Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on May 14, 2006, 04:47:20 PM
-
I wonder how many people actually heard this speech. Not enough. From the keynote speaker at the Democratic Convention
2004 Convention Speech - Barak Obama (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/convention2004/barackobama2004dnc.htm)
It is that fundamental belief -- It is that fundamental belief: I am my brother’s keeper. I am my sister’s keeper that makes this country work. It’s what allows us to pursue our individual dreams and yet still come together as one American family.
E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."
Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us -- the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of "anything goes." Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America -- there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America -- there’s the United States of America.
The pundits, the pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I’ve got news for them, too. We worship an "awesome God" in the Blue States, and we don’t like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and yes, we’ve got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.
Now compare to this Keynote speech....
Zell Miller keynote 2004 (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/convention2004/zellmiller2004rnc.htm)
No one should dare to even think about being the Commander in Chief of this country if he doesn't believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home.
But don't waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my Party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution.
They don't believe there's any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.
It is not their patriotism -- it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking.
They claimed Carter's pacifism would lead to peace -- they were wrong.
They claimed Reagan's defense buildup would lead to war -- they were wrong.
And no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.
Together, Kennedy/Kerry have opposed the very weapons systems that won the Cold War and that are now winning the war on terror.
Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security. But Americans need to know the facts.
The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40% of the bombs in the first six months of [Operation] Enduring Freedom.
The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.
The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi's Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra.
The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.
The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War.
The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's Capital and this very city after 9/11.
I could go on and on and on: Against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein's scud missiles over Israel; against the Aegis air-defense cruiser; against the Strategic Defense Initiative; against the Trident missile -- against, against, against.
This is -- This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?!
U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?!
Not even gonna start about how Zell lied about the defense spending, just look at the tone of the 2 speeches.. who do you want representing you?
-
I did. :D
He gave another doozey last Thursday.
-
Is Miller a possibility in '08? Like Lieberman, there's a democrat I'd consider.
-
you people actually listen to political speeches? next you will be saying you believe what they say.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Is Miller a possibility in '08? Like Lieberman, there's a democrat I'd consider.
Lieberman is the DNC's McCain.
McCain is the GOP's Lieberman.
-
Originally posted by john9001
you people actually listen to political speeches? next you will be saying you believe what they say.
When Bush spoke during the Bush/Gore debates of regime change in Iraq, I believed him. Of course, he also said that he wasn't for nation building... so it's a wash.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Lieberman is the DNC's McCain.
McCain is the GOP's Lieberman.
Yup.
Repubs with a brain frickin hate McCain.
Demo's with a brain frickin hate Lieberman.
But for me, if I was given a choice between McCain and Lieberman, I'd pick lieberman (I'm a republican sorta, if you haven't been paying attention).
How about you sandy? McCain or Lieberman?
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Yup.
Repubs with a brain frickin hate McCain.
Demo's with a brain frickin hate Lieberman.
But for me, if I was given a choice between McCain and Lieberman, I'd pick lieberman (I'm a republican sorta, if you haven't been paying attention).
How about you sandy? McCain or Lieberman?
Of the two, I like McCain, but only because he's more familiar. He manages to find his way on to the Daily Show a few times a year. He hasn't really said anything all that disagreeable. I'll confess that I'm ignorant of the voting records for both.
A more informed opinion could be different.
-
Originally posted by john9001
you people actually listen to political speeches? next you will be saying you believe what they say.
QFT.
-
MT,
I saw Obama's speech live and LOVED it. He is a great and truely inspiring speaker. While I don't agree with his politics I thought he did a great job at the DNC convention. I wish we had more politicans that could actually motivate and """"GASP"""" inspire people.
AHEM..
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=125029&highlight=obama
see i'm not such a pundit after all.
-
Hard to be "inspired" by people who will only lie to you, if it fits thier purpose. I have no respect for politicians, ergo, they cannot inspire me. However, if they lined up and jumped off a cliff into the Grand Canyon, I might raise an eyebrow.
As I have no respect foir them, I cannot consider them leaders. A true leader is typically selfless. Politicans are in the game to get what they can out of it before bailing. They have no respect for us, the people, or they would not continually lie to us.
I am not proud of our politicians. I am disgusted by them.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I wonder how many people actually heard this speech. Not enough. From the keynote speaker at the Democratic Convention
2004 Convention Speech - Barak Obama (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/convention2004/barackobama2004dnc.htm)
Now compare to this Keynote speech....
