More On Iraq Election
Rice: Election Going Better Than Expected – - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the Iraqi elections are “going better than expected” Sunday, despite conflicting reports about the extent of voter turnout in areas plagued by intimidation and violence. “Every indication is that the election in Iraq is going better than expected,” Rice said on ABC’s “This Week.”
Kerry: “We should not hype election” – - On “Meet The Press” Senator John Kerry said – “It is hard to say that something is legitimate when whole portions of the country doesn’t vote.”
Iraqis Brave Bombs to Vote in Their Millions – - Some came on crutches, others walked for miles then struggled to read the ballot, but across Iraq, millions turned out to vote Sunday, defying insurgents who threatened a bloodbath.
January 30, 2005 - 11:06 AM on January 30th, 2005
Kerry? People are listening to this guy? When does he show up in the Senate to vote?
January 30, 2005 - 12:52 PM on January 30th, 2005
2,
Kerry’s right, though. The turnout in Sunni areas was very, very low. In Baquaba, there was 30% turnout, which is equivalent to the Shia population there. I’m very glad that there seems to be a lower than expected loss of life (27 by 1 pm Iraqi time).
January 30, 2005 - 01:26 PM on January 30th, 2005
I for one, am glad that these people have had the right to take place in the democratic process. I am apalled at the libs, who should champion this process, dowplay it.
SHAME ON YOU!
January 30, 2005 - 01:43 PM on January 30th, 2005
JG – good afternoon. who’s downplaying the hopes for a successful election?
is it that socialist from Canada?
January 30, 2005 - 02:16 PM on January 30th, 2005
2 – i assume you were responding to my 1, not to yourself
January 30, 2005 - 02:28 PM on January 30th, 2005
Kerry’s surly whine gives us one more example of the debt we owe adult voters.
January 30, 2005 - 03:10 PM on January 30th, 2005
6,
And Bush’s empty rhetoric in description of a politically, culturally, and militarily difficult situation is a perfect reason to address issues like the one I addressed above. I champion democratic and fair elections. I decry elections that attempt to pass themselves off as fair and representative (and even as ‘elections’ for a government, which these are not).
Bush recently hailed Natan Sharansky’s ‘The Case for Democracy’ as representative of his political beliefs. The disconnect?
1) Sharansky argues against holding elections before violence dies down, as they can exacerbate problems rather than solve them.
2) Sharanksy is a critic of the Bush Administration’s handling of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as a ‘half-measure’ and ‘not sincere’.
3) Sharansky: “Even within the Bush administration, the president’s words, expressing a profound faith in freedom, are not always translated into policies that reflect that faith.”
January 30, 2005 - 04:01 PM on January 30th, 2005
Sandy- the Suni areas were given the opportunity to vote were they not? We in the USA still count the vote of areas with 30% turnout don’t we? Do you think it is possible that yesterday was the start of a new Iraq. Maybe those that didn’t vote will do everything in their power to make sure it never happens again?
January 30, 2005 - 05:29 PM on January 30th, 2005
If you don’t participate in a fair and open election, you really have no cause to complain about the governement you get.
January 30, 2005 - 10:39 PM on January 30th, 2005
Hi navy sis!!
January 30, 2005 - 10:52 PM on January 30th, 2005
9,
Unfortunately, such arguments on the individual are meaningless to dissuage collective grievances, however ‘quaint’.
January 30, 2005 - 10:52 PM on January 30th, 2005
on the individual levl, of course
January 30, 2005 - 11:02 PM on January 30th, 2005
It’s funny, those of us that are Repiblicans take this election in stride – we did a good thing, let’ go on with our life. I laugh at the democraps who will try to find ANYTHING wrong with it. Suck it up, deal. W is going down in history as an amazing pres.
January 30, 2005 - 11:02 PM on January 30th, 2005
Argh – new laptop, can’t type well.
January 31, 2005 - 12:20 AM on January 31st, 2005
10-Hi Lee! Was just passing through to get an update.:grin:
January 31, 2005 - 02:54 AM on January 31st, 2005
I heard on the news that approximately 60% of the population voted… That’s fairly comparable to the US.
January 31, 2005 - 07:16 AM on January 31st, 2005
Wet blankets?
Whiny pathetic losers?
Dogs in the manger?
January 31, 2005 - 07:18 AM on January 31st, 2005
Hmm,
In America, does voter turnout delegitimize elections? Does the 30% or so inner city voter turnout mean or elections are invalid?
Fortunately, they do not.
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 07:30 AM on January 31st, 2005
sandy sour grapes. I know you aren’t happy in that this election is not bound to produce a Progressive, Bush-hating government.
In a free and fair election isn’t part of the right to vote the right to BOYCOTT THE ELECTION? The Sunni are the Sore Losermen of Iraq. They lost power big time, and this election will ratify that loss of power.
Sandy, someday I hope an Iraqi who is estatic to vote for someone other than Saddam gets in your face and wreaks some personal havoc upon you. You have to get out of that spoiled brat mode of thinking you have. It is not your way or it is illegitimate. This election is a lot more fair and clean than the Washington State 2004 election, but you applaud that election because a Bush-hating Progressive machine managed to steal (for now) that election.
Yes, sandy, your blind partisanship shows.
January 31, 2005 - 07:59 AM on January 31st, 2005
19b “This election is a lot more fair and clean than the Washington State 2004 election”
talk about a sore loser.
January 31, 2005 - 08:14 AM on January 31st, 2005
I haven’t felt this positive about the future of Iraq in a long time. They still have a very long way to go, but I’m more optimistic for their future now.
January 31, 2005 - 08:23 AM on January 31st, 2005
Washington elections? You mean the Washington “legal wranglings”. There were no elections there.
Both parties should be ashamed of themselves. They have managed to relegate your electoral process to that of a legal hearing! Don’t anyone realize how dangerous this is? Election results are being determined by lawyers and judges, and not by the voter voice.
If we keep going at this rate, we all may as well turning over our voting privileges to our lawyers.
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 08:42 AM on January 31st, 2005
Shiloh, did you read about the Town Hall meeting at http://www.soundpolitics.com? Maybe a little 1st person may dent your blind partisanship, too. There IS outright fraud committed by the Democrats in King County just like Chicago and the Ukraine. Oh, you only like it because a law breaking Progressive won. How silly of me that shiloh actually subscribed to standards that were impartial.
January 31, 2005 - 09:10 AM on January 31st, 2005
how silly of you?, pcd
….please don’t be naive. apparently, everyone tries to steal elections nowadays. don’t get me wrong, any election fraud out to go straight to jail.
your outrage against all Democratic hanky-panky is tempered by the fact that you either defend or remain silent when the Republicans are under suspicion. i get partisanship, but intellectual honesty is also a treasured value when searching for truth.
i’m not saying you’ve never done it, so tell me the last time you condemned a Republican for bad conduct.
January 31, 2005 - 09:44 AM on January 31st, 2005
shiloh, since you NEVER condemn Progressives by name, you are a hypocrite.
I’ve condemned Bob Packwood. I’ve stood in Orange County Supervisor William Steiner’s face at church and told him he and his fellow supervisors were wrong in following Democrat Bob Citron’s request for more funds to invest. Citron caused the Orange County Bankruptcy.
I’ve told McCain he’s full of it.
What have you done, whiner? What of any kind of honest have you EVER demonstrated when it come to Democrat vote fraud? ALSO, quite partisan of you to parrot Democrat baseless charges as facts.
January 31, 2005 - 09:57 AM on January 31st, 2005
i asked the question with an open mind.
you answered somewhat, thoough most of it attacked me for a position i didn’t get a chance to state.
would you like to know if i’ve criticized liberals, or is your mind (as it seems it is) already made up?
tell you what. let’s stop now before we wind up where we always wind up.
