Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Civil War Within Democratic Party?  
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1344 times:

I'm sure I'm not the only one around here who's been reading some of the liberal blogs on the Internet.

What's clear to me is that there are great many Democrats who are now disgusted with the failure of 19 Democratic Senators to join with their 25 brethren to stop the cloture vote against the attempted filibuster of Judge Alito's confirmation vote by Sen. Kerry and friends.

I've even read that the Green Party might be a sanctuary for at least one of these disaffected Democrats.

Some say that there are really only 25 true Democrats in the Senate -- the 25 who voted against cloture.

Is the Democratic Party in a worst crisis now than ever before? Is this the fault of Kerry and friends? What are your opinions on this matter?

Thank you in advance for your thoughtful comments.

60 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
Is the Democratic Party in a worst crisis now than ever before?

ROTFL. Another fantasy by AerospaceFan.

No. The Democrats were in a bigger pickle in 1968, with the murder of RFK and the riots at the DNC in Chicago.

If anyone is sweating right now, it's the GOP, dude. The president's numbers are in the toilet. Two top leaders, Frist and Delay are either under indictment or being investigated for wrong-doing. The Abramoff scandal is on the horizon, and the war in Iraq isn't carrying the American people anymore.

But, again, you're entitled to your fantasies.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1309 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 1):
No. The Democrats were in a bigger pickle in 1968, with the murder of RFK and the riots at the DNC in Chicago

Why would you say that the Democrats were in a pickle? Was there internal dissension within the party, or simply a sense of chaos from the assassination? If the latter, that's quite a different thing.

Moreover, consider this: The Democrats were in control of the Presidency, the courts, and the Congress in the late 1960's. Today, the Democratic Party controls none of these. Would you truly prefer the position of the Democratic Party today than thirty-odd years ago?


User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7388 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1304 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
I'm sure I'm not the only one around here who's been reading some of the liberal blogs on the Internet.

Well there are reports that DNC chairman Howard "the scream" Dean is in the hotseat over reports that the DNC is down to just 5 million in cash.

Also, rumours are floating that Harry Reid may be replaced from his senate post due to eveidence that his donation, of 60 million from tribal Casino owners came from clients of Jack Abramoff.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1297 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Why would you say that the Democrats were in a pickle? Was there internal dissension within the party, or simply a sense of chaos from the assassination? If the latter, that's quite a different thing.

The murder of JFK was just the preamble. The '68 DNC was surrounded by anti-war protests, that turned violent, and Mayor Daly sent the police in and basically clubbed the protesters. If I remember right, a few of the protesters were killed.

Inside the convention hall, there was a clash between those who wanted to vacate Vietnam, and those who wanted to continue the war. Humphrey was for the continuing LBJ's continuation of the floor. There was a lot of chaos on the floor.

Those events, as much as the third-party candidacy by George Wallace, helped elevate Nixon to the presidency. The specter of the turmoil within the building, along with the melee outside, really cast a pall over the Democrats that year. It was an image a lot of voters did not easily forget.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Moreover, consider this: The Democrats were in control of the Presidency, the courts, and the Congress in the late 1960's.

But they were also "in charge", as it were, of what had become an unpopular war. Interesting correlation between then and now, isn't it?

The GOP wasn't exactly thrilled with having to bring Nixon back, after he lost the '60 presidential election, and then lost the California governor's race in '62. He wasn't seen as a winner. But, he promised to end the war-which he didn't, he expaned it-but he made that promise. Most of the country was ready to listen to anyone who said they would end the war (which is why I think RFK would have won the '68 election had he lived).

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Would you truly prefer the position of the Democratic Party today than thirty-odd years ago?

Absolutely. Because it's almost exactly the same position the GOP was back in '68. The irony is historically and ironically delicious, as far as someone like myself, who is interested in history and current events.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1297 times:

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 3):
Harry Reid may be replaced from his senate post due to eveidence that his donation, of 60 million from tribal Casino owners came from clients of Jack Abramoff.