Zell Miller keynote 2004 (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/convention2004/zellmiller2004rnc.htm)
Not even gonna start about how Zell lied about the defense spending, just look at the tone of the 2 speeches.. who do you want representing you?
Gotta say it does seem that Obama didn't drink the koolaid and Zell did. But opinions vary as do votes. Mine says Obama seems a more reasonable choice of the two if it was a presidential vote on the line.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
Gotta say it does seem that Obama didn't drink the koolaid and Zell did. But opinions vary as do votes. Mine says Obama seems a more reasonable choice of the two if it was a presidential vote on the line.
How do you think Obama would fare against Condoleezza? That would be an interesting race.
-
Originally posted by lukster
How do you think Obama would fare against Condoleezza? That would be an interesting race.
"Interesting" is a word for it. I believe Obama would fare well and he would be my preferred choice. But then, quotes seem to say alot in this thread:
"I'm not somebody who wants to run for office. I haven't ever run for anything," Rice told NBC. "I think I'm doing what I need to do, which is to try and promote American foreign policy, American interests, the president's democracy agenda at an extraordinary time."
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/10/16/national/w081714D55.DTL
-
john9001 is Scuzzy's shade :noid :noid :noid :furious :lol
b0th r teh sm@rt
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
As I have no respect foir them, I cannot consider them leaders. A true leader is typically selfless. Politicans are in the game to get what they can out of it before bailing. They have no respect for us, the people, or they would not continually lie to us.
I am not proud of our politicians. I am disgusted by them.
Well Skuzzy most of us here have probably had someone we can relate to as a good leader and those same endearing qualities are what make them nowhere near the sort of leadership we need to guide our nation. And if by chance that person was elected to lead us they would be extremely unpopular only because they lack the political correctness to placate the brain washed masses.
-
The real point here is the huge difference in tone of the Keynote speakers at the 2 conventions. One is uplifting and hopeful, the other is angry and attacking. Why would anyone want to attack the people who aren't even in power?
Maybe to mold the issue to a message instead of molding the message to the actual issues.
I'm sick of the Karl Rove games... I hope the majority of the Country is too.
The Conservative right may have some great ideas when it comes to running the Country.. no doubt about that.. but they have also been the instigators of the wedge that has separated us as a people, and the means by which Liberal became a dirty word.
Shame on them.
-
Id vote for Zell Miller before I would even consider voting for Barrack Obomba
-
MT you should callthe thread "Speechmaking to be proud of" NOT "Laeadership to be proud of"
-
Why would anyone want to attack the people who aren't even in power?
====
librals are teh suck?
-
Originally posted by Arlo
"Interesting" is a word for it. I believe Obama would fare well and he would be my preferred choice. But then, quotes seem to say alot in this thread:
"I'm not somebody who wants to run for office. I haven't ever run for anything," Rice told NBC. "I think I'm doing what I need to do, which is to try and promote American foreign policy, American interests, the president's democracy agenda at an extraordinary time."
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/10/16/national/w081714D55.DTL
That she doesn't want to run is perhaps even more of a reason to persuade her to do so. She would get my vote.
-
Originally posted by lukster
That she doesn't want to run is perhaps even more of a reason to persuade her to do so. She would get my vote.
Truth be told she's shown indications of wanting the job but she wants to be "drafted" (a mandate of the people for her to take the office). Not likely. So if she really want's it she'll have to compete in the political arena. An area that partisan politics has turned into a mud wrestling pit. ;)
-
Actually, I think Liberal became a less than positive image due to the ideas put forth by.... liberals.
9th Circuit as a good example.
-
Democrats realized the folly of trying to put the extreme left in office last year. My money says you see them trying to regroup and regain the religious dems that they alienated last year with their hard line anti-religion posturing. Making gay marriage and abortion two of the cornerstones of their campaign was a big mistake.
I wonder if the Reps will figure out they need to move away from the extreme right in order to win this election. I don't think they will because they're cocky after the last election. They think they actually won when the truth is the Dems totally threw it away.
I'm wondering how much of an impact having a black man with an arab sounding name running for office is going to have. I'd actually consider voting for him as long as the Dems don't try to out-stupid last election by putting hillary on the bill as VP.
-
No more Clintons, no more Bush. No more McCain and no more Kerry.
Time for someone new.....
-
Originally posted by Toad
Actually, I think Liberal became a less than positive image due to the ideas put forth by.... liberals.