January 31, 2005 - 10:23 AM on January 31st, 2005
19,
I never applauded the Washington State election. I also know Iraqis here in Calgary who fled Saddam’s regime and are very happy about the vote. My concerns about the election are pretty specific, not the overarching, ideological bias that you accuse me of. I do find the indignation of Arab countries about the election to be a bit silly: they may have points, but they themselves suppress their populations.
January 31, 2005 - 10:27 AM on January 31st, 2005
16,
If 80% of most American states voted but only 10-20% of people in Southern States voted, it would be a concern. Aggregates are misleading.
19,
Your insistence that every Sunni had the opportunity to run to the polls is ludicrous. There was an official boycott, but there were also many stations that never opened, and those that were bombed. And there were Sunnis who died.
January 31, 2005 - 11:02 AM on January 31st, 2005
WHAAAAAA
January 31, 2005 - 11:03 AM on January 31st, 2005
Hmm…
My understanding is only 4 stations did not open and there was an unsuccessful attempt to bomb one.
Because one part of a population either boycott an election or if only 50% of the average turnout shows up is no reason to invalidate the elections. If you allow this, the Baathist of the area have once again imposed their will upon the country which places us back at square one.
If they want to be represented, them they need to do so through the same process that everyone else is.
January 31, 2005 - 11:05 AM on January 31st, 2005
Note on last post- I was referring to the car bombs. There were something like 18 homicide bombers, but I am not updated on their success rate or even if they were targeting the election per se.
January 31, 2005 - 11:15 AM on January 31st, 2005
19: So they chose not to participate but obstruct because they will not be in charge? Sounds familiar.
I’m just waiting for news that the Sunnis are all going to renounce their citizenship and make tracks for Syria. The MSM is all upset because they couldn’t report on all the bombings because there was too much dancing in the streets.
January 31, 2005 - 11:34 AM on January 31st, 2005
Here’s a NPR report on the success & the not so much success of yesterday’s vote, from a reporter on scene.
Warning: the reporter is from the Los Angeles Times, so some of you may not want to bother.
I’ll see if Fox has a comparable report
January 31, 2005 - 11:36 AM on January 31st, 2005
Fox.com is leading with Michael Jackson, so, maybe later.
January 31, 2005 - 11:38 AM on January 31st, 2005
Here’s a snipet from Fox, shiloh:
With unofficial estimates indicating nearly 60 percent of Iraq’s 14 million eligible voters cast ballots Sunday, leaders from around the world ” including France and Germany ” called the elections a mandate by the people of Iraq.
Can you believe this? France and Germany – who won’t even admit Bush as a mandate.
January 31, 2005 - 11:46 AM on January 31st, 2005
sandy, how about some specifics, not the propaganda you have between your ears? You can always use the “Some people…” argument Progressivs use when they don’t have anything more than their own prejudice, but don’t want to admit it. Using that tactic only diminishs you to shilow gutter level sandy.
January 31, 2005 - 11:52 AM on January 31st, 2005
If LA Times editor John Carroll is serious about purging political bias from its coverage, then it would appear they are finally getting it.
I doubt NPR ever will, but one can always hope.
January 31, 2005 - 12:20 PM on January 31st, 2005
29,30,32:
Don’t get me wrong, I think that the election was quite a success given the circumstances. The entire war, in my opinion, can be accounted as a success compared to the possibilities in 2002-03. I just think that ignoring the issue of the Sunni boycott is not wise, especially with anti-intellectual musings like in 19. In most of Iraq, a (by all accounts) fair and free election took place.
January 31, 2005 - 12:24 PM on January 31st, 2005
35
Bush & others call 3% a mandate. a simple victory means he has been authorrized to act as our representative. that’s the definition of mandate, altho it has come to mean ‘majority support’. as you can see, it’s a tricky word.
heck, he acted like he had a mandate in 2000 if you look at his legislative agenda. i’m sure you wouldn’t say he had a mandate then.
37 – i doubt they will Sasha. i doubt the Washington Times, New York Post, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette or Fox News will admit theirs, either.
January 31, 2005 - 12:25 PM on January 31st, 2005
It looks as though Hillary Clinton has collapsed at a speech. Lets all hope she’s alright.
January 31, 2005 - 12:34 PM on January 31st, 2005
shiloh, Clinton never has a majority victory, only a plurality. Either use the same standard for Clinton and Bush or just go to DU to commiserate with the other Sore Losermen.
January 31, 2005 - 12:34 PM on January 31st, 2005
btw pcd, i thought Sen Kennedy was wrong last week when he called for a timetable for troop withdrawals.
for what it’s worth.
January 31, 2005 - 12:36 PM on January 31st, 2005
42 – we’ve always had an exit strategy – once the iraqi police are trained and ready to protect their own country, we’ll go.
January 31, 2005 - 12:37 PM on January 31st, 2005
43, exit strategy, total victory and shilohs mouth shut permanently.
January 31, 2005 - 12:44 PM on January 31st, 2005
39: If that’s the case, kill all gov’t funding for NPR and PBS.
The other outlets have to operate without such propping up, and they live or die in the marketplace.
January 31, 2005 - 12:55 PM on January 31st, 2005
41
1996
Clinton: 8.2 million popular vote margin/
………70% of total electoral votes
2004
Bush: 3.5 million popular vote margin/
……54% of total electoral votes/
pcd,
we’ll do better if we just stick to the facts.
January 31, 2005 - 12:59 PM on January 31st, 2005
45
NPR receives no direct federal funding for general support. NPR supports its operations through a combination of membership dues and programming fees from stations, contributions from private foundations and corporations, and revenue from the sales of transcripts, books, CDs, and merchandise. A very small percentage – between 1-2 percent of NPR’s annual budget – comes from competitive grants sought by NPR from federally funded organizations, such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Science Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts.
funding
January 31, 2005 - 01:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
shi, fact is Clinton never got even 50% of the popular vote. Bush got 52+% of the popular vote, those are facts. Just spin away and look like an ass. Be my guest.
January 31, 2005 - 01:04 PM on January 31st, 2005
Shi, just because NPR receives it’s federal funding through the CPB does not mean it doesn’t get appropriated federal funds. Before you try to spin that, my congresscritter is the chair of the House budget committee, and I have demanded to his face CPB get ZEROED OUT of the budget.
January 31, 2005 - 01:08 PM on January 31st, 2005
many folks believe that the multi-national corporations who otherwise gouge profits, rape environments & fund NPR & PBS are trying the oldest PR game going.
“see”, they seem to be saying, “we’re not bad guys. now watch Sesame Street.”
brought to you by your friends at Enron.
January 31, 2005 - 01:08 PM on January 31st, 2005
Direct or indirect, the money is still coming from taxpayers. And if PBS can get corporate sponsorship, then they should compete for advertising dollars the way everybody else have to do it.
January 31, 2005 - 01:09 PM on January 31st, 2005
48 – how are my figures spin and yours in #48, not?
January 31, 2005 - 01:10 PM on January 31st, 2005
If you don’t like the product, don’t use it.
January 31, 2005 - 01:12 PM on January 31st, 2005
51 – Sasha
1 to 2 % federal funding is not propping up NPR.
January 31, 2005 - 01:12 PM on January 31st, 2005
shi, you use popular vote only when it suits you. Now, you say 3 percent over 50 percent isn’t a mandate, yet you argue Clinton had a mandate when he never achieved 50 percent in either of his elections. Spinner!
January 31, 2005 - 01:14 PM on January 31st, 2005
shi, you use popular vote only when it suits you. Now, you say 3 percent over 50 percent isn’t a mandate, yet you argue Clinton had a mandate when he never achieved 50 percent in either of his elections. Spinner!
January 31, 2005 - 01:18 PM on January 31st, 2005
53 – Madison Ave sells people things they don’t need all the time.
that’s also why politicians have PR & polling firms.
that’s why various Cabinet Officers bought journalists.
advertizers wouldn’t pay 2 million dollars for a 30 second Super Bowl commercial if they didn’t know it worked.
remember Joe McGuiness’ book “The Selling of the President” on the ‘68 election? hell, Haldeman came from Madison Avenue!
we are being sold politcal stuff all the time & both sides are totally involved in the sale.