Harry Reid gave $60 million? Got $60 million? What?



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1289 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 4):
The '68 DNC was surrounded by anti-war protests, that turned violent, and Mayor Daly sent the police in and basically clubbed the protesters. If I remember right, a few of the protesters were killed.

Point taken.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 4):
Most of the country was ready to listen to anyone who said they would end the war (which is why I think RFK would have won the '68 election had he lived).

Now, here, I'm not sure this supports your point. Had RFK won, he would simply have taken most of the Democratic Party in his direction. I doubt that he would have had to prevail over a conservative challenger in a subsequent election from within his own party, had he never been assassinated.

This is the party that did nominate, after all, Hubert Humphrey as Vice President under President Johnson, not to mention George McGovern for President in 1972. If the Dixiecrats had had much influence by the late 1960's on the national level, how did McGovern manage to get on the ticket?

[Edited 2006-01-31 05:46:12]

User currently offlineGuitrThree From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2031 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1276 times:

Anyone who spent 10 minutes listening to Kennedy today make a total fool out of not only himself but the entire Democratic Party knows they are in trouble.

Yes, a vote will happen for Alito tomorrow, and strangely enough, as some here say, even if the MAJORITY of the people in this country are Democrats. And the MAJORITY of the people in this country are pro-abortion. And the MAJORITY of the people in this country support John Kerry and Ted Kennedy and Cindy Sheehan, they continue to lose elections, and thus, lose the Supreme Court.

Yes, folks, tomorrow marks yet another nail in the coffin of today's Liberal Party with the turning of the court. Yet not only that, other great news continues to happen. The Democratic party, as stated above, is almost broke. Cindy Sheehan is considering a run against one the parties most well known. Abramoff is now liked to the Democratic leader of the house. Hell, even Brokeback Mountain didn't win a thing...

Yep.. Ted Kennedy today showed his ass.. and it looked remarkably like the Democratic Party in general.



As Seen On FlightRadar24! Radar ==> F-KBNA5
User currently offlineJpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4357 posts, RR: 27
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1269 times:

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Yes, folks, tomorrow marks yet another nail in the coffin of today's Liberal Party with the turning of the court.

Whoa, thats news to me. Don't be a drama queen, ok?

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Cindy Sheehan is considering a run against one the parties most well known.

??? What is your point? Cindy Sheehan doesn't even merit a mention in this discussion, and she will not be a factor if she runs.

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Abramoff is now liked to the Democratic leader of the house.

Everyone knows the Abramoff scandal is unequally linked to Republicans. That said, its effect will be felt more on the outlook of Congress and Washington politics in general, and certainly will not prove to be a bad thing for the Democratic party. It will give incumbents in general some headaches.

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Hell, even Brokeback Mountain didn't win a thing...

O........k.......
I guess this is sort of a semi-joke, but it doesn't make any sense anyway. Sure of the screen actors guild awards, but if the hollywood foreign press is any indication (which it usually is), brokeback will do well at the academy. Not that this is relevant in any way to this discussion.



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1264 times:

how can there be a CIVIL war among uncivilised people? Big grin


I wish I were flying
User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1241 times:

I've got an idea, replace Dean with Cindy Sheehan so that the party can get back to its roots!

User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1238 times:

Quoting Pope (Reply 10):
I've got an idea, replace Dean with Cindy Sheehan so that the party can get back to its roots!

Strangely, the Democratic Party is soon to face even more pressure from its left flank. There is, on C-SPAN, coverage of an impeachment movement against President Bush.

To be honest with you, I was so appalled at the notion that I quickly switched the channel. Impeachment? In a time of war?

I realize that this sounds awfully complacent. I should be ever vigilant against Presidential abuse of power, etc. The basis for this impeachment movement, by appearances, is that the President allegedly "lied" to get us into the Iraq war. And if so, then we're deep into Cindy Sheehan territory, a.k.a. the land of the weeping willies, darkness at noon, etc., etc., and so forth.

