satx
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:26 am

What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:41 am

What the democrats need to do to win back the Whitehouse...

Become more conservative. Seriously, there is no other way. The public opinion polls may be hard on Bush at the moment, but any liberal that goes up against the next conservative will still be in a lower position by the time the next "swift boat veterans" or similar group gets a chance to rail against them. The only way the democrats can win back the Whitehouse is if they become nearly as conservative as the republicans. Of course, by the time that happens, what will be the point of voting anyway?
Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:43 am

Quoting SATX (Thread starter):
The only way the democrats can win back the Whitehouse is if they become nearly as conservative as the republicans.

Would that be the "tax cut and spend" conservatives, or the real conservatives?
International Homo of Mystery
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:05 am

Quoting SATX (Thread starter):
Become more conservative.

"Moderate" is probably a more palatable word. Smile

Those of you who speak for the Democratic party could go a long ways to help the cause if you would do a few things.

  • Don't run Hillary. Way too widely disliked already. Uphill fight.


  • Don't run Kerry. Seen by the right as so seriously flawed that he actually lost to Dubya - who most of us did not want to vote for. (You asked.)


  • Clamp a gag on people who use words like "flyover states" to describe 95% of the USA. That is insulting in the extreme. That is going-to-war-over insulting.


  • Stop characterizing people with some conservative leanings as redneck, hillbilly ChristianFundie, nazi, - you know what I mean. Some of us are actually educated, cultured and sincere. Deal with that.


  • A little more distance between your center and your extreme fringies. (We need to do the same on the right.) Don't argue in defense of the verbal diarrhea of the likes of the moron Ward Churchill. That utterly backs us righties into a corner. And for what? Some principle? If THAT represents your principles expect a drubbing in '08.


  • Back off gun control. (most of us Repubs would like our party to back off on abortion) We don't trust people who don't trust us with guns. We do not trust your motives when you come after ANY of our Contstitutional rights. Understand that most of us are more mistrustful of anti-gun legislation than we are of the Patriot Act.


  • That's enough for now. Ought to stir something up with just that list.
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    Superfly
    Posts: 37735
    Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:09 am

    SATX:
    It's looking like conservative Democrats Mark Warner and Evan Bayh have the best shot at winning and can certainly defeat the GOP candidate (who ever that is) because in the GOP side, Bill Frist may have too much ethical baggage if he hasn't been thrown in the slammer by 2008. Giulani nor Rice would piss off the conservative base.


    Conservative Democrats Bill Clinton and Al Gore won, well Gore won the popular vote at least.
    Liberal Democrat John Kerry came very, very close to beating Dubya but I think a lot of Kerry votes was a result millions who hated Bush.
    The Cheney/Rove machine scared just enough potiental Kerry votes with the gay marriage issue and the press made a big deal with Tereza's "shove it" comment.
    Bring back the Concorde
     
    jaysit
    Posts: 10186
    Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:10 am

    I doubt if the Dems would win even if every Republican in Congress was behind bars.

    They just know how to screw it up.
    Atheism is Myth Understood.
     
    Superfly
    Posts: 37735
    Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:17 am

    Wow SlamClick, I agree with all of your points in a political thread.  Wow!
    This is a first!

    Although I am a lefty, I understand and accept the fact that many people aren't and many buy in to the media's right-wing pro-corperate slant. I understand that is what cards the Democrats have to work with.
    Bring back the Concorde
     
    slider
    Posts: 6817
    Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:17 am

    They need to put a goddamn muzzle on that lunatic Howard Dean for starters....


    But yes, they do need to become more moderate. That's how Clinton got elected, after all--he took the moderate stance on many positions, almost conservative. It worked.
     
    diamond
    Posts: 3000
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:21 am





    [Edited 2005-12-08 19:42:31]
    Blank.
     
    Superfly
    Posts: 37735
    Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:23 am

    Quoting Slider (Reply 6):
    That's how Clinton got elected, after all--he took the moderate stance on many positions, almost conservative. It worked.

