They're Actually Doing It

[Guest MikeSC]

Education.

What is the typically conservative policy on education?

Eliminating the exceptionally useless Dept. of Education.

Approving civil unions.

He didn't come right out and say he approved this until just a week before the election, and in fact, this is one of the issues that helped Bush win the election, as he had supported a Constitutional amendment for months, an amendment that included civil unions and domestic partnerships in most states.

I've already explained why he supported the ban, but since nobody chooses to listen to a view outside of their own, I will not waste my time and energy rehashing it.

Not one word about outlawing abortion.

He avoided those questions quite nicely.

He did not state "I will make this horrible procedure" illegal, did he?

No Social Security privatization.

Isn't that what Bush's whole proposal is?

Nope, it's a hybrid. People have the "option" to invest their money or stay in Social Security.

 

Think of it as John Kerry's health insurance plan.

I was referring more to Congress. The Republicans lost because --- and I said the Dems would have the same problem MONTHS ago --- hatred of a candidate doesn't win elections.

        -=Mike

Agreed 100%. No incumbent will be running in 2008, so I don't expect this to be an issue.

The Dems will run the same "Bush = Satan" campaign that has bombed so impressively for 4 years now.

 

Another Hint: Dems --- the people don't HATE Bush. Stop assuming that they do. Again, the Republicans had to learn that the hard way. I thought y'all might have been paying attention.

-=Mike

[gWIL 0]

I'm telling you guys Evan Bayh is our next president. He is very moderate and just the thing Democrats need in 08. He is very likable.

[Guest MikeSC]

I'm telling you guys Evan Bayh is our next president.

Only if he can get his name out there a little within the next 4 years. The GOP already has several media darlings to choose from.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

A good piece on the folly of the Dems strategy:

The logic of the "Left Is More" position seems to be this: What people really want is a Debs or La Follette who will smite the corporations, turn swords into plowshares, share the wealth and banish John Ashcroft to a cabin in the Ozarks. But since the Democratic Party denies them their first choice, they will--naturally!--pick a hard-right warmaker of staggering incompetence and no regard for either the Constitution or the needs of the people. Better that than settle for a liberal centrist who would only raise the minimum wage by two dollars. In other words, these proto-progressives will consciously choose the greater evil out of what--spite? pride? I scorn your half-measures, sir! Keep your small change!

 

This makes no sense to me as an explanation of the recent election. It doesn't explain, for example, why Republicans gained in both House and Senate. It doesn't explain why Californians rejected a referendum to amend their three-strikes law so that twice-convicted felons wouldn't get twenty-five years for shoplifting, or why Arizonans voted solidly to bar undocumented aliens from obtaining a wide range of essential public services and to require public servants to report them if they try. It doesn't explain why the Kansas school board is once again a chorus line of creationists.

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041122&s=pollitt

Yes, she makes the same idiotic arguments throughout this piece that many of the left do (sorry, but insulting the majority is one of the less effective means of WINNING A MAJORITY) --- but this piece encapsulates the problem.

-=Mike

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

You're also forgetting Dean's success in getting people elected. He didn't campaign very hard for Kerry; his PAC took on 12 candidates for lower offices and won 9 of them; they were state legislature candidates mostly, and the initiative turned out to be a smashing success. In time, you'll see that if he gets this job, the Democratic party will be back in good shape by the time his term is over.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

Talk of Hitlery running has already occurred, and they're seriously considering putting Hulk Howie in charge?

 

2008 will be quite the insane election. I wonder what the GOP will have up its sleeve.

 

That's assuming that we're not a dictatorship by 2008, of course.

I thought liberals were supposed to make inane comparisons to WW2 dictators?

 

I just found it funny that Mike said that insulting the majority won't win you the majority, right after he insulted the left, like he normally tends to do. Of course, he's not running for office, so he doesn't have to worry.