Will impeachment be the next wedge issue driven into the Democratic Party?

Only Howard Dean knows for sure. Or not.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1234 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 11):
There is, on C-SPAN, coverage of an impeachment movement against President Bush.

 rotfl 

Let me guess . . . . Kerry? Kennedy? Reid? Pelosi?

The sound - and I mean SOUND defeat of the uber-partisan attempt by Kerry and his pal Kennedy to derail Judge Alito's confirmation might cause some serious rumbles in the Senate. I was disappointed to see Evan Bayh voting in favor of the fillibuster - but hey - he might have White House eyes in '08 and he doesn't want to piss off the extremists that will have to help get him nominated. Namely . . . Kerry? Kennedy? Reid? Pelosi? I'd toss Clinton's name in there too, except I don't view her as an extremist.

So - what's going on in the Democratic Party?

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Anyone who spent 10 minutes listening to Kennedy today make a total fool out of not only himself but the entire Democratic Party knows they are in trouble.

After that diatribe at the Alito hearings, anynoe that still thinks Teddy Kennedy is worth a tinker's dam has a serious problem. He's old, he's worn out, he's passe'. But, go ahead Massechusetts, send him (and Kerry) back to the Senate again . . . the entertainment is excellent.


User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1233 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 11):
There is, on C-SPAN, coverage of an impeachment movement against President Bush.

I feel that I'm a hardcore conservative and I don't have any problem with an investigation of the President. However, the investigation has to be for the right thing. This BS about him lying about WMD's even if true is not an impeachable offense. Lying in and of itself is not a crime, therefore the "high crimes and misdemeanors" requirement of the Constitution is not met.

But, the whole NSA spying mess might be. We live in a constitutional republic and congress has the obligation to investigate claims that the President broke the law. Personally, I think that this is a very grey area but the questions should be asked because nobody is above the law. If a statute made spying on citizens without a search warrant illegal and the president ordered that action without a sufficient legal basis, then he broke the law. From what I've read he's got a position to take that his actions had a legal basis.

Let's have the debate.

I think too often we allow ourselves to believe that dissent weakens our country. I'm of the school of thought that the opposite is true. Opposing ideas need to be debated and tested to see which ones can survive scrutiny. I think that the current behavior of the US Senate is an example of how a tradition of debate over ideas has been replaced by political grandstanding an has resulted in a weaker institution.

IMO, if democrats opposed Alito, then what they should have done is had a real debate about his opinions, not two days of opening statements where everyone lectured the judge in order to get their 30 second sound bite for the evening news. They should have picked 5 or 6 opinions he had written and really entered into a back and forth over what principles these opinions expressed.

If a nominee to the US Supreme Court can't have his opinions stand the scrutiny of the US Senate, well then may be he shouldn't be on the court. But our senators failed us because they didn't really care what his opinions said.


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1232 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
Some say that there are really only 25 true Democrats in the Senate -- the 25 who voted against cloture.

I would say that the left-wing loons, those voting against cloture, are NOT the true democrats. The true democrats are much more moderate and willing to work things out in a civilized manner. These guys are ideologues who want everything their way, or nothing at all. Same mentality as Al Qaeda, if you think about it, although thankfully they have not started blowing themselves up in congress. Maybe Michael Moore should volunteer... Imagine the blubber going all over the place.

To be fair, the right has its share of ideologues, but they don't seem to be as virolent as the ones on the left. Of course that is just my perspective.

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Anyone who spent 10 minutes listening to Kennedy today make a total fool out of not only himself but the entire Democratic Party knows they are in trouble.

 checkmark 

Quoting JpetekYXMD80 (Reply 8):
Everyone knows the Abramoff scandal is unequally linked to Republicans.

That's right, but the more loony democrats have again managed to shoot themselves in the foot over this scandal, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory (or at the very least diminishing the victory greatly.