    His southern drawl also helped him in conservative states. Bill Clinton is a very smart man but it's a shame that intelligence is frowned upon in many parts of the country. Many voters in red states like to see a candidate that talks rather simple. The right-wing of the GOP didn't care for Papa Bush because he was an intelligent, well educated New Englander.
    Bring back the Concorde
     
    usnseallt82
    Posts: 4727
    Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:49 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:39 am

    Quoting SATX (Thread starter):
    What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Find a platform....

















    Seriously.  yes 
    Crye me a river
     
    MaverickM11
    Posts: 15455
    Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:44 am

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 5):
    Wow SlamClick, I agree with all of your points in a political thread.

    I'm speechless.

    Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 9):
    Find a platform....

    That would be a step in the right direction.
    E pur si muove -Galileo
     
    Matt D
    Posts: 8907
    Joined: Fri Nov 19, 1999 6:00 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:47 am

    All of you raise excellent points.

    But the sad truth is that it's all going to boil down to 1) the best looking candidate who can 2) hurl the best insults in the shortest time and 3) whoevers staff can put together the most neatly packaged 30 second sound bites, regardless of factual content.
     
    AeroWesty
    Posts: 19551
    Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:49 am

    Quoting Matt D (Reply 11):
    the best looking candidate

    :: note to self :: Matt D thinks Bush is hot.
    International Homo of Mystery
     
    9VSPO
    Posts: 4187
    Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 9:03 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:54 am

    Quoting SATX (Thread starter):
    What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Voters with a brain?
     
    tristarenvy
    Posts: 2235
    Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:07 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:55 am

    Quoting SATX (Thread starter):
    What the democrats need to do to win back the Whitehouse...

    Prayer? No, wait...
    If you don't stand for SOMETHING, you'll fall for ANYTHING.
     
    usnseallt82
    Posts: 4727
    Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:49 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:56 am

    Quoting Matt D (Reply 11):
    But the sad truth is that it's all going to boil down to 1) the best looking candidate who can

    Already ruled out 99% of democrats...

    Quoting Matt D (Reply 11):
    2) hurl the best insults in the shortest time and

    Most of them can't find the thumb stuck in their ass, so speed and craftiness probably won't be mixed well...

    Quoting Matt D (Reply 11):
    3) whoevers staff can put together the most neatly packaged 30 second sound bites, regardless of factual content.

    Maybe if they put up an ad with flying ninjas?

    Seriously, its going to take a hell of a lot more than this. While a good portion of the voting public doesn't approve of the current administration, they are still very reluctant to vote in a democrat just because of what's going on. That says quite a bit about the DNC.

    Find a platform, learn to spell out what it is, get raging lunatics off the stage, and then find a candidate who won't piss it away........this is what would have to happen. Why won't it work with the dems?? Because every damned one of them is too power-hungry to realize the true power of a collective body.
    Crye me a river
     
    ANCFlyer
    Posts: 21391
    Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:58 am

    Discussed . . . . ad nauseam

    http://www.airliners.net/discussions/non_aviation/read.main/978089

    Good conversation in Falcon's thread as well . . .

    Perhaps a review before this one continues . . .

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 2):
    "Moderate" is probably a more palatable word.

     checkmark 

    Move toward the center, not to the right. We've got enough right wingers out here now. We need more centrists . . . or a viable third party built around a centrist theme that is neither beholding to the Democrats or the Republicans.

    Then get out of mudslinging business. Find a platform that doesn't say "Stay the Course" or "I Have a Plan" and be able to demonstrate and articulate how that platform will help all Americans . . . don't just profess to either stick with what we have or we can do better . . .
    FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
     
    9VSPO
    Posts: 4187
    Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 9:03 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:01 am

    From a UK perspective I thought Bill Clinton was pretty good. Big grin
     
    usnseallt82
    Posts: 4727
    Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:49 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:02 am

    Quoting 9VSPO (Reply 17):
    From a UK perspective I thought Bill Clinton was pretty good.