[jesse_ewiak 0]

Again, Mike, you're acting as if Kerry got blown out by twenty points. He was 200,000 votes away from being President. 48% of America voted for the "Most Liberal Senator" in America.

[Guest MikeSC]

Talk of Hitlery running has already occurred, and they're seriously considering putting Hulk Howie in charge?

 

2008 will be quite the insane election.  I wonder what the GOP will have up its sleeve.

 

That's assuming that we're not a dictatorship by 2008, of course.

I thought liberals were supposed to make inane comparisons to WW2 dictators?

 

I just found it funny that Mike said that insulting the majority won't win you the majority, right after he insulted the left, like he normally tends to do. Of course, he's not running for office, so he doesn't have to worry.

The left isn't the majority. And I should be more clear and state the leadership of the left is absolutely clueless. They don't know what they're doing.

 

Conservatives NEVER said their inability to win Congress for 40 years was because people were stupid --- it was, in our eyes, because the Dems ran them all as local campaigns far better than we did. It took the radical idea of running ALL Congressional candidates on one national platform that did the trick.

 

There are people on the left who are rational. It's a shame the whackjobs drown them out.

  Again, Mike, you're acting as if Kerry got blown out by twenty points. He was 200,000 votes away from being President. 48% of America voted for the "Most Liberal Senator" in America.

Bush had the press as in the bag for his opponent as has ever been seen --- and STILL increased his vote total by 7M votes from his 2000 total (twice the increase Clinton saw in 1996). He overcame forged memos, an attempt to portray the draft as a legitimate concern, a horrendous propaganda piece that made a killing, and outright false stories (the missing explosives) in an attempt to unseat him.

 

And it only made him MORE liked by the public.

 

The left will never acknowledge this --- but Bush is a far more popular candidate than Clinton was. Clinton had better poll numbers --- except when it mattered: at the ballot box.

-=Mike

[Guest Sohaib Falaajul]

I don't see how this is a positive at all for the Democrats.  People were running from this guy like the plague in Iowa in January.  The last thing they need is another guy who will glady talk about inane conspiracy theories and continue the angry Democrat thing.

The media crucified Howard Dean for being excited about RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. How dare he! People were genuinely excited about his campaign.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

People were already jumping off the bandwagon long before the scream.

[NoCalMike 0]

The left will never acknowledge this --- but Bush is a far more popular candidate than Clinton was. Clinton had better poll numbers --- except when it mattered: at the ballot box.

-=Mike

Well Kerry had more votes at the ballot box then Clinton did as well. So that doesn't really mean shit and you know it. More people on both sides turned out for this election then in 1996. More people were driven to the polls. When more people are voting, numbers will increase.

[NoCalMike 0]

Bush had the press as in the bag for his opponent as has ever been seen --- and STILL increased his vote total by 7M votes from his 2000 total (twice the increase Clinton saw in 1996). He overcame forged memos, an attempt to portray the draft as a legitimate concern, a horrendous propaganda piece that made a killing, and outright false stories (the missing explosives) in an attempt to unseat him.

The forged memos were caught and ended up hurting Kerry more then Bush. The Documentary has nothing to do with "the press" as every daytime/evening talkshow was harder on Michael Moore then they could ever dream to be on Bush leading up to the war. The main stream media were basically cheerleaders for the war the way they sat on their hands during the administration's drum beat.

 

The draft will always be a legitimate concern when you are running a war with no end in sight, and in which the press can't get concrete answers out of the leadership, on top of the fact that this administration claims that Iraq is only the beginning and has no problem attacking other countries pre-eminently before the task at hand is completed.

[Guest UncleKimmyGibler]

HOWARD DEAN IS SEXY WHEN HE IS ANGRY...Like that fine hunk of Greek Meat Jesse Katsopolous

 

HOLA TANNERINOS

[Guest MikeSC]

 

The left will never acknowledge this --- but Bush is a far more popular candidate than Clinton was. Clinton had better poll numbers --- except when it mattered: at the ballot box.