9th Circuit as a good example.
That's not unlike saying conservatives have a less than positive image due to the ideas brought forth by conservatives.
The current administration as a better example.
Both of which are a perfect examples of how partisan politics is bad for the nation as a whole.
As an aside, I tend not to blame courts for doing their job no matter the opinion of those who's agenda it threatens. If someone doesn't like the ruling ... present a stronger case.
-
Well, the 9th is the most overruled Cirucuit in the US. So I guess a lot of people present a stronger case.
Accountability and Responsiblity are the two traits I consider first when examining an issue.
While the current administration has a very poor record in this area, looking over the past 40 or so years of my "political awareness" it seems to me that the "Liberal" view is the one that most often removes Accountability and Responsiblity for people's actions....from the people that perform those actions.
Little Billy has a problem? It's not Billy's fault...it's society's fault. Or, choose something, anything to blame but little Billy.
Now, lately, both sides are pretty much in the same pot. It seems no one can do anything but point fingers.
-
We're agreed.
-
so which of you divisive guys gave colored people the "african-american" title?
I'm with toad... only care about individualism and personal responsibility. I may or may not be my brothers keeper depending on how I feel about it at the time and if I think they deserve it.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so which of you divisive guys gave colored people the "african-american" title?
I'm with toad... only care about individualism and personal responsibility. I may or may not be my brothers keeper depending on how I feel about it at the time and if I think they deserve it.
lazs
Well ... if that was really part of the issue ... blame me and we'll move on. ;)
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Democrats ..........Making gay marriage and abortion two of the cornerstones of their campaign was a big mistake.
This is exactly the point. Democrats DIDN'T make this a cornerstone of the campaign... Republicans made it a Democratic cornerstone. Kerry was AGAINST gay marriage.
More Rove attack politics.
Did you know the Republicans even sent fliers out to predominately Black areas of the South stating that the Democrats wanted to "ban the Bible & Have Gays teach your children"?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
MT you should callthe thread "Speechmaking to be proud of" NOT "Laeadership to be proud of"
Conveying the message is part of leadership... a huge part. I'll stick with my title.
-
Words are cheap. It does not take any leadership skills to read a speech, especially if it is prepared by someone else. It takes far more to live up to the words, than to just mutter them at the crowd.
Actions speak far more than words. A leader will hold himself accountable to everyone. A coward points fingers or redirects any possible fallout to someone else. Oh,..but that is politics,..isn't it? Or is that what we have labeled it today?
-
SAY NO TO MCCAIN AND ANYONE ELSE WHO SUPPORT USER FEES FOR AVIATION SERVICES!
I was a McCain fan until I found out he supports user fees to be charged for aviation services. Doing this fked up Europe and Canada and the Airlines are pushing for it here so they can fk up our system! You get a bill every time you talk to a tower, ATC or weather services. It would be death to GA for all but the rich.
-
"Hey, lady. You gotta buy a ticket if you want a seat on the plane. Well .... you might need two."
- Joe the ticket counter guy
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
This is exactly the point. Democrats DIDN'T make this a cornerstone of the campaign... Republicans made it a Democratic cornerstone. Kerry was AGAINST gay marriage.
Ummm... your revisionist politics is not refreshing in the least.
Gay marriage was pushed into the forefront in order to villify republicans. The SSC nominations were questioned based on their abortion viewpoints. Are you saying this was a republican plot to undermine the democrats? Because I don't believe a single republican was involved in Portland's decision to keep the courts open 24 hours a day to accomodate all of the gay marriages.
Sometimes you're so far off it just makes me shake my head.
-
Huh?
What does any of that have to do with the Presidential election?
Oh... that's right.
Nothing.
-
hitler was a great speech maker, so he must have been a great leader, unlike boosh who can't even pronounce some words.
if obama's first name was albert we could call him al obama:lol
-
I'm pretty sure there's a greater difference between Hitler's speeches and Obama's than Hitler's and some others you'd be hesitant to belittle. ;)
-
Speech-a-fying isn't the same as gettin' r done.
We've seen a lot of speech-a-fying and very little getting done.
From all sides.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Huh?
What does any of that have to do with the Presidential election?
Oh... that's right.
Nothing.
Q: Is Dick Cheney's daughter gay? How is it anyone knows that?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Speech-a-fying isn't the same as gettin' r done.
we're doomed.
hap
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Q: Is Dick Cheney's daughter gay? How is it anyone knows that?