    That's what she said.  Big grin

    Signed,
    Bill
    Crye me a river
     
    AeroWesty
    Posts: 19551
    Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:06 am

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 16):
    Move toward the center, not to the right

    This I agree with, and as an odd consequence of history, the overt slide to the right that the Republican Party has taken in the past decade or two is exactly what will bring the Democrats more to the center.

    I hope that when the party in the White House does change, because we all know it will someday, it will because of what the party stands for, and not because of being able to blame the other for missteps that weakens the country (yes, I am bothered by our soaring debt ...). Either party should be able to win fair and square without making the country suffer in the process.
    International Homo of Mystery
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:11 am

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 5):
    Wow SlamClick, I agree with all of your points in a political thread.
    This is a first!

    Hey, the old hard-line Slammer would have taken that as a sign that he needed to re-think some of it. Smile If I may help you cage your political gyros again, I was answering the question what should they do and not necessarily endorsing those things. It may be that deep in my conservative soul (oxymoron anyone?) I don't want them to do these things.

    The cynical views about how the next election will be won are pretty much correct, it is mostly theater. My biggest fear in '04 was that Bush would consider a victory a "mandate from the people" which he obviously did. My fear for '08 is that whoever wins will think the same way. I'd be happy to send them my tax dollars for the rest of my life, let them name every public building after themselves, put their own pictures on our money and stamps if they'd just stay in Washington and leave us alone. Most of all if they would just STOP MAKING NEW LAWS!

    Leave it alone.
    Leave it all alone.

    (sigh)
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    cfalk
    Posts: 10221
    Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:24 am

    Quoting SATX (Thread starter):
    Become more conservative. Seriously, there is no other way. The public opinion polls may be hard on Bush at the moment, but any liberal that goes up against the next conservative will still be in a lower position by the time the next "swift boat veterans" or similar group gets a chance to rail against them. The only way the democrats can win back the Whitehouse is if they become nearly as conservative as the republicans. Of course, by the time that happens, what will be the point of voting anyway?

    Agreed. In spite of poor popularity ratings for Bush, and some pretty obvious failings, the Dems have not been able to capitalize on it. Their popularity is almost as bad.

    I think it is because many people feel that the far-left has hijacked the Democratic Party. John Kerry tried desperately to position himself as a centrist, but his 20+ years of voting records showed him for what he really was.

    There was one Democrat that I would have voted for against Bush in 2004. But Joe Lieberman was blasted out of the primaries way too fast. This guy is pretty solidly in the center, is an experienced member of the senate, and most importantly seems to be an honest, thoughtful and down-to-earth guy. I think he would have made an excellent president, if a little on the boring side.

    All the other candidates were simply awful, most especially Dean, Kerry, and Edwards. The fact that they lost against a President who fucked up the Iraq aftermath, had several unpopular and controversial members of his administration, , was tagged as a far right "neo-con" and had as much public speaking ability as a dried apricot, is proof of how truely BAD the democratic candidates were.

    The party needs to ditch their extremist elements. That includes people like Michael Moore and the Hollywood crowd. That also includes canning Howard Dean from the DNC chair - one of the most telling clues that the Dems have been hijacked by the nutty fringe. Denounce many of the actions of the ACLU, Cindy Sheehan, and other kooks.

    The Democratic Party should be just slightly left of center. If they get that balance right, they can't lose in 2008. But if they run Hillary Clinton, Kerry, or someone similar, they will lose. Don't underestimate Karl Rove - he's probably the smartest man in Washington, and will certainly help to put together a powerful Republican list. The Dems have to be solidly mainstream to fight successfully.

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 5):
    many buy in to the media's right-wing pro-corperate slant.

    Yeah, right. 2 recent examples:

    When Joe Lieberman made a speech saying how the U.S. must stay in Iraq until the mission is completed, it hardly got any press. But when Murtha says "cut and run!", it's everywhere for a week.