January 31, 2005 - 01:20 PM on January 31st, 2005
46: PCD was talking about popular votes. Not states and electoral votes.
January 31, 2005 - 01:21 PM on January 31st, 2005
55
as Ronald Reagan said, famously, “there you go again.”
pcd – i did not bring up Clinton, neither did i say he had a mandate.
didn’t the whole ’shiloh’s screen name’ fiasco teach you anything?
January 31, 2005 - 01:23 PM on January 31st, 2005
why is Shiloh objecting to cutting off Federal funds if it doesn’t matter to NPR?
January 31, 2005 - 01:34 PM on January 31st, 2005
54: Then cut it. If that 1-2% is such an insignificant amount, CPB and related interests don’t need it.
January 31, 2005 - 01:35 PM on January 31st, 2005
shi, you wonder why you are a hated asshole? forget it you are too dense. You’ll only becured on the point of death.
January 31, 2005 - 01:44 PM on January 31st, 2005
47-Why the hell would NPR be getting funding through the NSF (National Science Foundation)? What exactly are they contributing to the scientific community. Thanks for giving a great example of government waste!
January 31, 2005 - 01:44 PM on January 31st, 2005
55
as Ronald Reagan said, famously, “there you go again.”
pcd – i did not bring up Clinton, neither did i say he had a mandate.
didn’t the whole ’shiloh’s screen name’ fiasco teach you anything?
January 31, 2005 - 01:48 PM on January 31st, 2005
please read what i post [or don't].
i did not take a position on federal funding.
i did not take a position on Clinton.
i supplied data.
the rest of it is in your head.
January 31, 2005 - 01:49 PM on January 31st, 2005
63,
Npr does more thorough science coverage than anyone else, lee.
January 31, 2005 - 01:50 PM on January 31st, 2005
Sasha – i posted the popular vote percentages pcd was referring too.
as an example, i provided a comparison.
January 31, 2005 - 01:55 PM on January 31st, 2005
67: Where?
January 31, 2005 - 02:07 PM on January 31st, 2005
68 – i misspoke. i posted popular vote margins.
January 31, 2005 - 02:15 PM on January 31st, 2005
2000
Bush….47.87%
Gore….48.38%
2004
Bush….50.8
Kerry…48.3
Clinton over Bush in 1992 by approx 6 million votes
Clinton over Dole in 1996 by approx 8 million votes.
mandates are where you find them.
January 31, 2005 - 02:22 PM on January 31st, 2005
OMG you guys just don’t quit!
January 31, 2005 - 02:57 PM on January 31st, 2005
At this point it is obvious that Shi is not going to acknowledge that Bush, by virtue of his election by a majority of the Popular Vote and a majority in the Electoral college, has a mandate to govern implementing Bush’s agenda. At this point it is time to tell shiloh to GFY, and move on without him.
January 31, 2005 - 03:01 PM on January 31st, 2005
While I don’t believe that Bush didn’t receive a mandate in 2004, I don’t believe Clinton’s 48% qualifies as one either.
The bottom line is- all these figures are thrown out by partisan hacks who try to justify their boys positions. On can’t claim a Bush loss in 2000 without casting a shadow on Clinton’s wins or JFK’s or even Abraham Lincoln’s and one can’t claim a Bush mandate without having the same of Clinton’s wins either.
So, let’s try discussing something a bit less childish, shall we?
And for God’s sake- what’s up with referring to these post numbers since I left? That’s just cold: “Hey you-= number 23. Yeah you. You’re so wrong that I’m not even going to refer to you’re screen name.”
Ted
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 03:03 PM on January 31st, 2005
Ted (#73:razz
– we do that b/c sometimes people post multiple things, and we want to address the comment in the correct post.
If that makes sense.
January 31, 2005 - 03:24 PM on January 31st, 2005
Without the post number I might have an accidental mis-flirt!
Sandy, re your 66 (better Ted? :grin
: ok, thanks. I don’t listen to NPR so wouldn’t have known that, but I’ll buy it as an acceptable reason for some limited NSF funding, although I would prefer to see the money go to some of my colleagues research interests.
January 31, 2005 - 03:32 PM on January 31st, 2005
*backs away from Lee, slowly*
Much better, Lee
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 03:33 PM on January 31st, 2005
Just messin’ with ya, Ted…
January 31, 2005 - 03:36 PM on January 31st, 2005
I know- no worries…
(backs away from Lee even further):shock:
January 31, 2005 - 03:47 PM on January 31st, 2005
Election results for anyone interested- 1992 to 2006 popular vote:
1992 election:
Clinton/Gore: 44,909,806 (43.01%)
Bush/Quayle: 39,104,550 (37.45%)
1996 election:
Clinton/Gore: 47,400,125 (49.23%)
Dole/Kemp: 39,198,755 (40.72%)
2000 election:
Bush/Cheney: 50,460,110 (47.87%)
Gore/Lieberman: 51,003,926 (48.38%)
2000 election:
Bush/Cheney: 62,041,268 (50.73%)
Kerry/Edwards: 59,028,548 (48.27%)
January 31, 2005 - 03:51 PM on January 31st, 2005
Lee I see you – get back to work!
January 31, 2005 - 03:55 PM on January 31st, 2005
Thanks ted!:wink:
January 31, 2005 - 03:55 PM on January 31st, 2005
ack! Still can’t edit!
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 04:08 PM on January 31st, 2005
70: It’s going to take a while for the paint to dry before you get yourself out of that corner.
January 31, 2005 - 04:16 PM on January 31st, 2005
What would I do without you K?
Sigh, back to work it is…
January 31, 2005 - 04:20 PM on January 31st, 2005
Hey you. Ted. #73
If we don’t name the post we’re responding to, not that we always get it right, people misunderstand and think you’re addressing them when it was someone else, someone gets pimp-slapped to the other side of the Internet, and it just turns into bloodbath.
Or, someone may be correcting someone and issuing general information to everyone and no one, and may not want to call the person out. Like the way you did #79. (Thanks by the way)
And at other times, people have just enough spite to not even recognize the person, just the post. But that never happens here.
No, we can’t edit but Lisa installed the spell check and spam karma, which gets a little overzealous at times.:smile:
Welcome back.
January 31, 2005 - 04:22 PM on January 31st, 2005
Lee, you can’t leave yet. Your punching bag is bound to show up sooner or later….or now.
January 31, 2005 - 04:27 PM on January 31st, 2005
66: Sandy I think the Discovery Channels is even more thorough and relevant in its programming. One can only see NOVA: The Miracle of Life (c. 1987) only so many times. They broadcast the good stuff all the time, not just during pledge drives.
January 31, 2005 - 04:32 PM on January 31st, 2005
86 – who might the punching bag be?
January 31, 2005 - 04:38 PM on January 31st, 2005
If I named names, the punching bag would know.
I’ve had a rough day.
January 31, 2005 - 04:44 PM on January 31st, 2005
sorry to hear, sasha. lee is pretty nice to everyone so i am curious.
January 31, 2005 - 04:44 PM on January 31st, 2005
I like “Hey you Ted”. If you just reference a post, then one has to go back and see if it’s relevant to them. Kinda lazy I guess, but I hate that too.
Besides- what died we all do before we had post number?!!?
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 04:50 PM on January 31st, 2005
Grandpa Ted; why back in my day, we didn’t have these thingies called “post numbers”…
K, don’t listen to Sasha; I called out a certain resident liberal (not sandyb or shiloh) a few times and Sasha makes me sound like an attack dog
I’m really just a big cuddly teddy bear 
OK, back to work before my guardian angel scolds me again!
January 31, 2005 - 04:53 PM on January 31st, 2005
Ted said:
*********
Besides- what died (sic) we all do before we had post number?
*********
To which Sasha replied…
That kind of thing.
It’s easier now naming the post # because anyone can see if something is being misquoted and/or taken out of context.