Could be because the question came up in 2 dabates and it was mentioned by both Kerry and Edwards, or
It could be because Cheney himself brought it up in the early part of the campaign in Iowa... look it up.
-
Sure thing MT. Revisionist history is your strong point. Especially that part about who made what an issue.
-
Oh comon... Dems respond to a question and that means they "made it an issue".
Spit out the koolaid.
-
It was just a harmless question MT. Remember, the republicans made it an issue... It's the republicans that alienated people from the democratic party. It's the republicans that duped everyone into thinking the dems were pro gay marriage, pro abortion and anti religion. That is why millions of people that normally hate anything republican were turned away from the democratic party. It was because of what the republicans told them... not because of what the dems said on the issues. Yes, after years of hating repulbicans, they actually started hanging on every word they said.
Either that or the democrats started using terms like "religious wackos" to describe any Christian as if only the republicans went to church. It almost makes you wonder why Obama brought it up in his speech. Well, maybe it doesn't make you wonder, but it makes anyone with common sense wonder.
-
You can prattle on all you like, but the tone is clear to see from the examples I posted and there are many more. The tone was set by the republicans and it went like this:
Smear - Kerry
Queer - They're coming to get your children
Fear - Vote for Bush or they'll attack again.
The real problem was that the idiot Democrats allowed it to happen.
-
... forget about all the things the Dems said and ran on during the campaign, 'cause Obama set the tone for them with one speach at their convention.
Are people really that dumb?
Nevermind :D
-
I said it before and no one listened...
Only YOU can Free America.
There's a Storm coming, when Americans are finally sick and tired of the BS and a New Nation shall be Born.
We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore.
We will be united in our common interests.
"We will not go quietly into the night!
We will not vanish without a fight!
We're going to live on!
We're going to survive!"
Free America!!!
Mac
-
MT, one thing is undeniable...even for you.
Given two chances at beating Bush, the Democrats were unable to get the job done either time.
And it ain't like Bush is some kinda super politician.
It's theirs to lose this time. If they do snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again, I bet the excuses for losing will be the funniest EVAR!
-
A history lesson from my man drifty: (http://driftglass.blogspot.com/)
".... Seriously, watching these Gap-clad Yahoos trying to paper over the moral bankruptcy and cowardice of their party and positions with nothing but empty decibels and hysterically spasmodic knee-jerkery is like unto watching a Busby Berkley epic recast with Third Stage syphilitics, water-head drunks and St. Vitus’ Dancers: There’s a sense of horror that no Grown-ups are putting a stop to it... a certain, shameful, geek-show fascination...and a degree of wonder that, given the headless-Chickenhawk flailing that passes for forensic skills on the Right, they all haven’t just kicked each other’s million-dollar orthodontia down each other’s throats.
I mean, Jesus, how is it possible that everything they touch turns to ****? Hell, twenty-years from now, you show someone your fancy-schmancy Medal of Freedom, and the question is going to be, “Good Lord, what did you get caught doing? ****ing dogs?”
I wanted to take a moment and talk a little about a subject which is the single most verboten topic within the Republican Party: The Past.
Specifically, how did we get here?
How did it ever get to be OK to be just plain Bug**** Zell Miller Ranting Nuts and still claim a place at the Adult's Table of public discourse? For example, how did a bilious Mad Cow like Ann Coulter ever get her name publicized anywhere but scrawled on the walls of your lower-rent Glory Hole stalls? Why isn’t Rush – who uses the phrase “feminazi” as freely and often as Chicagoans say “Over by d’ere” – ever given the Dick Durbin treatment for conflating the women’s movement with the Third Reich?
We’re about to have a helluva Summer and Fall, and all over D.C. and the MSM, any number of ass-licking “Moderate” Republicans and misguided Dems will be wringing their damp little paws and decrying the lack of civility and comity in our public discourse.
Which might be fair enough...if the breakdown of mutual respect was a natural phenomenon, but its not. The strategy of dumping ton after metric ton of raw sewage into the public discourse in order to slime to death anyone within a mile of honest debate is a strictly man-made Republican phenomenon.
For twenty years, the GOP Poison Factory has made unilateral war on the Democratic Party, and for twenty years the Dems have been stupid enough to keep kicking at the football that Lucy kept yanking away at the last minute (and then Lucy would pee in their faces for good measure.)
