Moveon.org Owns the Democratic Party.

[Rob Lister]

Yeah, 'cause the 2nd amendment was such a huuuuuge issue in the election.

It might just have been huuuuge enough to make the difference. Hard to say. It is an issue and it is one that splits (somewhat) the dems but doesn't really split reps at all.

It's one of the little things. I don't think it would profit the dems enough that they should go for being open and honest about it. They should simply leave it to the states to the extent that the rhetoric will allow it.

Gay Marriage is something that spits both dems and reps, so that issue was properly marginalized until Edwards, and then Kerry, decided to make Cheney's daughter an issue. That wasn't so much a mistake as a flounder; they were down in most polls and needed something, anything, to bump them up.


My point is that they should try being very honest about their position -- or at least as honest as are the reps -- in the '06/'08 election. They were not in the last one.

 

[kimiko]

Really? How do you know?

Uhhh, because they're my family and we all were open with what we thought prior to the election and shared who we would each be voting for. My dad has always been very conservative, and the guns are his hobby, but he was quite clear that he jumped the repub ship particularly for the admin's egregious military-related decisions.

 

[Rob Lister]

Uhhh, because they're my family and we all were open with what we thought prior to the election and shared who we would each be voting for. My dad has always been very conservative, and the guns are his hobby, but he was quite clear that he jumped the repub ship particularly for the admin's egregious military-related decisions.

Just asking. I've got a brother-in-law that will swear up and down he voted for Kerry...assuming his wife is around. He tells me privately that he voted for Bush. I don't pretend to know whom he voted for.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Gay Marriage is something that spits both dems and reps, so that issue was properly marginalized until Edwards, and then Kerry, decided to make Cheney's daughter an issue.

Dick Cheney was the one who brought her up first. Then Kerry mentioned her and suddenly she was off limits.

 

[kalen]

Given the conservative bent of the corporate media in the US, Kerry really never had a chance. Try to imagine what would've happened if he called "bu11sh1t" on the "War on Terror" like what Nader was doing.

 

[Zep]

This is getting so OLD, folks...

The brainless sock-puppet loser monkey is in the chair for the next 4, thanks to the brainless religo-morons of middle America.

We sure gotta deal with it out here. How about you?

 

[BPSCG]

thanks to the brainless religo-morons of middle America.

We sure gotta deal with it out here. How about you?

Help us out here. If the "brainless religo-morons" voted for Bush, then who did the intelligent religo-morons vote for?

And who did the brainless atheio-morons vote for?

Question: Which one is this guy?

Someone needs to do a poll. Maybe there's a large voter base of brainless atheio-morons for the Democrats to mobilize four years from now.

High-IQ Atheio-Morons for Nader in 2008!!!

 

[Globert]

Yeah, 'cause the 2nd amendment was such a huuuuuge issue in the election.

It cost Clinton the house o' reps in '94 and they aint got it back. I venture that it was a big straw on Gore's camel in 2000, and there are some liberals who think guns are responsible for the actions of their owners. Further that there are special types of extra mean lookin' evil guns that are also responsible for the actions of their users.

Kerry could've hunted every day of the campaign, and never come close to erasing his anti gun record.

It aint the biggest issue, but it's up there.

-Globe

 

[Ed]

Help us out here. If the "brainless religo-morons" voted for Bush, then who did the intelligent religo-morons vote for?

And who did the brainless atheio-morons vote for?

Question: Which one is this guy?

Someone needs to do a poll. Maybe there's a large voter base of brainless atheio-morons for the Democrats to mobilize four years from now.

High-IQ Atheio-Morons for Nader in 2008!!!

So, if I am understanding the photo corrextly, this Armani clad, rolex wearing wimp is marching down the street from his condo, between Latte Mocha's and is complaining? More than that he is a revolutionary? OK.

 

[Zep]

Help us out here. If the "brainless religo-morons" voted for Bush, then who did the intelligent religo-morons vote for?

Um, that's an obvious oxymoron, isn't it. So, clearly, they voted Bush.

And who did the brainless atheio-morons vote for?

I gather that they didn't bother to vote much at all. As usual.

Question: Which one is this guy?

pillory? He's my hero!

Someone needs to do a poll. Maybe there's a large voter base of brainless atheio-morons for the Democrats to mobilize four years from now.