January 31, 2005 - 04:59 PM on January 31st, 2005
Ya. Right.
K, in Lee’s world:
Called out = “I disemboweled the little so & so, laughed out loud and said ‘You and I could probably get along if your politics weren’t as red as the pool of blood growing at your feet.’”
January 31, 2005 - 05:00 PM on January 31st, 2005
you people are really amazing. try to get this:
i never said Clinton had a mandate. do you understand that much? if so, keep reading. if not, i don’t care.
i posted figures to show that ‘mandates’ are in the eye of the beholder.
how the hell do you figure Bush has a mandate and Clinton didn’t?
first of all, look up mandate and try to find another word to describe someone with “overwhelming support” they are not synonymous.
try to open your minds before the partisan poison gets hold of your sense.
January 31, 2005 - 05:05 PM on January 31st, 2005
RE: #92
Just how many damned Liberals are on this blog, anyway?
January 31, 2005 - 05:06 PM on January 31st, 2005
you’re assuming facts not in evidence. i have not touted Clinton or any of his policies in this discussion, yet i get the distinct feeling i’m being treated as if i did. your defensive posture regarding your boy is noted.
his supporters have a lot to be defensive about & i don’t envy your position.
try honesty – life is to short.
January 31, 2005 - 05:08 PM on January 31st, 2005
shiloh, you, sorta sandy, simon, stageleft
January 31, 2005 - 05:09 PM on January 31st, 2005
94 – doesn’t sound like my boy.
January 31, 2005 - 05:18 PM on January 31st, 2005
Didn’t someone here claim we were going to see a voter turnout of over 70%?
January 31, 2005 - 05:20 PM on January 31st, 2005
98 add sabor
what’s with the s’s
January 31, 2005 - 05:20 PM on January 31st, 2005
99: Okay, maybe I’m projecting. I feel like having a few people drawn and quartered right now.
(Note proper use of projecting)
January 31, 2005 - 05:24 PM on January 31st, 2005
I think, shiloh, you may have brought that on yourself in 46 and 70. It looked as though you were trying not to disclose Clinton’s share of the popular vote.
January 31, 2005 - 05:26 PM on January 31st, 2005
102 – I will stay away!
January 31, 2005 - 05:28 PM on January 31st, 2005
Sasha, you’re trying to ruin my image as a big, cuddly teddy bear, but my woman called you out on it!
I’m not gonna name names dg; I don’t come here to get into personal battles, but there’re more than you think, especially since I’ve been around this place for a long time! Don’t get all defensive man; in case you didn’t notice I didn’t state it as an insult, you added the “damn”
January 31, 2005 - 05:29 PM on January 31st, 2005
Oh for…
No one here, K!
January 31, 2005 - 05:32 PM on January 31st, 2005
A perpetually horny, rum swilling, coffee stain makin’ teddy bear.
January 31, 2005 - 05:35 PM on January 31st, 2005
dial-up or office, Lee?
I have to jet, I’ll be back in a while.
January 31, 2005 - 05:37 PM on January 31st, 2005
107 – sounds perfect,
January 31, 2005 - 05:39 PM on January 31st, 2005
64- all you have shown is that you said not to capitalize the s. What does that prove?:roll:
January 31, 2005 - 05:41 PM on January 31st, 2005
Lee,
Re:92- we walked uphill both ways to and from school barefooted in four feet of snow for a mile…
January 31, 2005 - 05:42 PM on January 31st, 2005
RE: #105
Let’s just be clear — I’m presumed to be the biggest “damned” Liberal on this blog.
Shiloh’s just jealous.
January 31, 2005 - 05:45 PM on January 31st, 2005
shiloh,
OOC, do you think that Gore was “robbed” of the Presidency?
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 05:45 PM on January 31st, 2005
103 – i wasn’t
January 31, 2005 - 05:47 PM on January 31st, 2005
K, it is sad that you think of me as a liberal just because I disagree with some things. It doesn’t mean I am one. You need to know that because people disagree with certain aspects of one ideology does not mean they are the exact opposite. Not every democrat is a liberal just like not every republican is a conservative. I am called conservvative by liberals just like you and others here call me a liberal. I have to say I am an independent.
January 31, 2005 - 05:49 PM on January 31st, 2005
113
i think the system worked as it has always worked. there were so many special interests running around down there in 2000, who knows what to think.
what does OOC mean?
January 31, 2005 - 05:51 PM on January 31st, 2005
115 – what does this mean:
I am called conservvative by liberals just like you and others here call me a liberal.
You make it sound like I am liberal.
bleh! yuck! spit!
Ok, sorry…maybe the problem is the Viking fan part.
January 31, 2005 - 05:53 PM on January 31st, 2005
out of curiousity.
shiloh, i didn’t know that either, and it took me 4 seconds to figure it out. use some brain.
January 31, 2005 - 05:54 PM on January 31st, 2005
shiloh,
OOC means “out of curiosity”.
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 05:58 PM on January 31st, 2005
15
here’s a good example of attempts to pigeon-hole, categorize in order to bring out the talking points against ‘liberals’.
free thinkers are suspect.
K – it’s generous to categorize sandy as a’kind-of’.
what’s a socialists position in reference to liberalism, right or left, do you think?
January 31, 2005 - 06:00 PM on January 31st, 2005
120 – i assume you meant 115? 15’s was irrelevant?
January 31, 2005 - 06:01 PM on January 31st, 2005
NAVY SIS- I just sent you an e-mail. Could you let me know if you got it please?
Thanks!:smile:
January 31, 2005 - 06:01 PM on January 31st, 2005
120 – interesting you take “liberal” to be a bad thing to be called.
i don’t mind being called conservative one bit.
January 31, 2005 - 06:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
118 – you have the gift of being able to inform & insult simultaneously. you might want to seek a refund of that gift. it’s offensive.
thank you for the information.
January 31, 2005 - 06:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
Socialism isn’t a political philosophy, it is an economy. When paired with a political position/form of government, it is usually looked upon as being left.
The problem is that people look at politics as a line (one dimensional), with left and right beliefs when it is actually a grid (two dimensions) with an x and y axis.
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 06:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
122- there she is. hi peejz. we’ve all got each other’s emails so lee and i took it offline so i am not seen by shiloh as “sexually liberal”
January 31, 2005 - 06:03 PM on January 31st, 2005
K yes it was 115 and how did you translate anything i said into being ashamed of being called a liberal?
January 31, 2005 - 06:04 PM on January 31st, 2005
Oh, BTW all- I posted those figures so one could compare apples to apples, and not apples to oranges.
Fact is, the popular vote means jack.
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 06:05 PM on January 31st, 2005
122- PEEJZ!:grin: Where have you been woman?:razz:
I will check it right now.:wink:
January 31, 2005 - 06:06 PM on January 31st, 2005
127 – when i called you a liberal, you said i was categorizing. soooo….why do you care?
i am not saying you agree with everything michael moore says.
January 31, 2005 - 06:07 PM on January 31st, 2005
by virtue of implementing a Socialist economy, you may find policies based upon the principles of Socialism filtering into the day to day politics of those involved.
i think Socialism can be both a noun & a verb.
January 31, 2005 - 06:08 PM on January 31st, 2005
Liberal is not a derogatory term. Why would a person take it as such. I am considered a “conservative”. I do not think of myself as a conservative person, just politically.
January 31, 2005 - 06:09 PM on January 31st, 2005
lee i see you again. don’t get me all worked up before mom’s.
January 31, 2005 - 06:09 PM on January 31st, 2005
For some reason I can’t check my mail.:sad:
January 31, 2005 - 06:10 PM on January 31st, 2005
131 – give me a sentence where it can be a verb.
January 31, 2005 - 06:10 PM on January 31st, 2005
IMO, socialism is a measure of degrees between a purely capitalist economy and a purely communist one. This degree can be measure by how much the citizen is taxed.
Ted
January 31, 2005 - 06:12 PM on January 31st, 2005
Shiloh, Ted means In My Opinion.