There is a reason why a sweetheartbag like James Dobson isn’t off fleecing widows out of their pensions but instead wholly owns the testicles of the Heir Presumptive to the GOP Throne. There is a reason why Creationists and Petro-potatos dictate Science Policy, and why the GOP Krazy Kampus Kuttlefish have no concept of how to construct a decent argument
It’s because for twenty years they have been carefully taught that lying, cheating and calling anyone a traitor who disputes their infinite wisdom in the slightest is their God Given Right. They have been taught that Thuggery and Mendacity are Good and Holy, and when you get caught with your pants down and your wang buried to the short-and-curlies in the family pet...that the solution is to shriek a little louder, and call everyone who sees you a terrorist.
The good news is, this makes them incredibly weak. At long last, like dying drunks, all the GOP has left to prop itself up are the very dregs of the bottle: hatemongering traitors like Rove, warmongering loons like Rummy and Dominionist chuds like Dobson. And like the Potemkin Puppet People that seat-filled Bush's disasterous Social Security Loot-a-palooza Tour, they have grown so used to hearing nothing but retard adulation for every idiot lie they puke out that one, clean shot to the body freaks them completely out.
"Play-nice" time is over. Long over. I say **** these people, and anyone that look’s like ‘em.
And now, for your viewing pleasure, a re-cut version of comments from elsewhere and elsewhen. Call it recycling ;-) Or, if you prefer, a Special Encore Performance of the actually history of the GOP’s Long March into the Moral Sewer...
1986: Federal court rules that overturning the “Fairness Doctrine” was the purview or the Executive Branch, and Congress has no say in the matter. The Fairness Doctrine was a 1949 FCC reg that said, in part, that if you wanted to use the public airwave you had to, at a minimum, "afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of public importance."
1987: The Reagan Administration immediately invites the “Fairness Doctrine” to the West Wing basement to “check out some cool **** I got” and shoots it in the head. Twice. See, when you’re Anointed By God Almighty, all “conflicting views” are axiomatically equal to Satan’s Own Lying Helljizz, and we can’t be having helljizz spattering all over the place, can we? What About The Children!?
So no more Fairness Doctrine, and suddenly any bottom-dweller with a talent for spoonfeeding young, dumb Fascists whatever lies they want to hear could become Rich! Rich as Pirates! But from what far shore would this new lion arise?
This from World Of Celebrities “In 1988, Limbaugh returned to radio as a talk show host in Sacramento, California.”
My, but that was fast.
Again, why do you have to be “Fair and Balanced” if you are 100% right all the time, and everyone else is a freedom-hating traitor? And would you want to give Valuable Bandwidth/Frequency to those Enemies of Democracy anyway?
And out of his fetid, little whelping box comes his imitators – the Hannitys, O’Reillys, Coulters, Fox News itself, etc.
In 1992, President George I goes on Limbaugh's show as part of his re-election campaign.
In 1994, when the Republicans captured the Congress, they held a ceremony naming him “an honorary member of Congress” and “the Majority Maker.” Today he is heard bleating his Goebbespeak from 600 stations and 20 million people listen to him every week.
Meanwhile, inside the Party of Lincoln (although the differentiation between party “insiders” and “the media” had, by this time, all but disappeared) Newt Gingrich -- GOP’s #1 Fountain of Bile -- had produced GOPAC’s own Little Red Book: a primer on teaching GOP Newspeak to the young ‘uns. It divided the rhetorical world into Positive, Optimistic Words to be used to describe all things Republican, and another list of words to be worked into every conversation about Democrats. Newt Gingrich’s instructions to his congressional Hitler Youth:
“This list is prepared so that you might have a directory of words to use in writing literature and mail, in preparing speeches, and in producing electronic media. The words and phrases are powerful. Read them. Memorize as many as possible. And remember that like any tool, these words will not help if they are not used.”
The words he listed to be jackhammered mindlessly into the skulls of anyone anytime you spoke of Democrats were: decay, failure (fail) collapse(ing) deeper, crisis, urgent(cy), destructive, destroy, sick, pathetic, lie, liberal, they/them, unionized bureaucracy, "compassion" is not enough, betray, consequences, limit(s), shallow, traitors, sensationalists, endanger, coercion, hypocrisy, radical, threaten, devour, waste, corruption, incompetent, permissive attitude, destructive, impose, self-serving, greed, ideological, insecure, anti-(issue): flag, family, child, jobs; pessimistic, excuses, intolerant, stagnation, welfare, corrupt, selfish, insensitive, status quo, mandate(s) taxes, spend (ing) shame, disgrace, punish (poor...) bizarre, cynicism, cheat, steal, abuse of power, machine, bosses, obsolete, criminal rights, red tape, patronage.
