"We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back."

[Lou Cypher]

Like I've said before, as long as the face of the Democratic party are the likes of Micheal Moore and Moveon.org they will continue to lose their political clout. This story in the press sure wont help.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=548&u=/ap/20041209/ap_on_el_ge/democrats_critics&printer=1)

Lou :globe:

[Gaim Mastr]

Well, you can't argue with their scathing remarks about the Democratic leaders being "professional election losers", now can you ?? :lol:

But yeah, the Dems need to separate themselves from the left-wing lunatic fringe if they have any hopes of winning the big chair again.

You know, a lot of people screaming 'sour grapes' after the last election tried to use Christians as scapegoats for Bush's re-election. I think that's the wrong way to look at it. You don't have to be a church-going Christian to also be at least somewhat conservative on a lot of issues. And as long as the Dems refuse to accept that, they're going to be leaving themselves with nothing else but Moore-like spokespersons.

Like I said before, the Democrats were outclassed in this last battle for the White House. The whole race was like watching an early Mike Tyson get into the ring with some unknown for a 1st round knockout. And that's exactly what happened. The Reps started hitting a lot harder a lot earlier on. The Dems were knocked out early on, but didn't even know it. I was wrong too, in that I thought they had a chance right up until the end. Goes to show that while Americans are a lot of things, one thing we aren't is a people who elects weak-willed, wishy-washy politicians into the highest office. Well..... most of the time we don't.

:wink:

[Lou Cypher]

Well, you can't argue with their scathing remarks about the Democratic leaders being "professional election losers", now can you ?? Win I read that remark it reminded me of Bob Shrum (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9895-2004Sep9.html), They talked(Kerry's people)about how Shrum has never won a Presidential election and that there was a curse surrounding him.

Lou :globe:

[Darth Nader]

It kills me the way 'liberal' became a dirty word. It was used to great effect by the Bush campaign against Kerry climing he was such a liberal and so on....Kerry not helping by trying to distance himself from that 'label', giving more credence to the belief that liberal is bad or at least not favorable to described as such...like hippies.

I admit I have a problem with both liberals and conservatives in a broad sense. Liberals come off as obnoxious jackasses at times, and conservatives as arrogant self rightous tight-asses. Of course those are fairly broad generalizations :D

I think Moveon.org's comment weren't that bad a thing. They are obviously not happy with the direction of their party, and want to take control. They probably could have worded it better though.

Not sure about everyone else, but it has felt like our political system, and by association, or politians, have been on a downward spiral ever since the republican party was in "get Clinton" mode. When a politcal party needs to 'reinvent' itself, that sounds more like an advertisement campaign than anyting else. We should have had the Eugenics ars by now....

[mandrake]

I admit I have a problem with both liberals and conservatives in a broad sense. Liberals come off as obnoxious jackasses at times, and conservatives as arrogant self rightous tight-asses. Of course those are fairly broad generalizations :D

I think the real problem with the labels "conservative" and "liberal" are that they are highly subjective. If I'm talking to a staunch democrat or a women's lib person, I'm a "right-wing nut job conservative", however if I take the exact same views to a deep south Independent Baptist, I'd be a "commie pinko liberal".

[Happy Chris†man]

The tragically amusing thing is that much of the neoconservative (i.e. the Arlen Spectre and Ahnuld sort of) agenda mirrors the liberal left's. We are increasingly approaching, if not up to our eyeballs in days when there's really only one house running the show, puppeting two management teams against one another.

Each administration over the last few years, Democrat and Republican, has done little to stop the selling out of this nation into dependence upon globalism. I vote chiefly for whomever seems the most likely to be pro life and tend not to trust whomever's in power blindly. No human administration would be perfect, even were this not the case otherwise.

I pray for our presidents, but God didn't give me eyes for the purpose of voluntarily pulling wool over them.

[dos.Kapital]

Brothers, Sisters........

Don't worry. If you've noticed our history, we elect(and tolerate) in waves. We go Conservative..........we go Liberal. It's all the same. Nothing changes. I love how the polls and the media stress, "Oh! It's the moral vote that counts." Or, "the religious Right and the christians really cast the vote."
Funk dat! It's us...........the people! Just like choosing our mates! We don't know what the hell we want! So, we end up with who "sells" the best, and who "stands" for the correct positions.


Uh, yeah............Karl Rove is no slouch, by the way. :yes:

[Happy Chris†man]

Brothers, Sisters........

Don't worry. If you've noticed our history, we elect(and tolerate) in waves. We go Conservative..........we go Liberal. It's all the same. Nothing changes.

You're supposed to believe and repeat this, but the truth is that we've become increasingly leftist since the 60's. It's happened (and happens) even with Republicans in office. A lot of controversial legislating is snuck by on weekends, over holidays, and in riders. Don't think for a minute that you're getting the whole story on the evening news.

Ever heard the phrase "inch by inch, everything's a cinch"? It's called incrementalism: If you want to boil a frog, you don't drop him into a hot pot or yank up the heat. You turn it up slowly, little by little, until by the time he realizes he's in danger, it's too late.

We might be able to wrest this country back to sanity, at least for a time, but we've got to clean house within the GOP first. The neocon (liberal-in-conservative-clothing) infestation is as dangerous (and anti family) as the SCOTUS.