Howard Dean and other democrats have been going around saying that "the Abramoff scandal is a 100% republican scandal, and that Abramoff did not give a dime to the democrats". And many people believe them, just out of sheer repetition. But it is a clear misrepresentation of the facts.

The fact is that the organization for which Abramoff worked gave about 35% of the money to Democrats, and 65% to Republicans. But Abramoff's PERSONAL donations were 100% to republicans. Whenever Dean or others are asked to explain their statements, they say that they are talking about Abramoff's personal contributions.

The problem is 1) that the explaination is rarely if ever included in the interview, the original soundbyte is much more fun for the media, and 2) Abramoff's personal donations are not in question, as far as I know. They were perfectly legal. It was the organization's donations that are under the spotlight, and they included democrats.

Whenever the democrats come out knowingly distorting facts, it turns people off. Ironically, they are doing the exact same thing as they accused Bush of doing before the Iraq war. The difference is that 3 years later nobody has been able to show any evidence that Bush did lie, and in fact the evidence seems to point that he was being honest. But then the democrats get caught trying to pull a fast one of their own, and so incompetantly as well.

I say the Dems have a serious problem. They need to lose the ideological left side of the party (the Moore, Kennedy, Sheehan section) in order to get some credibility back. But at the same time they have to be careful to maintain critical mass so that they have the numbers to challenge the Republicans, which they cannot do if the wacky third of their members leave.

Frankly, the Dems are in a serious bind, and I don't know how they can get out.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1228 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 12):
So - what's going on in the Democratic Party?

Only Shiva may know. This particular dance of destruction has gone on for quite a while, I reckon.

Quoting Pope (Reply 13):
But, the whole NSA spying mess might be

Perhaps, and perhaps not. But I'm much more practical: To not only change one's horse in mid-battle, but figuratively unholster the Constitutional gun and aim squarely between its eyes, for "principle", would seem rather the wrong thing to do.

I'm all for principle, but oftentimes, principle works best when there is a nation that exists in which it can be contemplated.

In other words, were we not at war, the NSA measures would not be tolerated. But I'm of the school that says that the President is, in fact, entitled to push the Constitutional limits during times of war. Lincoln, after all, suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War. And Truman, years after the end of World War II, attempted to nationalize the steel mills.

Neither were impeached, even though both actions were unconstitutional.

America can be defeated in this war against terror, but only if we defeat ourselves. And the surest way to defeat is to pretend that we can afford it in the name of gazing intently deep into our collective navel.

[Edited 2006-01-31 11:42:59]

User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1222 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 14):
I say the Dems have a serious problem. They need to lose the ideological left side of the party (the Moore, Kennedy, Sheehan section) in order to get some credibility back.

The funny thing, to me, is that it's actually the ideological left that has historically appealed to "the masses" in the Democratic Party. In other words, FDR and LBJ found it politically profitable to expand government at the expense of the rich in the name of helping those who were disadvantaged.

But FDR and LBJ were men of a different era. Even JFK, LBJ's immediate predecessor, had begun to embark upon a trajectory more intent on advancing an abstract national interest than the more common redistributivist approach. Apollo was the brainchild of a man whose vision encompassed more than our affairs here on Earth.

Compare them, shall we, with the left of today, whose Vietnam protest-style anachronisms stand out almost as starkly as the judicial hypocrisy of its two Senators from Massachusetts. Or compare the sheer machismo of nation-building, to say nothing of stairways to heaven, to the abortion-fixated left of NARAL and NOW, or the sexual politics of gay marriage proponents. It may be said, with humor, that in a mere four decades, the Democratic Party has gone from exploring to exfoliating.

This being so, to use their own parlance, it may be time for a complete makeover.