And guess what: it worked. Without anything like a “free” press, or regulatory requirements to report news fairly, or an opposition party that had yet caught on to the sea-change that was happening all around them, the GOP Lie Machine steamrolled on unimpeded.
This was and is straight-up GOP Party POLICY, and now they actually have the nerve to pule about “civility” and “decorum.”
**** them. **** anybody that looks like them. **** anybody that voted for them and doesn’t want to begin the conversation with, “I am soooo sorry”.
The point of this is simple and I’ve said it this way before: without Gingrich declaring a deliberate, Orwellian War on Language itself, and without Limbaugh and his ilk acting as the Republicans’ own trillion watt Bull**** Metraton, the GOP are nothing but a minority part, squatting in their squalid Slave States, musing angrily about Negroes.
Professor Plum-**** ‘em in the Conservatory with a candlestick.
**** ‘em sideways.
-
"drifty" sounds like a whining dumbarse :lol
-
At least we now know where Nash gets his material for his rants. ;)
-
:)
I don't get my material from him... I wish I could pull that kind of writing off. Call us like-minded though, and my attraction to his blog not unlike the natural tug of gravity.
-
Actually... every damn thing that guy said was right.
*shudder*
No wonder I avoid anything remotely resembling 'TV News'.
-
Yer right, I've never seen you electronically ink anything like this:
I mean, Jesus, how is it possible that everything they touch turns to ****?
and as for his rant:
Without anything like a “free” press, or regulatory requirements to report news fairly, or an opposition party that had yet caught on to the sea-change that was happening all around them, the GOP Lie Machine steamrolled on unimpeded.
Yah...that's it. The US doesn't have a free press. ROFLMAO. mmpphhttt.
Yeppers, all the media is Pro-Republican, Pro-Bush. He's got that nailed down fer shure, dude. This Government controls EVERY SINGLE WORD we see in print, on the screen and online.
I do see common elements; he has become his enemy.
-
Oh, horsepuckey Hang.
He's spewed out exactly the same kind of baloney he accuses teh Eveeil Repubs of doing.
He's the mirror image, if anything.
-
Heh, that's the obvious reply...
"Oh my! He's acting just like.... like.... Republicans! The nerve... the hypocrisy!"
He said: "Play-nice" time is over. Long over."
In fact, along with the little history lesson in hate, it was the entire theme. He equated continuing to act with decorum to being "stupid enough to keep kicking at the football that Lucy kept yanking away at the last minute."
-
The fact that he lies himself is all part of the expose then?
How clever of him, how very, very, clever.
No free press.............. still laughing over that one.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Heh, that's the obvious reply...
"Oh my! He's acting just like.... like.... Republicans! The nerve... the hypocrisy!"
He said: "Play-nice" time is over. Long over."
In fact, along with the little history lesson in hate, it was the entire theme. He equated continuing to act with decorum to being "stupid enough to keep kicking at the football that Lucy kept yanking away at the last minute."
What exactly did the guy "say" in his history lesson?
Playtime is long over? Just have to laugh, sorry.
Gosh,
-
nash's hysterical rants are mildly amusing and expected.
-
Can't say I've ever heard a republican of any prominence spew forth the verbal diarrhea like your "drifty". Ya know, just because ya have freedom of speech in this country doesn't necessarily mean ya should share every thought that passes through your lower intestine.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Oh, horsepuckey Hang.
He's spewed out exactly the same kind of baloney he accuses teh Eveeil Repubs of doing.
He's the mirror image, if anything.
Well, thats a definition that's fair.
And, fer once... balanced. Of course, it's just some neo-lib shouting up a well at Nash.
Still, it's more entertaining than fox news. And, the only talking head i've seen on any news channel worth actually listening to is Lou Dobbs. ...and I suppose he's barking mad - nuts too, cause even CNN thinks he needs to lay off the caffine.
Hey Nash.. aside from the entertaining wordsmithing, has the guy actually made a constuctive suggestion yet?
-
What's a neo-lib?
-
Originally posted by Nash
What's a neo-lib?
like a neo-con only different.
-
right.