Now I am being an ass.
January 31, 2005 - 06:13 PM on January 31st, 2005
130 – i care because it affects the way a person responds to labels.
once categorized, the anti-liberal talking points sometimes take precedence over recognizing an individual, along with all the shade of gray.
‘liberals’ are said to be this or that quite often on this site and it’s counter-productive to an exchange of ideas.
January 31, 2005 - 06:14 PM on January 31st, 2005
138 – so are conservatives. it goes both ways.
as a psychologist, i never cared much for labels either. but that needs to be done for insurance purposes…
January 31, 2005 - 06:14 PM on January 31st, 2005
Shi- re: 138.
Been there, done that!
January 31, 2005 - 06:15 PM on January 31st, 2005
134- UGH! Will you keep me posted though! I am heving a hell of a time geting this mailed!
January 31, 2005 - 06:16 PM on January 31st, 2005
RE: #126
Are you “sexually liberal” when Shiloh’s not lookin’? Not in to voyeurism?
January 31, 2005 - 06:17 PM on January 31st, 2005
141-Will do!:wink:
January 31, 2005 - 06:17 PM on January 31st, 2005
142- on that note, it’s time for me to jet. more later guys!
January 31, 2005 - 06:18 PM on January 31st, 2005
K, re 133:
Yes Dear!
Just a quick check-in; I gotta leave, like, now, to go tutor!
peejz, dontcha have my email?
January 31, 2005 - 06:19 PM on January 31st, 2005
126- OH! that sounds good! I hope to get ahold of you. Hopefully Navy sis gets the mail!
How is your flu? Are you feeling better?
January 31, 2005 - 06:24 PM on January 31st, 2005
K – i might have stretched a bit by saying socialism is a verb.
in an attempt to salvage some points, one can be seen acting socialistically when implementing the principles of socialism.
i know it’s used as an adverb there.
that’s about as close as i can get.
not too strong, i admit.
January 31, 2005 - 06:39 PM on January 31st, 2005
RE: #147
Isn’t “socializing” a verb?
January 31, 2005 - 06:49 PM on January 31st, 2005
Peejz, I got your email and I passed it on to K, and Lee!:grin:
January 31, 2005 - 07:01 PM on January 31st, 2005
149-Thank-you so much Navy SIS!:smile:
January 31, 2005 - 07:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
150-Tweren’t nuttin! Glad to oblige!:wink:
January 31, 2005 - 07:06 PM on January 31st, 2005
138-you have referred to yourself as a socialist. Why all the frustration over a label?
January 31, 2005 - 07:07 PM on January 31st, 2005
Now that K and Lee have swapped info, the nights here just won’t be the same!
I guess now I’ll have to be put trampy girl on a leash!:wink:
January 31, 2005 - 07:08 PM on January 31st, 2005
153- A short one at that!:cool:
January 31, 2005 - 07:10 PM on January 31st, 2005
152
it hinders communication, as i explained.
January 31, 2005 - 07:12 PM on January 31st, 2005
155- Only in your mind:roll:
January 31, 2005 - 07:13 PM on January 31st, 2005
153-I know! That was some of the best reading!
January 31, 2005 - 07:14 PM on January 31st, 2005
& here i thought you were asking an honest question. whatever was i thinking? & we’re off…
January 31, 2005 - 07:18 PM on January 31st, 2005
158- why would I do that:roll: You just need to find something to bitch about.
January 31, 2005 - 07:24 PM on January 31st, 2005
okay – here’s something i’m concerned about: i hope the budding Democracy in Iraq has a better understanding on how to treat their enemies.
U.S. Denies Guantánamo Inmates’ Rights, Judge Says
Jan. 31 – A federal judge here ruled today that the Bush administration has been wrongly blocking terrorism suspects held in Cuba from fighting their detention, and that the review procedure set up to determine whether they are “enemy combatants” is inherently unfair and unconstitutional.
don’t mean to ‘bitch’, peejz, but this looks like a potential problem. why don’t you sweep this under the rug where you evidently keep your manners.
January 31, 2005 - 07:32 PM on January 31st, 2005
160-consider it swept:smile:
January 31, 2005 - 07:47 PM on January 31st, 2005
Hi peejz!
BTW, Bush is still looking for that $8.8 billion of Iraqi money he has yet to account for!
January 31, 2005 - 07:51 PM on January 31st, 2005
162- Wow:roll:
January 31, 2005 - 07:56 PM on January 31st, 2005
162—
Shut your tripe dg! I just saw a damn video of Shep Smith going through a secret bunker under Saddam’s palace that he had built for considerably more than the 1.74 billion you try and say he only took from the oil for food.
While his people are starving, he’s using the humanitarian aid to finance his secret bunkers and set up the insurgencies to fight after his regime is toppled.
January 31, 2005 - 07:57 PM on January 31st, 2005
And you are still stuck on Bush did this…Bush did that…. You are the most idiotic, naive, pessimistic person I have ever run across.
January 31, 2005 - 07:57 PM on January 31st, 2005
I knew you’d be concerned. That’s more than that pesky Oil For Food scam, isn’t it?
January 31, 2005 - 08:01 PM on January 31st, 2005
166–
Your secret love Admirer Saddam was using oil for food money to build the Miles of tunnels under his palace.
But it’s okay, because it was Saddam that did it. But if your radical buddies at the NYT spin wild stories about Bush misapprpriating funds, you jump all over it. Glad to see you got your priorities in order, MORON!
January 31, 2005 - 08:18 PM on January 31st, 2005
Just do the world a favor, Curl up in a lttle liberal ball and die! Go to where ever evil place liberals go when the world is finally spared of their constant bullshit and stay there, forever because people are getting sick of your shit and I am one of them!
January 31, 2005 - 08:35 PM on January 31st, 2005
168-SNATCH!!!:grin::grin:
January 31, 2005 - 08:37 PM on January 31st, 2005
Dammit Peejz! I missed him!:twisted:
January 31, 2005 - 08:40 PM on January 31st, 2005
114: Do you understand, shiloh, how it can be taken that way, given you did it twice?
January 31, 2005 - 08:46 PM on January 31st, 2005
170- I think you scared the young buck:eek: What did you do to him?
January 31, 2005 - 08:52 PM on January 31st, 2005
172- HAHAHA! A lady never tells!:razz:
January 31, 2005 - 08:59 PM on January 31st, 2005
The site is so slow right now!
January 31, 2005 - 09:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
dg, I suggest honorable suicide, or meet me with your buddies in Iraq… Same result.
January 31, 2005 - 09:04 PM on January 31st, 2005
174- I know it’s been that way all day!:roll:
January 31, 2005 - 09:45 PM on January 31st, 2005
Grrrrrr. Even with a hi-speed connection.
Like standing in front of a microwave oven yelling “FASTER!”
January 31, 2005 - 09:49 PM on January 31st, 2005
177- I hear ya there! I have DSL and it’s still very slow!:???:
January 31, 2005 - 09:49 PM on January 31st, 2005
148 – that’s a gerund, i believe.
January 31, 2005 - 09:50 PM on January 31st, 2005
Hey there K!:grin:
January 31, 2005 - 09:51 PM on January 31st, 2005
And it means a totally different thing from the economic system.
January 31, 2005 - 09:59 PM on January 31st, 2005
Hey guys. Just watched the Bachlorette.
January 31, 2005 - 10:03 PM on January 31st, 2005
182- Was it any good?
January 31, 2005 - 10:09 PM on January 31st, 2005
It was okay. If you don’t follow it I can’t really explain…
January 31, 2005 - 10:10 PM on January 31st, 2005
Who was the young buck navy sis scared away? Wasn’t me you were talking about was it?
I just got home.
January 31, 2005 - 10:11 PM on January 31st, 2005
No, I just can’t get into that one, or most reality tv for that matter.:smile:
January 31, 2005 - 10:12 PM on January 31st, 2005
Hi Lee, where’s my evening email?