Doubtful. USA's gone all Xian-right, doncha know. Bushie said so.

High-IQ Atheio-Morons for Nader in 2008!!!

Nader, the thinking man's alternative candidate. Which means he hasn't a hope. Ever.

 

[Rob Lister]

Question: Which one is this guy?

In this guys case I'd feel fairly comfortable putting a bullet between W's eyes. Call it preventive maintenance.

 

[shecky]

In this guys case I'd feel fairly comfortable putting a bullet between W's eyes. Call it preventive maintenance.

You OK, Rob? Your recent comments are a bit, shall we say, creepy.

 

[kimiko]

So, if I am understanding the photo corrextly, this Armani clad, rolex wearing wimp is marching down the street from his condo, between Latte Mocha's and is complaining? More than that he is a revolutionary? OK.

I don't see any Armani or Rolex. You know, lots of liberals are just normal people. Some of them even attend marches if they live close to large cities.

 

[Ed]

I don't see any Armani or Rolex. You know, lots of liberals are just normal people. Some of them even attend marches if they live close to large cities.

He also has a $250 hair styling job and has had liposuction, the botox is obvious.

He clearly is trying to look dangerous to get laid and the silly gansta thing is not him so he is going for revolutionary chic.

See it all the time.

edit: Calling for revolution is not "liberal".

 

[kimiko]

He clearly is trying to look dangerous to get laid and the silly gansta thing is not him so he is going for revolutionary chic.

Revolutionary chic? He tucked in his shirt, forgot the beret, and those shorts don't look like natural fiber to me.

 

[AtheistArchon]

As to corporations being evil, modern liberals (i.e., libertines) think everyone with a job is evil. This is not news.

- Um. I know this was an attempt at a joke, but I just have to point out... five or six of my modern liberal friends are wishing very hard that they had the jobs they had before Bush.

edit: Calling for revolution is not "liberal".

- Clearly you've never read the Democratic Underground.

Help us out here. If the "brainless religo-morons" voted for Bush, then who did the intelligent religo-morons vote for?

- Presumably everyone who voted for Bush had a reason for doing so. Most of these people are demonstrated as religiously conservative. They also must approve of Bush's job in his first term, or else they'd kick him out on his track record, yadda yadda yadda, see my post in this thread on how brainless one must be to support that track record. Or don't.

- I'm curious... is it pity for the man? Is that why otherwise intelligent people won't comdemn him?

 

[Jocko]

- Um. I know this was an attempt at a joke, but I just have to point out... five or six of my modern liberal friends are wishing very hard that they had the jobs they had before Bush.

I know a few too. They think Bush invented the global economy, Bush is responsible for the recession that began a year before he took office, for it getting worse after 9/11... THAT'S the joke, AA. My assessment of the modern lib (please note the qualifier) is dead serious. Its trademark is contempt for the working man.

I don't know your friends, but if they're anything like mine, they can't point to a single real, quatifiable reason or policy that allowed Bush to "take away their jobs." If you have a different tale to tell, then please share and restore some measure of my faith in progressive thought.

- Clearly you've never read the Democratic Underground.

Apparently the underground has seeped to the surface, not unlike a broken septic tank. Both reek to high heaven and telling America that ◊◊◊◊ is roses won't change a thing.

- Presumably everyone who voted for Bush had a reason for doing so. Most of these people are demonstrated as religiously conservative. They also must approve of Bush's job in his first term, or else they'd kick him out on his track record, yadda yadda yadda, see my post in this thread on how brainless one must be to support that track record. Or don't.

I voted for him and I haven't been to church in 8 or 9 years. There's also a lot of policies Bush espouses I disagree with (immigrant amnesty, for instance), so there's no blanket approval. Check the presumptions, pal.

- I'm curious... is it pity for the man? Is that why otherwise intelligent people won't comdemn him?

No, the pity vote went to Kerry. 48% of the elctorate, and that was the best you could come up with? And you have the nerve to call conservatives stupid. That's like questioning the intelligence of an opponent who only gave you two pawns in a five-minute chess game; if he's the stupid one, what does that make you?

I've said it before and I'll say it again here... the left blaming a "Stupid, uninformed crowd of Jesus freaks" for their November drubbing is not getting you any closer to a real solution.

Go ahead, run Hillary in '08. Maybe then it will sink in.