-
Originally posted by Nash
What's a neo-lib?
Well, honestly; i thought it sounded like the opposite of a neo-con.
Imagine my surprise when i just punched it into google:
Neo-Lib (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism)
-
Ya know, the idea that the Dems can lay off all of the blame for their own losses on Rush, O'Reilly, FoxNews et al sorta explains why they lost two in a row.
It wasn't THEIR fault... oh, no... the losses were beyond their control. It wasn't anything they did or said or the candidates they offered.
"20 million listen to Limbaugh"..... but ~120 million votes were cast.
They better cowboy up or they'll snatch defeat from the jaws of victory next time around. Again.
-
So the destruction of the fairness doctrine and the rise of the hatemongering right wing pundits is just ignored cause the guy used the term "free press"?
Kinda like saying a car isn't fast cause the upholstery is ripped.
-
crap. and all this time, i figured the split in the seat was why the turn indicators wouldn't work.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Ya know, the idea that the Dems can lay off all of the blame for their own losses on Rush, O'Reilly, FoxNews et al sorta explains why they lost two in a row.
It wasn't THEIR fault... oh, no... the losses were beyond their control. It wasn't anything they did or said or the candidates they offered.
"20 million listen to Limbaugh"..... but ~120 million votes were cast.
They better cowboy up or they'll snatch defeat from the jaws of victory next time around. Again.
LOL.. they'll tank.
of course.. if it looks like they might win and haven't shot themselves in the ass, there prolly won't be an election.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
So the destruction of the fairness doctrine and the rise of the hatemongering right wing pundits is just ignored cause the guy used the term "free press"?
Kinda like saying a car isn't fast cause the upholstery is ripped.
The fairness doctrine never happened. Is that what the guy tried to get across in his rant?
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
The fairness doctrine never happened. Is that what the guy tried to get across in his rant?
No, he said it was repealed under the Reagan administration...
The Doctrine was enforced throughout the entire history of the FCC (and its precursor, the Federal Radio Commission) until 1987, when the FCC repealed it in the Syracuse Peace Conference decision in 1987. The Republican-controlled commission claimed the doctrine had grown to inhibit rather than enhance debate and suggested that, due to the many media voices in the marketplace at the time, the doctrine was probably unconstitutional. Others, noting the subsequent rise of right-wing radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh, suggest the repeal was more likely motivated by a desire to get partisans on the air.
The two corollary rules, the personal attack rule and the political editorial rule, remained in practice even after the repeal of the fairness doctrine. The personal attack rule is pertinent whenever a person or small group is subject to a character attack during a broadcast. Stations must notify such persons or groups within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said, and offer the opportunity to respond on the air. The political editorial rule applies when a station broadcasts editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulates that the candidates not endorsed be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.
The Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. ordered the FCC to justify these corollary rules in light of the decision to axe the fairness doctrine. The commission did not do so promptly, and in 2000 it ordered their repeal. The collapse of the fairness doctrine and its corollary rules had significant political effects. One liberal Pennsylvania political leader, State Rep. Mark B. Cohen of Philadelphia, said "The fairness doctrine helped reinforce a politics of moderation and inclusiveness. The collapse of the fairness doctrine and its corollary rules blurred the distinctions between news, political advocacy, and political advertising, and helped lead to the polarizing cacophony of strident talking heads that we have today."
-
Originally posted by Toad
Ya know, the idea that the Dems can lay off all of the blame for their own losses on Rush, O'Reilly, FoxNews et al sorta explains why they lost two in a row....
Dems aren't laying "all" the blame for their losses on that. It's one component. But the thread started to discuss the tone of the discourse, and now you've got it in your mind that we're supposed to be talking about the scapegoating of the Democrat's election failures.
And someone else is wondering about the Democrat's suggestions... which is novel, because if these last 6 years have taught us anything, it's that nobody is ever interested in hearing them. Certainly not the powers that be. And certainly not until now. Curious, that.
Me? I've been disapointed in Obama more than once. I still have high hopes for him. But he's a rookie Senator trying to hum a tune which everyone else has long stopped singing. On any other day I'd admire that, but nowadays, I actually think that things are so serious that you aren't doing the job you were elected to do unless you start shouting uncomfortable **** from the roofs of tall buildings.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
No, he said it was repealed under the Reagan administration...
So, if he had just used a rational, logical series of sentences and thoughts based on facts, he could have actually given a "history" lesson about something?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
More Rove attack politics.