    National polls show that many people have a very poor opinion of the overall economy today, but very few say that they have personally seen evidence of economic hardship within their own businesses. This clearly shows how opinion can be colored by constant repitition of how fragile and poor the economy is.
    The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
     
    ANCFlyer
    Posts: 21391
    Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:32 am

    Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 19):
    as an odd consequence of history, the overt slide to the right that the Republican Party has taken in the past decade or two is exactly what will bring the Democrats more to the center.

    . . . . . if the Democrats are smart about it . . . . with few exceptions, no evidence of that in recent years. No way in hell Kerry or Gore or Dean are anywhere near the center - neither is Hillary (regardless of her recent portrayal to the contrary).

    Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 19):
    and not because of being able to blame the other for missteps that weakens the country

    Ahhh, yes, ye old Partisan Politics hard at work. Screw the country - what does the PARTY want. Pretty tiring game.

    How about "Screw the Party" - what does the COUNTRY want for a change?? That'd be a switch wouldn't it!
    FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
     
    StevenUhl777
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 11:02 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:37 am

    Quoting Cfalk (Reply 21):
    There was one Democrat that I would have voted for against Bush in 2004. But Joe Lieberman was blasted out of the primaries way too fast

     checkmark  As a Republican, I have to say that I have a tremendous amount of respect for Sen. Lieberman. Had it been Joe vs. W, I would have crossed and voted for Joe.

    Quoting Cfalk (Reply 21):
    This guy is pretty solidly in the center, is an experienced member of the senate, and most importantly seems to be an honest, thoughtful and down-to-earth guy. I think he would have made an excellent president, if a little on the boring side.

     checkmark  Unfortunately, the majority of the American voting public is too stupid and ignorant to look at attributes like this. Jimmy Carter was probably the nicest guy around, and he was obliterated by everyone. Not that I agree with him on anything, but you get the idea. Had Joe Lieberman aligned himself with another more moderate Dem. in 2000, he would have been VP then, and probably still today. Instead, he chose that eco-terrorist moron Al Gore. Sad, very sad.
    And the winner for best actress is....REESE WITHERSPOON for 'Walk the Line'!!!!!!!!
     
    satx
    Posts: 2771
    Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:26 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:59 am

    Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 9):
    Find a platform....

    Our platform is pro-choice, pro-environment, separation of church and state, anti-war, anti-trust, etc. Just because you may not agree with any of these ideals doesn't mean they're suddenly no longer a valid platform.

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 16):
    Move toward the center, not to the right.

    It's all one in the same. There's no point in playing with semantics. However much to the right the Democrats move will become the new left. What, if any, distance remains between the new left and the right will become the new center. The Democrats will never become a party of the center because we only have two parties to pick from in the first place. Eventually, almost everyone will end up on the right of where we all used to be.

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 16):
    We need more centrists . . . or a viable third party built around a centrist theme that is neither beholding to the Democrats or the Republicans.

    There wasn't much of a distinction between Clinton and Bush 41, but the fact that Bush 43 got re-elected shows that the country has moved a considerable distance to the right. Or it shows that you can't trust Diebold Election Systems (a major vote counting system and strong supporter of the Republican platform). Take your pick.

    Quoting StevenUhl777 (Reply 23):
    As a Republican, I have to say that I have a tremendous amount of respect for Sen. Lieberman. Had it been Joe vs. W, I would have crossed and voted for Joe.

    Sen. Lieberman isn't much of a democrat, IMO.

    Anyway, I'd almost rather that the democrats lose on principle than allow themselves to be molded by the domestic media, corporate America, and the self-absorbed Bible belt.
    Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
     
    seb146
    Posts: 14334
    Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:07 am

    Well, according to the Republican spin machine, the Democrats are just a bunch of God-hating fags.

    Sadly, I think what the Dems need to do to win back the White House is attack. Get a spin machine and paint the Republicans as really really bad people. Unfortunatly, that is the way it will work.

    GO CANUCKS!!
    Patriotic and Proud Liberal
     
    satx
    Posts: 2771
    Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:26 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:15 am

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):
    . . . . if the Democrats are smart about it . . . . with few exceptions, no evidence of that in recent years.

