends and I make self-deprecating jokes about our own respective cultures all the time.

“Also you said that HUGE numbers of Southerners would be drawn by these creature comforts.”

C’mon, free BBQ and Beer and lots of slutty girls flaunting themselves? Huge numbers of AMERICANS would be guaranteed come out for those “creature comforts”.

“Aside from the regional slur, I find it very hypocritical to claim the high road on cultural issues, as is your wont, and refer to women as sluts.”

Some women ARE sluts. If you are trying to say that there is no such thing as slutty women you are being completely ridiculous.
Jeeze, didn’t you ever once watch an episode of the Jerry Springer Show?
It should have been called Sluts and Depravity R’ Us.

“Is this an example of the vaunted Democratic empathy for women?”

“Girls Gone Wild” and other Totally Brain-Dead Attention-Whores set women as a whole back, not move us all forward. I honestly have more respect for a prostitute than I have for those kind of women — because at least they manage to get paid for acting like sex objects that men don’t have to show any respect towards.

Posted by: Adrienne at June 22, 2006 2:22 PM
Comment #160893

Cuzin Adrienne-

Came in at Wilmington, moved west to Scotland, Robeson, and Marlboro SC. Sound about right?

McIntyre, McLaurin, McNeill????

Posted by: George in SC at June 23, 2006 10:29 AM
Comment #164824

I felt compeled to write on a few comments reguarding ” we put our own kids on trial and not prosecute in guantanimo bay” May I just say that I am appalled by your war on terror ( I’m Irish) as it fuels islamic fundamentalists to Bin Ladens sick cause. Firstly 9/11 was a disguisting slaughter of innocent people (10,000), but so was an illegal war on Iraq (didnt find any wmd) where an estimated 100,000 civilians were killed by American actions. Tell me is an american life worth 10 iraqis?
I believe every soldier should be prosecuted who discards the geneva convention on human rights and this includes your president as the cuban prison is holding innocent people (4 Britains released who were on holidays in Pakistan, spending 4 years of their lives in jail) and using torturous methods to extract information that might be falsehoods anyway. Dont get me wrong, there probably are guilty men in there but isnt the right to a fair trial one of the cornerstones in your great constitution. I love your country but I love your constitution more, The right to civil liberty for every man was brilliant but the patriot act enabled your government to take away a lot of your liberties. I just cant understand how invading middle eastern countries can possibly rally muslims to your cause.

Posted by: Ross at July 4, 2006 9:40 PM
Comment #173637


Posted by: d.a.n at August 6, 2006 3:20 PM
Comment #185246

I think voting to legalize torture is going to backfire on the Republicans. It disgusts most Americans and does not work. The purpose of torture is not to get information but to get the other person to plead guilty whether he is or not. If the Republicans think this makes them look strong on national security, it doesn’t. It makes them look desperate.

Posted by: sanbois at September 29, 2006 11:01 PM
Comment #192869

It isnt voting to leagalize torture. It is allowing certain non-harmful (except phycologicly) techniques to be used on terrorists and suspected terrorists to get information that could potentialy save countles lives. To me there is no choice you either deal with terror in an envasive way and fight it like a war or you play defense. Defense is allowing diplomacy to work untill the end of the eath. That we learned after 911 and the clinton administration’s rediculous, incompetent effort to treat the terrorist attacks o nthe world trade center in 1993 and the uss cole war ship in 1996 as “criminal activities” just representitive of few people’s agendas. The point of 911 is the realization that these attacks arnt going away… ever. not untill we take the war to the enemy and defeat them. It wont happen over night. Terrorism can never be truly eradicated. But, like acne it ican be controled and if given the right perscriptions (in this a potnet one is needed becuase we are dealing with about 100 million lessons) then we can control it and in turn prevent the permenet scars it could leave o nthe world. I beleive that our constitution only applies to people of our country and so terorists arnt protected or give any rights and as terrorists they certainly havent earned any… except for maybe capitol punishment.

Posted by: ed at November 2, 2006 6:00 PM
Post a comment