Karl Rove is no slouch, by the way. :yes:

Rove is brilliant. He makes me wish I could trust this adminstration (and I say this as someone who voted for it, to block Kerry).

[Happy Chris†man]

We might be able to wrest this country back to sanity, at least for a time, but we've got to clean house within the GOP first. The neocon (liberal-in-conservative-clothing) infestation is as dangerous (and anti family) as the SCOTUS.

http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0035238.cfm

If he's not held to a family-friendly agenda (assuming we can hold him to it), he'll degenerate to his own. Don't be shocked. It's politics as usual.

[dos.Kapital]

Happy Christman wrote:
You're supposed to believe and repeat this, but the truth is that we've become increasingly leftist since the 60's. It's happened (and happens) even with Republicans in office. A lot of controversial legislating is snuck by on weekends, over holidays, and in riders. Don't think for a minute that you're getting the whole story on the evening news.









You know, it really appears that we have gone increasingly leftist since the 60's. But, I think it is balanced by the conservativism that has maintained the status quo in this country, since the Reagan years. Even Nixon won his "silent majority" vote. Today, where are all the student protests and human rights marches(like one might see in much-more-liberal Europe)? I'm talking about the overall mood of the general public--not the Courts and journalists.


On another note, do you have something against globalism? I ask because I wanted to know what you mean in an earlier post where you mentioned "selling out of this nation into dependence upon globalism". I am curious where you stand on this.......and subsequently outsourcing Westernization.

I like what you mentioned about how deals are snuck in over the weekends. Yeah, I love reading about those late-night Saturday and Sunday "sessions" where members of Congress hammer out details about certain bills. All that the rest of us yokels can do is just smile and "hope" they're just working hard. :joker:

[Happy Chris†man]

On another note, do you have something against globalism? I ask because I wanted to know what you mean in an earlier post where you mentioned "selling out of this nation into dependence upon globalism". I am curious where you stand on this.......and subsequently outsourcing Westernization.

Yes, I have several things against globalism. I'm not a communist (it doesn't work, it easily becomes an excuse for mass murder, et cetera), nor do I claim any economics expertise whatsoever, but I believe globalism's proving to be a suckers' game for the US: Far more jobs are leaving the country than coming in. Proponents of NAFTA, CAFTA, et have always said "free" trade would benefit us, but the chief beneficiary appears to be Asia (though ironically, many remain desperately, hopelessly poor there).

There's also something simply, fundamentally dangerous to the sovereignty of a nation when it becomes heavily dependent upon others, especially when the dependence is economic. I realize that it could be said that all nations in the WTO are interdependent (in theory), but America's among those with the most to lose. WWII's ramp-up proved that we have the physical capacity to generate all our needs (including oil) within our own borders. We have no sane reason I'm aware of to chain ourselves to exporting the best we have and importing inferior products. It's crazier still when those cheaper, inferior imports are putting higher-quality-item-producing American businesses into bankruptcy.

I know the standard cry is "you want to make America isolationist again - you heathen", and I'll admit that it would create shock waves throughout the world. The ugly truth, however, is that such shock waves would likely only advance what's already happening slowly anyway, geopolitically. I'm not saying we should say "good riddance" to our trade partners and allies, but sinking ourselves on their behalf won't exactly benefit our children or grandchildren.

When corporate bodies are allowed to sue countries like Mexico as though they were private individuals, something ain't kosher. This is the other, perhaps less tangible, but nonetheless dangerous aspect of globalism: Corporate ethics, especially in a global sense, is an oxymoron. Christians are increasingly being pushed out of big companies for refusing to compromise their faith in the Bible as God's word. To say the least, people of faith in particular should note that a world dominated by corporations will only allow citizenry their freedom of religion so long as it benefits said corporations and doesn't conflict with their agendas.

The saddest aspect may be that we're probably in too deep to pull out. Globalism's lackeys swear doing so could wreck what's left of the economy. In this one regard, I can't say I know for certain that they're wrong. I'd love to see evidence refuting the conclusion.

I need to make it crystal clear that I believe we are blessed by God with the standard of living, resources, and heritage we have. These things dictate that we be generous in helping the poor inside our borders and without. If we're such poor stewards that we lose our blessings in global pyramid schemes or arbitrary redistributions in the name "the people", however, before we know it, we'll be in no shape to help anyone.

[Happy Chris†man]

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20050116-095827-7822r.htm

[SupaTroopa]

It's crazier still when those cheaper, inferior imports are putting higher-quality-item-producing American businesses into bankruptcy.


People want inexpensive stuff, if it's comparable, it'll sell. I will buy a better foreign product (cars for a long time - now no one knows where all their parts are made) if it's there for the most part, the privatization of utility companies has gouged me bad enough and those are "American" companies and they're getting more of my money to fund other profit seeking ventures than they need to provide ample power to me.

I pay too much for medical and car insurance, I pay too much for cable, internet access, et al...,

What I'm trying to say is that our standard of living is higher than those countries just now experiencing industrialization and corporate contracting. When they are providing a larger portion of their societies with job skills and education - and start earning more money - they will also want nicer things - and their services and products will also cost more.

Where that leads to is anyone's guess I suppose.