    Bashing the Republicans 30% of the time and bashing the democrats 70% of the time isn't being even-handed. Not that I would ever expect you to admit that.

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):
    No way in hell Kerry or Gore or Dean are anywhere near the center - neither is Hillary (regardless of her recent portrayal to the contrary).

    Gore was very much in the (old) center IMO, and Kerry was much closer to the center than Dean was. The very fact that you group them all together (with Hillary, even) is just more evidence that you don't really see them as serparate people to be judged individually, but rather you judge them all with a very broad brush. Isn't that what you usually bash other people for doing?
    Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
     
    Superfly
    Posts: 37735
    Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:17 am

    Quoting Cfalk (Reply 21):
    When Joe Lieberman made a speech saying how the U.S. must stay in Iraq until the mission is completed, it hardly got any press. But when Murtha says "cut and run!", it's everywhere for a week.

    Murtha's comments carry more weight because he actually served in combat and is a military hawk as well. Big deal what Lieberman says!
    He is a conservative Democrat in a blue state and is often on he wrong side of important issues such as wars.
    Bring back the Concorde
     
    ANCFlyer
    Posts: 21391
    Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:29 am

    Quoting SATX (Reply 24):
    Our platform is pro-choice, pro-environment, separation of church and state, anti-war, anti-trust, etc. Just because you may not agree with any of these ideals doesn't mean they're suddenly no longer a valid platform.

    Why would you assume I don't agree with these. Once again you demonstrate your ability to lecture and assume without research. But, that's okay . . . it's to be expected   

    Pro-Choice:   
    Pro-Environment: Half a   
    Anti-War:   
    Anti-Trust:   
    Sep of Church and State: No Position
    Gay Rights:  checkmark 


    Anything else you'd like to know?

    Quoting SATX (Reply 24):
    Eventually, almost everyone will end up on the right of where we all used to be.

    Interestingly, I wonder just how much more to the right some of the Republicans can go? Some are falling off the plain already!

    Quoting SATX (Reply 24):
    There wasn't much of a distinction between Clinton and Bush 41, but the fact that Bush 43 got re-elected shows that the country has moved a considerable distance to the right. Or it shows that you can't trust Diebold Election Systems (a major vote counting system and strong supporter of the Republican platform). Take your pick.

    Option Three (which you conveniently left out): That the Democrats ran a worthless ho hum candidate . . . therein lies the answer to your test SATX. I don't believe most folks voted FOR Bush as much as I believe most folks voted AGAINST Kerry. Voting against "Mr. I Have A Plan but I can't tell you about it (cause, really I don't have one, but it sounds good to say that in a campaign)" was why my vote went to Bush.

    Quoting SATX (Reply 24):
    Sen. Lieberman isn't much of a democrat, IMO.

    As suspected. And he's a damned moderate Democrat. So is Joe Biden, but I'd suspect you don't care for him either.

    Quoting SATX (Reply 26):
    Gore was very much in the (old) center IMO, and Kerry was much closer to the center than Dean was. The very fact that you group them all together (with Hillary, even) is just more evidence that you don't really see them as serparate people to be judged individually, but rather you judge them all with a very broad brush

    I don't subscribe to that theory.

    I think Gore is a Bunny Hugging, Tree Hugging Environmental Nutjob with the personality of a doorstop that would have done no good in this country for industry or energy.

    Kerry simply didn't have a plan, no plan, contrary to what he said every single time he got in front of a camera "We Have A Plan To ABC -XYZ". But there was no plan, he is hollow and out of touch . . . if it doesn't include a Snow Board or a Bottle of Heinz Ketchup it doesn't phase him. There were other things, like his notable absence from the Intelligence Committee meetings, non-disclosure of his complete military record (sans anything classified) which only he can authorize, and again, the persona of a scrub brush . . . etc. Old news now, as he's still Senator Kerry.

    Dean is the furthest left of all of them. I agree with you there, no question. His extremist views that he continues to purvey through his numerous speeches and appearances (Tonight Show the other night, what an ass) demonstrate his extremism.