Did you know the Republicans even sent fliers out to predominately Black areas of the South stating that the Democrats wanted to "ban the Bible & Have Gays teach your children"?
I guess Rove must run the Democrat party too. During the campaign in the STL market (and I am sure many others), we were treated to such "inclusive" and "non-divisive" and "moderate" political messaging such as this:
(Cue deep, African-American sounding voice):
"When you vote Republican, another black church burns . . . "
That's about all I could stomach to remember.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Heh, that's the obvious reply...
"Oh my! He's acting just like.... like.... Republicans! The nerve... the hypocrisy!"
No. He's acting exactly how he's accusing the reps of acting. It's a common thing for anyone that wants to take the tone of a complete ******* to justify his actions by pointing out how "the other side" would do it too.
Nobody is saying it's OK for one to do it and not the other... except you, of course.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Smear - Kerry
Queer - They're coming to get your children
Fear - Vote for Bush or they'll attack again.
LOL!
You do realize you are exactly what you accuse others of being... right?
How is it that you could even possibly believe that the republicans had some kind of market on the smear campaign? Did they get CBS to run a story the week before the election based on completley falsified documents?
I mean seriously... I know about Bush's DUI, his cocain habit, his early departure from the National Guard, his wife's drug dealing, his daughter's drinking habits... Were these part of the republican campaign policy too?
You seem convinced that the republicans have somehow duped the voters when it can't be farther from the truth. People weren't drawn away from the democratic party last election, they ran from it.
My wife works at a relatively low paying job that is predominantly staffed by minorities. 99% of them are democrat. Not a single one of them would vote for Kerry and outright said so. They didn't vote for Bush either, but it was the first year in decades that some of them refused to vote.
The republicans did not shove gay marriage down our throats prior to the elections. This is one I watched develop in a manner you wouldn't quite understand politically in that Portland was one of the "hotspots" on this topic. In Portland, 2 gay members of our city council and one member supporting gay marriage got together and decided to allow gay marriage in Portland, not bothering to invite the other 4 members of the city council to that meeting. They then decided to keep the courts open 24 hours a day to accomodate the "influx" of gays seeking marriage. This was not a republican plot. The state legislature, which is majority dem, then passed a bill defining marriage (banning gay "marriage") and put it up before a vote in the state. It passed by an overwhelming margin in a state that has voted Dem since I can remember... It was at least a 20 point margin... another thing that's unheard of in this state.
I wonder how that could be? I wonder how the republicans could infiltrate our state in a manner of months and change everyone's mind on this subject. They are so very sneaky.
But, the repblicans were villified for their stance on gay marriage and the stance of the "religious wackos" that are "intollerant". Those aren't labels that were made up by republicans, bub. I don't remeber seeing them thrown around nearly as much as last election. This "smear" campaign you speak of was a two way streak. Of course, the republicans were smart enough to only smear the opponent. The Dems weren't quite as clever and decided to smear the opponent AND the voters.
-
LOL nash... did reading weirdos make you an angry nutter or did you seek out the weirdos because you are an angry nutter?
MT.. I don't get it... the democrats have control of the media and of entertainment and of our kids minds in the teaching game...
why is it that they feel missrepresented and unable to get out their message? surely you can see how silly it all is?
Their message sucks.... it is a whiney socialist pandering message and the problem is that too many of their supporters have a voice that is heard... the more you hear from the left wing nash bloggers and the left wing media and the airheaded movie stars and screetching "people of color" and depressed women and excuse making teachers and poor underpaid autoworkers....
the more you hate democrats if you have any brains. They are their own worst enemy... sure... the candidates can (sometimes) pull it together for an election and go the soundbite safe route and try to act sane and not communist for most of the election route but... they never leave well enough alone... they allways get tagged with the liberal collar because...
well.... that is what they are. you never win if you vote for em... you lose more every time one is in power... you end up with new socialist programs that go on for eternity (or we are broke whichever comes first)... you end up with a whole crapload of activist judges that think lenin was right.
nope... I don't care what they say... I refuse to allow democrats to make me feel guilty.... If you can do that then no democrat will ever have power over you ever again.
democrats are like that fake 39 year old "vietnam war veteran" beggar that you can't make go away..... you know his message is BS but somehow he makes you feel guilty enough or impatient enough to give him a buck.
If you don't buy their message of guilt the democrats have nothing.
lazs