I just got home a bit ago too. Nice to have a home cooked meal with momma.
January 31, 2005 - 10:13 PM on January 31st, 2005
185- It was my young buck in training …Snatch!:twisted: Hey check your email.:wink:
January 31, 2005 - 10:13 PM on January 31st, 2005
186 – this one isn’t the best. i do love the amazing race and the apprentice, though.
January 31, 2005 - 10:14 PM on January 31st, 2005
Oh yeah, Snatch was back – I saw that! Are you guys still hitting adult chat rooms?
January 31, 2005 - 10:17 PM on January 31st, 2005
168 – LOL – curl up in a liberal ball…gotta love that Snatch.
January 31, 2005 - 10:17 PM on January 31st, 2005
Lee and Navy sis got mail from me. A short while ago.
I think the cat is about to complain about the litter box. She stinks.
January 31, 2005 - 10:18 PM on January 31st, 2005
190- Not lately..:twisted:
January 31, 2005 - 10:20 PM on January 31st, 2005
K, It’ll be coming real soon; I’m still weeding through all the stuff!! Man it piles up quick
January 31, 2005 - 10:22 PM on January 31st, 2005
Awww gritty kitty is adorable!!:grin:
January 31, 2005 - 10:27 PM on January 31st, 2005
Speaking of which, ever since Matt moved out of my place, the dogs at work (black and yellow lab)sit protectively around me. Do they sense this stuff?
Or are they trying to hit on this single bitch?
January 31, 2005 - 10:28 PM on January 31st, 2005
You got the e-mail sis?
What about you Lee?
January 31, 2005 - 10:29 PM on January 31st, 2005
Lee, I sent you an email and it came back as undelieveable. Is your box at capacity?
January 31, 2005 - 10:30 PM on January 31st, 2005
You’re the alpha.
Who’s keeping the dogs?
January 31, 2005 - 10:33 PM on January 31st, 2005
199 – these are my boss’ dogs, at work.
They used to ignore me now they constantly lick me or hang around my chair. It’s cute, except when they fart.
January 31, 2005 - 10:34 PM on January 31st, 2005
Navy sis, is your brother in the Navy at present?
January 31, 2005 - 10:39 PM on January 31st, 2005
201, yes.. did Lee send u pic?
January 31, 2005 - 10:40 PM on January 31st, 2005
I sent you guys email!:wink:
January 31, 2005 - 10:42 PM on January 31st, 2005
201- of your brother? no. i don’t think lee is sending anything of anyone’s without asking. i told him i wouldn’t send the picture of him in the lingerie and top hat.
January 31, 2005 - 10:53 PM on January 31st, 2005
204- do you want to see a pic of my brother on his ship?:grin:
January 31, 2005 - 10:54 PM on January 31st, 2005
K check your mail. Please
January 31, 2005 - 10:58 PM on January 31st, 2005
Hey y’all! Man, I gotta quit trying to multi-task! K, I hope ya like the pic I just emailed you; it’s the most recent I have
I have a way with animals; I’ll bet those dogs would let me through to you! I sure hope they’re keeping all the other horny bachelors away though!
Sasha, gritty kitty is pretty damn cute! I think we already talked about it before, but black cats are my favorite!
January 31, 2005 - 11:01 PM on January 31st, 2005
Thanks Lee.
I have to go to bed now. I had a slight blackout.
‘Nite!
January 31, 2005 - 11:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
Thanks for the pictures Lee and Sasha! Both cute!
Yes, NS – I would!
I’m so tired. I think I am going to hit it soon. I washed my sheets and they are sooo comfy – something about having fresh sheets and freshly shaved legs feels so damn good.
January 31, 2005 - 11:02 PM on January 31st, 2005
208- Nite Sasha!:grin:
January 31, 2005 - 11:08 PM on January 31st, 2005
Siiiiiiigggggghhhhh! Thanks for that wonderful visual K!
Nite Sasha!
sis, I’ll forward that pic to K for ya! I’m sure you’re busy with those instructions I sent!
January 31, 2005 - 11:10 PM on January 31st, 2005
K guys, I am going to get off the board for the night. Be good without me!
I promise to download Yahoo IM here soon sis.
Lee I’ll wait for your email with the pic and send you a private good night.
January 31, 2005 - 11:15 PM on January 31st, 2005
Mmmmm – K!
You should be getting it any second; something coming in was tying up my bandwidth for a while. Damn dial-up!
February 1, 2005 - 07:39 AM on February 1st, 2005
‘liberals’ are said to be this or that quite often on this site and it’s counter-productive to an exchange of ideas.
Who would have thought that considering the fact that this is a right leaning blog:roll:
February 1, 2005 - 08:09 AM on February 1st, 2005
Peejz, the complaints come from Liberal/Progressives unhappy with the way they look to others. Their way to remedy that is to browbeat everyone into sharing the rosy selfimage the liberal has instead of reality.
February 1, 2005 - 08:20 AM on February 1st, 2005
215-There is a lot of truth to that.
February 1, 2005 - 09:23 AM on February 1st, 2005
As Rush put it this morning, they didn’t want the Iraqi people to win, they wanted Bush to lose. They lost 2 elections in 3 months!
February 1, 2005 - 09:35 AM on February 1st, 2005
214 sounds like an admission that you’d rather classify someone than engage in a discussion of issues without a preconceived notion of how it will turn out.
February 1, 2005 - 10:11 AM on February 1st, 2005
218, shi, there’s a column in today’s Chicago Sun Times I think you ought to read. It was written by a Progressive for Progressives like you. I sent a copy to Reilly asking her to post it for you and sandyb.
Maybe if this Progressive can come to his senses, there might be hope for you, shiloh.
February 1, 2005 - 10:20 AM on February 1st, 2005
Dont beat around the bush,,, progressive is just a cover word for communist.
February 1, 2005 - 10:23 AM on February 1st, 2005
219 – good morning pcd – thanks for looking out for my welfare.
may i suggest David Brock’s “Blinded by the Right”.
then we can all come to our senses & see where we are when we get there. i think we’d both be surprised.
February 1, 2005 - 10:25 AM on February 1st, 2005
205- K, he is a cutie! He’s 22!:grin:
February 1, 2005 - 10:27 AM on February 1st, 2005
“theres one smoking a joint, and another with spots”:shock:
February 1, 2005 - 10:27 AM on February 1st, 2005
220
ok, let’s not beat about the Bush.
what you said can also be said in some other words like,
“i’m making a general statement that at its core, is worthless”
conservatism is another way of saying……
[you didn't want to start that name calling so early in the day, do you?]
& good morning. JG
February 1, 2005 - 10:30 AM on February 1st, 2005
222 – A little too young for me.
February 1, 2005 - 10:33 AM on February 1st, 2005
I am fine. How about you?
I challenge you to find a difference form the progressive platform and the communist party USA platform. Better yet, the Democratic platform and the CPUSA.
Birds of a feather…
February 1, 2005 - 10:36 AM on February 1st, 2005
shi, where’s your standards? Brock, Ha! He’s got no credibility with anyone.
February 1, 2005 - 10:36 AM on February 1st, 2005
225-Actaully he’s engaged,to an older woman.:grin: She’s 26 not too bad.
February 1, 2005 - 10:39 AM on February 1st, 2005
228 – lee will be glad to hear that. and i’m an old maid compared to 26.
February 1, 2005 - 10:41 AM on February 1st, 2005
It seems there is a concern about the Iraqi government’s turnout figures, it appears the 60% figure was based on registered, rather than eligible voters, unlike how calculations are usually done:
“The 60 percent figure is based on the notion that 8 million of 14 million eligible Iraqis turned out. But the 14 million figure is the number of registered Iraqis, while turnout is usually calculated using the number of eligible voters. The number of adults in Iraq is probably closer to 18 million, which would lower the turnout figure. And the registration figure itself is questionable. Anyone who received a ration card was deemed registered, and there was no effort to remove duplicate names or those who sought extra food rations. Election officials concede they did not have a reliable baseline on which to calculate turnout.”