[Edited 2006-01-31 11:58:51]

User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12887 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1206 times:

There is a terrible division within the Democratic Party today. Too much of the party is controlled by those whom are more interested in a particular view of unpopular issues, especially as to Abortion, Affirmative Action, Gay rights/marriage, Blacks and other minority people, attitudes toward those illegally in the USA, use of our military, expanding government and taxing higher to pay for it. This alienates the huge center of White Male Middle Class voters and encourages them to vote Republican, even if it isn't in their real economic interest. Republicans also have played into those emotional issues, bypassing the real economic interests of most Americans that most cannot understand the Government's part in it.
Perhaps the best thing would be for the Social left extremist to spin off into their own party and return the Democratic party to a party of the working class, and focusing on the issues of them.


User currently offlineMidnightMike From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2892 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1202 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 14):
Howard Dean and other democrats have been going around saying that "the Abramoff scandal is a 100% republican scandal, and that Abramoff did not give a dime to the democrats". And many people believe them, just out of sheer repetition. But it is a clear misrepresentation of the facts.

The fact is that the organization for which Abramoff worked gave about 35% of the money to Democrats, and 65% to Republicans. But Abramoff's PERSONAL donations were 100% to republicans. Whenever Dean or others are asked to explain their statements, they say that they are talking about Abramoff's personal contributions.

The problem is 1) that the explaination is rarely if ever included in the interview, the original soundbyte is much more fun for the media, and 2) Abramoff's personal donations are not in question, as far as I know. They were perfectly legal. It was the organization's donations that are under the spotlight, and they included democrats.

That just about sums it up, well said......



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1196 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 16):
It may be said, with humor, that in a mere four decades, the Democratic Party has gone from exploring to exfoliating

And it may be said, with humor, that in a mere three decades, the Republican Party is all going back to jail.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1195 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
Is the Democratic Party in a worst crisis now than ever before? Is this the fault of Kerry and friends? What are your opinions on this matter?

No, this is not the worst crisis for the Democratic Party. No, it is not the fault of Kerry.

The problem is that the Democratic Party has strayed. The Democratic Party used to be the party of the people, the party of the common man. Now they are the exact same as the Republicans and have been for a while. Everyone is bought and paid for and the people are shafted. I firmly believe there are more Democrats in the country than Republicans, but there are more Republican voters than there are Democratic voters. If you preach almost the exact same message as your opponent, there is no reason to get off one's butt and vote for that person. Both parties have shifted noticeably to the right: the Republican Party embodied by the politicians in DC that Richard Nixon is too left wing for them now, and the Democratic Party has moved to the ground the Republican Party used to occupy. If you look at the basic platforms of the two parties, they have mostly the same ideas, they just differ on how they want to implement the plans.

If the gods had meant for us to vote, they would have given us candidates. Vote Kinky for Governor!

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1185 times:

Quoting Texan (Reply 20):
The problem is that the Democratic Party has strayed. The Democratic Party used to be the party of the people, the party of the common man. Now they are the exact same as the Republicans and have been for a while. Everyone is bought and paid for and the people are shafted.

 checkmark 

Quoting Texan (Reply 20):
Both parties have shifted noticeably to the right:

I think the opposite. Both parties have moved sharply to the left.

- One of the basic principles of conservatism is small government. Neither party now even pretends to support that concept. That's a shift left.

- 30 years ago nobody would have dreamed of prayer in school or having a christian cross in a public park or even around a teacher's neck being a symptom of government coersion. That's a shift left.

- Nobody questions anymore the moral validity of the government being the principle guarantor of people's retirements and medical care. Shift left.

There are tons more examples.


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1185 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 1):
But, again, you're entitled to your fantasies.

Evidently some at the Washington Post share Aerospace's fantasies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2006/01/30/AR2006013001319.html

Quote:
Tasting Victory, Liberals Instead Have a Food Fight

By Dana Milbank

Tuesday, January 31, 2006; Page A02

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds congressional Democrats in the best position they've held in 14 years, besting President Bush and Republican lawmakers on Iraq, the economy, health care, immigration, ethics and more.

All of which can mean only one thing: It is time for the Democrats to eat their own.