        -=Mike

Well Kerry had more votes at the ballot box then Clinton did as well. So that doesn't really mean shit and you know it. More people on both sides turned out for this election then in 1996. More people were driven to the polls. When more people are voting, numbers will increase.

No, it means A LOT. People can say "I like the guy" all day long. If they won't VOTE for him, no, he isn't that popular or beloved.

 

Bush has outpolled Clinton twice and increased his previous vote total far more than Clinton did in his re-election bid.

The forged memos were caught and ended up hurting Kerry more then Bush.

ONLY because bloggers nailed CBS to the wall about the whole deal. It didn't hurt Kerry because of anything besides CBS and the Dems being nailed in committing a fraud.

The Documentary has nothing to do with "the press" as every daytime/evening talkshow was harder on Michael Moore then they could ever dream to be on Bush leading up to the war.

Hardly. They couldn't fall over themselves enough to praise this movie. And the Dems CLEARLY thought it'd help a lot, seeing how McAuliffe and the other Dems were all too happy to be seen with Moore.

The main stream media were basically cheerleaders for the war the way they sat on their hands during the administration's drum beat.

You missed the "quagmire" stories while we were busily running through Iraq, eh?

The draft will always be a legitimate concern when you are running a war with no end in sight, and in which the press can't get concrete answers out of the leadership, on top of the fact that this administration claims that Iraq is only the beginning and has no problem attacking other countries pre-eminently before the task at hand is completed.

Yet the Republicans and military leaders have both said no draft is needed OR desired. The only people proposing draft bills were Dems.

 

So, why exactly would the press take the story seriously as something Bush would even consider?

-=Mike

[AndrewTS 0]

I thought liberals were supposed to make inane comparisons to WW2 dictators?

Moderates get the luxury of mocking and parodying both sides, though.

 

Hardly. They couldn't fall over themselves enough to praise this movie.

 

Remember Gore and plenty of Dems plugging Day After Tomorrow? It seems any lousy movie that tells people what they want to hear will be bought by people.

 

Michael Moore apparently is a fan of Michael Bay, too.

 

Not only do a lot of Dems like the movie, but they'd place it up there with their favorite political films:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/...vies/index.html

 

DEMOCRATS

 

1. MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON

2. ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN

3. MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE

4. FAHRENHEIT 9/11

5. THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT

 

REPUBLICANS

 

1. MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON

2. CITIZEN KANE

3. THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT

4. MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE

5. DAVE

 

INDEPENDENTS

 

1. MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON

2. THE FARMER'S DAUGHTER

3. CITIZEN KANE

4. MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE

5. FAHRENHEIT 9/11

 

OVERALL

 

1. MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON

2. THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE

3. CITIZEN KANE

4. ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN

5. THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT

 

Some odd choices there, too. The American President liked more by Republicans than by Democrats, let alone making the top 5?

 

just found it funny that Mike said that insulting the majority won't win you the majority, right after he insulted the left, like he normally tends to do. Of course, he's not running for office, so he doesn't have to worry.

 

Well, I don't think "the majority" or whoever was insulted. However, I noticed that now a lot of Democrat supporters have shifted from insulting President Bush...to insulting President Bush and the Bush Electorate. Prior to the election they mainly targeted Bush and didn't really comment on the voting public either way. However, a lot of people seem to identify with Bush and found Kerry more distant, and took offense to a lot of things said about him.

 

Considering that they'll want to appeal to as broad a base as possible in 2008, the DNC itself probably should make sure it tries to accomodate all the voters while not attempting to alienate them, and maybe tighten the nozzle on some of it's more virulent BS spigots. DNC officials being buddy-buddy with Moore doesn't really do them any good. Only Moore himself is benefitting from that.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

"Patrick Buchanan, among the most conservative pundits and presidential candidates in the republic's history, found that he could not identify any allegedly liberal bias against him during his presidential candidacies. 'I've gotten balanced coverage, and broad coverage – all we could have asked. For heaven's sake, we kid about the liberal media, but every Republican on earth does that."... And even William Kristol, without a doubt the most influential Republican/ neoconservative publicist in America, has come clean on this issue. 'I admit it,' he told a reporter. 'The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures.'