BTW, Dan Secor is a Fox analyst now? And he was praising the Bush Admin’s handling of Iraq? That’s surprising.
February 1, 2005 - 10:41 AM on February 1st, 2005
Sorry 230 is from the WP.
February 1, 2005 - 10:44 AM on February 1st, 2005
229-:lol:
February 1, 2005 - 10:46 AM on February 1st, 2005
227 – i can see where Brock, once the golden boy of the Right, no longer has credibility with them.
you’re not saying because someone disagrees with you their credibility is lost, are you?
is so, we’re in a lot of trouble.
the Senate can disband and the anarchists can sharpen the long knives.
JG – if you see no difference between Communism & the Democratic platform we should move on to another subject.
February 1, 2005 - 10:48 AM on February 1st, 2005
233. Not trying to piss you off Shiloh. Just log onto their website and look at their platform or “manifesto”. I don’t blame you for being embarassed, communisim is like the black plague of political systems. Killed more than anyone, but it is a fact.
February 1, 2005 - 10:52 AM on February 1st, 2005
226,
There are a lot of differences between the C.P platform and the Democrats. What amazes me is thayt the communists are becoming pretty moderate in their platforms. The NDP (Social Democratic)platform in Canada is more radical.
February 1, 2005 - 10:54 AM on February 1st, 2005
Communist are communist…. same evil, no matter what.
February 1, 2005 - 10:57 AM on February 1st, 2005
215,
I wear my progressivism on my sleev as you know, PCD, no shame here. In fact, I must reply to you by saying that I never paint rosy pictures of anything (well, gay marriage excluded). Read my writings on Iraq and other issues. When was the last time I accused ‘conservatives’ of being anything?
February 1, 2005 - 10:58 AM on February 1st, 2005
236,
The history of communism is sordid, and I am not a supporter of the communist party in any country, John.
February 1, 2005 - 11:01 AM on February 1st, 2005
CPUSA: Bush is destroying workers rights and outsourcing jobs instead of protecting the right to organize and creating new jobs rebuilding schools, bridges, roads and hospitals.
K-E: . . . Create good-paying jobs here, not ship them overseas; support our unions; establish a National Education Trust Fund to ensure that schools always get the funding they need; offer a fully refundable College Opportunity Tax credit on up to $4,000 of tuition for every year of college.
CPUSA: Bush is privatizing Medicare, Social Security and public education with phony reforms instead of enacting health care for all, protecting retirement funds and full funding for public education through college.
K-E: . . . use targeted tax cuts to extend affordable, high-quality coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every child; make affordable health care a right — not a privilege — for every American.
CPUSA: Bush is bankrupting the Federal Government with giant tax cuts for the very rich and super-funds to the military instead of securing the budget for human needs by taxing the rich and spending on human needs.
K-E: . . . cut the deficit in half during first four years in office; end corporate welfare as we know it; roll back the Bush tax cuts.
CPUSA: Bush is rolling back civil rights gains instead of enforcing and expanding affirmative action to end racism in all areas of life.
K-E: . . . extremist judges are turning back the clock on our 40-year march toward equality; will strongly enforce our nation’s civil rights laws, support affirmative action to reduce discrimination and expand opportunity, and only appoint judges with a record of enforcing the nation’s civil rights and anti-discrimination laws.
CPUSA: Bush is curtailing women’s rights and choice by undermining Roe v. Wade instead of upholding the right to choice and ending the gender wage gap.
K-E: . . . help Balance Work And Family; close The Pay Gap; Protect Women’s Health And Right To Choose; only nominate individuals to the federal bench whose records demonstrate a respect for the full range of constitutional rights, including the right to privacy and the right to choose.
CPUSA: Bush is abusing immigrant workers in low-wage jobs instead of providing a clear path to citizenship and equal rights.
K-E: . . . offer a reform bill in his first 100 days that allows immigrants to earn legalization and encourages family reunification.
CPUSA: Bush is exploiting and ruining the environment by protecting corporate polluters instead of conserving our natural resources for the public good.
K-E: The League of Conservation Voters called Kerry an “environmental champion.” K-E will: improve the environment in backyards and communities across America; revitalize contaminated industrial sites, get toxics [sic.] out of communities; guarantee our children access to clean, safe parks and baseball fields; take on traffic congestion and sprawl; reverse the Bush-Cheney rollbacks to our Clean Air Act; plug loopholes in the law; take aggressive action to stop acid rain; use innovative, job-creating programs to reduce mercury emissions and other emissions that contribute to global warming.
CPUSA: Bush’s war in Iraq is a disaster for our security and economy. He is pushing for more preemptive wars and for first strike nuclear military policy instead of negotiations and cooperation utilizing the UN.
K-E: Today, our leadership has walked away from more than a century of American leadership in the world to embrace a new — and dangerously ineffective — American disregard for the world. They bully instead of persuade. They act alone when they could assemble a team. They confuse leadership with going it alone.
CPUSA: Bush is denying civil liberties and free speech in the name of fighting terrorism instead of repealing the USA Patriot Act and helping cities, towns and states fund firefighters and police.
K-E: Our first defenders will respond to any attack with courage and heroism-but they also need the equipment and manpower to do the job; believe in an America that is safe and free, and [promise to] protect personal liberties as well as personal security.
CPUSA: Bush discriminates against Gays and Lesbians with a Constitutional Amendment instead of expanding civil rights and liberties for all.
K-E: . . . strongly enforce our nation’s civil rights laws; support affirmative action to reduce discrimination and expand opportunity; strongly enforce equal justice for all victims of hate violence; back the Fairness Act to reverse damage done to civil rights laws by right-wing judges.
February 1, 2005 - 11:03 AM on February 1st, 2005
Sandy, I am not saying that you are. I am just saying that the progressive agenda is the same as the Communist.
Same misguided and failed concepts, with a different name.
February 1, 2005 - 11:08 AM on February 1st, 2005
The evils of communism are not represented in this platform. I don’t see a call for an end to elections, the extinguishing of civil and human rights, and the complete ownership of civil society by the state. There is, I would guarantee you, a difference between the US communist party’s platform today and in the 1950’s-70’s.
February 1, 2005 - 11:09 AM on February 1st, 2005
218- given the fact that Sandy is the only “liberal” on the board with the ability to have an intelligent conversation with, I would say you are wrong.
February 1, 2005 - 11:11 AM on February 1st, 2005
240,
Socialism has had failed concepts and programs. But I would also argue that it saved the US from a fascist or communist revolution in the mid-1930’s, and many programs which could objectively be considered ’socialist’ guarantee the well-being of millions in the US. The US tried laissez-faire economics; the result was disaster (1929-1938).
February 1, 2005 - 11:17 AM on February 1st, 2005
are you concerned at all about the pleasure you seem to derive from going out of your way to insult me?
it’s okay with me ’cause i’m used to it. it’s you i’m concerned about. your hate will make you
sick.
& your lack of manners should be an embarrassment.
i’ve tried to have an intelligent conversation with you, but all i get is these belittling comments. i guess you would call them ‘intelligent insults’?
you’re a pip.
February 1, 2005 - 11:28 AM on February 1st, 2005
what’s a pip?
February 1, 2005 - 11:30 AM on February 1st, 2005
241. See that is what communist do when in power. They didn’t say those thing in the Russian Revolution… They basically said what the dems say today.
February 1, 2005 - 11:30 AM on February 1st, 2005
245 – i was thinking the same question. in the venacular i think it means, ‘you’re really something else’
February 1, 2005 - 11:34 AM on February 1st, 2005
ok JG – you’re convinced that the opposition are Communists. i get it.
does that leave you & the people who agree with you as the only patriots involved in the process?
is there a loyal opposition that has the welfare of the country at heart?
is everyone ‘else’ enemies of America? ’cause that’s kind of what you’re getting close to saying, if not precisely what you are saying.