Right on cue, liberal activists including Cindy Sheehan and Ramsey Clark gathered yesterday at the Busboys & Poets restaurant and bookshop at 14th and V streets NW for what they billed as a forum on "The Impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney." But the participants, while charging the administration with "crimes against humanity," a "war of aggression" and even "the supreme international crime," inevitably turned their wrath on congressional Democrats, whom they regarded as a bunch of wimps.

I tend to agree with you, though - the democrats were in much worse shape in 1968.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1178 times:

Okay, this is getting really bizarre:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
Is the Democratic Party in a worst crisis now than ever before?



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 22):
Evidently some at the Washington Post share Aerospace's fantasies.



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 22):
The new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds congressional Democrats in the best position they've held in 14 years, besting President Bush and Republican lawmakers on Iraq, the economy, health care, immigration, ethics and more.

So what is it group? If you can't even agree upon if the Dems are in their worst crisis or not in under 25 posts, I dunno ... seems like the WaPo got it right in their opening paragraph, then went on a Cindy Sheehan hate-fest. Like she represents much in politics at the moment.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1174 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 23):
So what is it group? If you can't even agree upon if the Dems are in their worst crisis or not in under 25 posts,

That's the whole point, Westy. With all the republican screwups in Iraq, scandals in congress, Katrina screwups, etc. etc., the democrats ARE perfectly placed to take over the country. They SHOULD be able to. But the democratic party is so screwed up itself that it is doubtful that they can get their collective fingers out of each others' asses long enough to do what has to be done in order to sieze the opportunity. They are grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory (so far, anyway)