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0465001769...00J#reader-page

[Guest Loss]

I agree. A "liberal media" would have ignored Whitewater and the Monica scandal.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

maybe Clinton was some sort of non-liberal, which made the liberals mad, so they decided to go after him, after failing to have Paula Jones killed. CBS did kill Vince Foster.

 

ya know.

[NoCalMike 0]

The media is corporate, not liberal or conservative. Ratings are what drives the stories and coverage, and the tendency to outright ignore any stories related to media consolidation and a possible negative impact.

[Guest MikeSC]

"Patrick Buchanan, among the most conservative pundits and presidential candidates in the republic's history, found that he could not identify any allegedly liberal bias against him during his presidential candidacies. 'I've gotten balanced coverage, and broad coverage – all we could have asked. For heaven's sake, we kid about the liberal media, but every Republican on earth does that."... And even William Kristol, without a doubt the most influential Republican/ neoconservative publicist in America, has come clean on this issue. 'I admit it,' he told a reporter. 'The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures.'

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0465001769...00J#reader-page

I agree. A "liberal media" would have ignored Whitewater and the Monica scandal.

 

The media is corporate, not liberal or conservative. Ratings are what drives the stories and coverage, and the tendency to outright ignore any stories related to media consolidation and a possible negative impact.

 

maybe Clinton was some sort of non-liberal, which made the liberals mad, so they decided to go after him, after failing to have Paula Jones killed. CBS did kill Vince Foster.

I'll deal with this all. The press didn't want to deal with Whitewater period. And don't even TRY and say the "EVERYBODY lies about sex" press even attempted to actually cover the Monica story close to fairly.

 

Explain how the BAD GUY in the story was not the President who perjured himself --- but the woman who decided to document what she felt was an attempt to get her to commit a felony. Explain how RAPE ACCUSATIONS got ignored. Explain how Kathleen Willey --- as credible a source as there is --- got dragged through the mud for her accusations about Clinton. Explain how the press took the word from a Dem operative that the Gennifer Flowers tapes were fake --- when they were not.

 

And the current press? Gee, they give Air America a glowing report on NBC News on the night of their first broadcasts --- in spite of the network getting abysmal ratings and virtually no clearance. Do I even need to mention the memo story? How about the obsession over Bush's Nat'l Guard story WHILE trying to dismiss any criticism of Kerry's service? How about the explosives story? How about holding up Joe Wilson as a credible source --- but ignoring it when he is completely proven to be a liar?

 

Hell, explain why it took them several days to call Iowa for Bush --- when PA was such a close race that they called very quickly?

-=Mike

...Yeah, the press doesn't take sides. Should've seen Judy Woodruff of CNN nearly bursting into tears when FL went for Bush. Or Rather's attempts to claim that OH could still go for Kerry...

[NoCalMike 0]

The press was trying dismiss any criticism of Kerry's service!?! WTF?

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Yeah, the press doesn't take sides. Should've seen Judy Woodruff of CNN nearly bursting into tears when FL went for Bush. Or Rather's attempts to claim that OH could still go for Kerry.

I didn't watch CNN this time around, so I missed Cryin' Judy -- although I remember her in '02, and it was golden to watch that, plus Carville put a basket on his head.

 

When the election was all wrapped up, I did turn over to CBS just to laugh at Rather. This may have been mentioned in another thread, but I heard a few days ago Rather was arguing with some CBS talking head about the mathmatical possibilty Kerry could win Ohio, and Dan said something like "Well for the record Bob Sheffer (I think) does not teach mathmatics" and Bob said, "Dan, I did teach math..."