February 1, 2005 - 11:36 AM on February 1st, 2005
Well, taking someone down a pip refers to (British) taking an officers pip from the uniform… Capitan to lieutenant etc… due to their pips referring to their rank… (some desperate glory) 1917.
February 1, 2005 - 11:37 AM on February 1st, 2005
Whats a matter man,,,, we gonna come around the square with some Puerto Rican girls, who are DYING TO MEET YOU!
February 1, 2005 - 11:52 AM on February 1st, 2005
rolling stones?
February 1, 2005 - 12:09 PM on February 1st, 2005
when i worked in hospital, there was a music group made up of docs & a couple of respiratory therapists. the lead singer, an ER doc named jerry came up with the name “Jerry & the Temporary Pacemakers”.
may only be funny to oldies music fans. & even then, not so much.
February 1, 2005 - 12:14 PM on February 1st, 2005
Thought shiloh was thinking of himself as Gladys Knight, and also thinking John as one of his backup singers.
Shiloh, Brock discredited himself. Has nothing to do with agreeing or not.
Now, as to that column, you dismissed it immediately because you disagreed with it without even reading it. Says a lot about your lack of character, shi.
February 1, 2005 - 12:15 PM on February 1st, 2005
Shi, I like Gerry & the Pacemakers better.
February 1, 2005 - 12:20 PM on February 1st, 2005
Communism is not evil- it isn’t even a political belief. It is a form of economy- just like socialism and capitalism.
People are evil, not political systems. That is why communism failed- it relies on the goodness of people to work. The government of the USSR was fascist, and that’s where the evil was ion the system.
Ted
Ted
February 1, 2005 - 12:21 PM on February 1st, 2005
thanks for your incisive assessment of my character, altho i haven’t dismissed it, so you’re assuming facts not in evidence which, perhaps, says something about your
character.
why don’t you provide the link to what you’d like me to read & stop with the hysterical charges that make you look silly.
how did Brock discredit himself? he seemed a True Believer when he was the Right’s attack dog, and seems equally sincere now.
i know that question calls for an actual response, but i’m confident you can work in a character attack,or two,in the reply.
February 1, 2005 - 12:24 PM on February 1st, 2005
i think there should be a contest. whoever calls me the most names gets a prize/ & whoever does it most viciously gets another.
pcd & peejz are the permanent daily contestants, with guest players coming & going as the day goes on.
February 1, 2005 - 12:29 PM on February 1st, 2005
257 – I know you’d love the attention, but I don’t have the time or the energy.
February 1, 2005 - 12:52 PM on February 1st, 2005
i just got all the attention i needed in your response, darlin’. i’d hope people would understand, ignoring me tends to make me want to go away.
February 1, 2005 - 12:54 PM on February 1st, 2005
259 – oh, go direct planes or something.:???:
February 1, 2005 - 01:10 PM on February 1st, 2005
yeah – altho it’s a great weather day from Seattle to Bismark, ND to Denver. when nothing happens on my shift, it’s a success.
February 1, 2005 - 01:22 PM on February 1st, 2005
the liberal mantra straight out of shiloh’s mouth:
when nothing happens on my shift, it’s a success.
February 1, 2005 - 01:39 PM on February 1st, 2005
262 – i don’t know what this means, but at least you vented.
February 1, 2005 - 01:39 PM on February 1st, 2005
liberal laziness.
February 1, 2005 - 02:05 PM on February 1st, 2005
it’s kind of like working in an Emergency Room. it’s not laziness not to want to have clients.
but it’s seems convenient for you to think of it the other way, so by all means, enjoy.
[damn ER people - liberals, no doubt]
K, we can stop now.
February 1, 2005 - 02:06 PM on February 1st, 2005
#219 – - Heya PCD, I just saw where you had sent me a story link. Just wanted to let you know I didn’t receive that so if you would like to resend I’d appreciate it
February 1, 2005 - 02:47 PM on February 1st, 2005
Reilly, I sent it again. If you don’t get it this time, go to Drudge and follow the link refering to Progressive or was it Liberal columnist speaking the unthinkable.
Sandyb, it wasn’t who you said it was. this is Sun Times Columnist, not Washington Post or Fox News.
February 1, 2005 - 02:54 PM on February 1st, 2005
265 – fine with me.
February 1, 2005 - 03:00 PM on February 1st, 2005
i didn’t mean all conversation K. just the implied insults.
February 1, 2005 - 03:07 PM on February 1st, 2005
never stop being a kid. never stop feeling and seeing and being excited with great things like air and engines and sounds of sunlight within you.
wear your little mask if you must to protect you from the world but if you let that kid disappear you are grown up and you are dead .
- Richard Bach
nothing by chance
February 1, 2005 - 03:33 PM on February 1st, 2005
270 – can i smoke some too?
February 1, 2005 - 03:44 PM on February 1st, 2005
244- No I am not but thank you for asking:smile:
February 1, 2005 - 03:50 PM on February 1st, 2005
245- it is a term of endearment. Old people say it.
February 1, 2005 - 03:52 PM on February 1st, 2005
Shiloh loves you; we all knew it.
February 1, 2005 - 03:56 PM on February 1st, 2005
274- do you think Bonnie does too:razz:
February 1, 2005 - 03:56 PM on February 1st, 2005
don’t get me stirred up, theres smoke in the bubbling water over there.
February 1, 2005 - 03:57 PM on February 1st, 2005
February 1, 2005 - 04:11 PM on February 1st, 2005
peejz there is no one else on this site who pays more attention to me than you.
it doesn’t matter to some if they get positive or negative reenforcement. the key element is the reenforcement.
so in a weird, perverse way, thank you, i guess.
& talk about perverse, you still think i’m bonnie.
that is so cute. gives you one more excuse to talk to me, i guess.
February 1, 2005 - 04:14 PM on February 1st, 2005
278- You are welcome Sybil:smile:
February 1, 2005 - 05:20 PM on February 1st, 2005
255,
Very correct, ted. I was using John’s terms. Communism has resulted in evil things, though (let’s not get into a discussion of the word ‘evil’. I don’t have the time).
October 16, 2005 - 09:27 PM on October 16th, 2005
Look here, you right-wing posters are all forgetting some facts:
1. Liberal/Socialist/Democrats (LSDs) have a double standard. If our opponents step on a crack in a sidewalk, it means a major scandal. Whatever we do is a non-issue, because we mean well, are morally correct, and are the fighting for the minorities and the little guy.
2. LSDs are by definition always right beacuse we mean well. If you disagree in any way whatsoever, you are a racist, sexist, homophobe, bigot, etc.
3. Yes, we have massive, organized voter fraud in the big cities, organized and conducted by our co-conspirators, the Union bosses. Why, we probably deliverd somewhere around 15% of the vote fraudulently to Al Gore and John Kerry. We even pulled out all the stops with the Hanging chad and dimpled chad bullshit in Florida. But Bush trumped us with the US Supreme Ct. Damn… But I digress. Oh, yeah, my point was that we can do any fraud, any voter or fundraising crime (remember bagman Al Gore in the Buddhist Temple, or making fundraiser calls from his office on company time? Tee Hee!) and it’s okay. but if a Republican is even accused of an iregularity, then even just the accusation, the suspicion alone is a MAJOR scandal.
4. We are indeed the lowest form of scum at the very bottom of the political pond. That is because we will stop at nothing, stoop as lolw as necessary, drop the bar even lower, do any damn thing, sell out anyone or anything, even screw over this nation in time of war to gain political advantage in our relentless pursuit of power. No matter if more U.S. soldiers are killed because the enemy is encouraged by our unbounded efforts to undermine Bush and the resolve of the American people. The point is that we want Bush discredited, out, once we are in power then we’ll figure out what to do. Maybe we’ll just put out heads back in the sand and ignore the problem again. You see, it really all is a matter of definition. You have a problem, you just redefine what a “problem” is, and presto! The issue goes away?
See? So next time you hear an LSD talking, you now know what we are all about!