25 AeroWesty : The Republicans hold both houses of Congress, the White House, and the next set of elections isn't until November. Everytime the Dems take a stand, e
26 Cfalk : 1) Stop looking in the past ("Bush lied") and start looking forward ("This is what we what to do"). The democrats appear to be driving using only the
27 AeroWesty : They have. They've moved right along to "Bush broke the law". There are similar comparisons that can be made for the actions of those in the Republic
28 Post contains images Texan : Well, economically the "Conservatives" in Congress have moved to god knows where, following the same pattern as Reagan and Bush I. It has been a long
29 Halls120 : I agree. Kennedy and Kerry's absolutely USELESS fight last night to prolong the debate on Alito was incredibly stupid, and will be used against democ
30 Falcon84 : Bush isn't God; he isn't the whole country; he's one man, and the war will go on whether he is there or not. He isn't Omnipotent. Chill out. Besides,
31 Pope : We already have a constitutional amendment which nationalizes discrimination. The 14th. That amendment doesn't say you can't discriminate, it says th
32 Falcon84 : Fair enough. Then why do you need an amendment saying that certain Americans aren't as equal as others, Pope? Is this amendment SO NECESSARY to the p
33 Pope : Wait wait wait. I'm not for the anti-marriage amendment at all. In fact, in separate posts I've come out in complete opposition to it. To me that's j
34 AeroWesty : I agree with you there, and as I've stated before, this country has become paralyzed over the abortion issue, and will continue to be from both the l
35 AerospaceFan : That's not entirely correct, in my opinion. It is the Democrats who have become paralyzed by the abortion issue -- using it as the litmus test for th
36 AeroWesty : Sir, put down the bottle. Two words: Harriet Miers. The uproar within the Republican party was even louder than from the Democrats over just this iss
37 Falcon84 : I just read that on that other post, Pope, and I think you're dead on in what you said there. My apology for jumping the gun on that one.
38 AerospaceFan : The uproar within the Republican Party over Harriet Miers was unusual, and not entirely framed within the terms you imply. Miers was simply not in th
39 Pope : The process brought us Miers. IMO that selection was made in order to present a candidate that had no record to critize instead of the best possible
40 AeroWesty : We are talking about the same Republicans as in the ones in the United States of America, correct? I'm curious where this was a question in this thre
41 AerospaceFan : I agree with you. It was polemicists like Ann Coulter who led the most public charge against Miers, and Coulter essentially "ratted her out" on the l
42 Post contains links and images Cfalk : Still looking at the past. Not that they should not do it at all, but that is all they seem to do. I don't remember any republicans on the comittee g
43 Post contains links AeroWesty : http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/02/news/web.0102bush.php "Senator Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican and chairman of the Judiciary Committe
44 Cfalk : Let me repeat: Not that they should not do it at all, but that is all they seem to do.
45 Post contains links and images AeroWesty : Right you are. Democrats should align themselves with these forward-thinking Republicans. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/politics/29health.html "T
46 Cfalk : Really? I never heard him say that. All I heard from him was Bush-bashing and vague ideas like "work together with our allies". And that is his fault
47 Post contains links Texan : Source: U.S. Treasury Department While income tax rates did rise slightly during Clinton's tenure, he also passed a tax cut in 1997 which reduced tax
48 Post contains images AeroWesty : Okay, now I have to borrow a symbol from our friend in Anchorage. Just Google "Kerry" and "health care". Honestly, such short memories.
49 JetJock22 : That's a ballsy call, especially being from Texas. Kudos to that.
50 Cfalk : You missed the point. I shouldn't have to. I'm a voter. I wanted to hear what he had to say, and I did not hear anything I found interesting. I do re
51 Post contains images AeroWesty : Since the campaign is over, all I can do is point you to the web. I heard plenty of campaign speeches, and (horrors!) television commercials by Kerry
52 Post contains images Texan : Westy, I unfortunately have to agree with Charles here We had many debates over this, where I basically repeated what Charles said. Kerry had decent
53 AeroWesty : Gee, and I kept hearing things like, "We're going to let everybody buy into the same health-care plan senators and congressmen give themselves", alon
54 Post contains images Texan : That could be. Kerry never stumped here and we had no commercials. And when in St. Louis I rarely watched TV, so I would not have seen those ads even
55 Post contains images Pope : This issue has been beat to death.
56 GuitrThree : Delusions of grandeur? Delusions of grandeur? Democratic Superstar John Kerry flies half-way around the world to start a filibuster that ends with le
57 FDXMECH : I disagree. Most people I talk to, it never even comes up. Maybe the Dems are paralyzed over this issue, but if they step the outside the office, the
58 Texan : Change it in politicians in general and I agree. It is most definitely not just the Democrats or just the pro-choice groups. Completely agree that mo
59 SATX : At this point there is no reason to assume anything will change anytime soon. The Republicans have nothing to fear from the Average politically-minde
60 AerospaceFan : Just take the Arlen Specter challenge: Can you name a prominent Democrat currently on the national stage who is pro-life? Arlen Specter, the Chair of
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Civil War Goes To Oregon State posted Sat Nov 25 2006 07:26:48 by S12PPL
Have We Reached True Civil War In Iraq? posted Fri Nov 24 2006 20:36:10 by Falcon84
Sri Lanka: Sliding Into Full Civil War Again? posted Tue Sep 5 2006 21:08:21 by MaverickM11
70 Years Ago: Spanish Civil War Began posted Wed Jul 19 2006 21:22:29 by MD11Engineer
The Next Civil War posted Mon Apr 10 2006 17:42:54 by AsstChiefMark
My Country Is In Civil War, Says Former Iraqi Pm! posted Sun Mar 19 2006 16:41:46 by Sabenapilot
The End Of All US Illusions For Iraq: Civil War!? posted Wed Mar 1 2006 10:20:46 by Sabenapilot
Has The Dreaded Iraqi Civil War Started? posted Wed Feb 22 2006 23:28:34 by Prebennorholm
Has The Dreaded Iraqi Civil War Started? posted Wed Feb 22 2006 23:27:47 by Prebennorholm
Men's College Basketball: 324th Civil War! posted Sat Dec 31 2005 23:13:17 by S12PPL