    Hillary is, IMO, a psuedo-centrist. I'm not convinced yet she's "changed" like some people profess. I think it's a put up job. No evidence to the contrary, IMO.

    That better for you? No broad brush applied there.

    [Edited 2005-12-08 21:31:21]
    FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
     
    dvk
    Posts: 1017
    Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2000 12:18 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 6:14 am

    Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 15):
    Quoting Matt D (Reply 11):
    But the sad truth is that it's all going to boil down to 1) the best looking candidate who can

    Already ruled out 99% of democrats...

    But the other 1% includes the VERY handsome Evan Bayh.  Wink
    I'm not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information.
     
    slider
    Posts: 6817
    Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 6:22 am

    Quoting StevenUhl777 (Reply 23):
    I have to say that I have a tremendous amount of respect for Sen. Lieberman. Had it been Joe vs. W, I would have crossed and voted for Joe.

    Ditto- and he just returned from his 4th trip to Iraq in a year and had some very astute observations that were summarily ignored by the media. Murtha got the pub for his rant, but Liberman's observations--largely because they were in contrast to the DNC party line and conventional wisdom--went under the radar. More importantly--and as you guys all know I'm one of the most critical people of pretty much ALL the elected oligarchs--I believe Joe Lieberman is one of the few decent men in the Senate; an honest man who does want to serve the people and not his party master or special interests.

    Quoting Seb146 (Reply 25):
    Sadly, I think what the Dems need to do to win back the White House is attack.

    You're joking, right? That's all their platform has been for years--that is exactly the crux of their problem--that they DO attack but never offer solutions or engage in an honest debate of the issues free from the ____(insert here) reactionary line of the day.

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 28):
    Hillary is, IMO, a psuedo-centrist. I'm not convinced yet she's "changed" like some people profess. I think it's a put up job. No evidence to the contrary, IMO.

    I think Hillary is a total Marxist and her posturing as a centrist as of late is a deliberately and well-crafted campaign that is a precursor to a presidential campaign. "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Hey, if it sounds like a Marxist and acts like a Marxist....
     
    dl021
    Posts: 10836
    Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 6:27 am

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 8):
    Many voters in red states like to see a candidate that talks rather simple. The right-wing of the GOP didn't care for Papa Bush because he was an intelligent, well educated New Englander.

    Well, you say you agree with Slammers point but proceed to insult people you refer to as "red-staters" saying we don't want someone smart?

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 3):
    Conservative Democrats Bill Clinton and Al Gore won, well Gore won the popular vote at least.

    Bill Clinton never, ever won the presidency with the majority of the popular vote. He ended up with a plurality because the conservative vote split between the Republicans and whichever party Perot was funding.

    Gore a conservative? He was a reed that bent with the wind.

    Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 10):
    Quoting Superfly (Reply 5):
    Wow SlamClick, I agree with all of your points in a political thread.

    I'm speechless.

    Don't be.....Fly immediately disabused that notion....see above.

    Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 15):
    Quoting Matt D (Reply 11):
    3) whoevers staff can put together the most neatly packaged 30 second sound bites, regardless of factual content.

    Maybe if they put up an ad with flying ninjas?

    Now, that'd at least be cool.

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 20):
    Most of all if they would just STOP MAKING NEW LAWS!

    What, and actually enforce the old ones? But then what would Congress have to do? C'mon...they have to justify their existence. That's what lawyers do.

    Quoting StevenUhl777 (Reply 23):
    Unfortunately, the majority of the American voting public is too stupid and ignorant to look at attributes like this. Jimmy Carter was probably the nicest guy around, and he was obliterated by everyone

    Jimmy Carter was obliterated in the election because his presidency was a failure in nearly every sense of the word.

    And the public is not stupid...calling them that may be the quick and easy thing to do, but it is not true. People are simply treated as if they were stupid.

    Quoting SATX (Reply 26):
    Gore was very much in the (old) center IMO

    On which planet?

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 27):
    Quoting Cfalk (Reply 21):
    When Joe Lieberman made a speech saying how the U.S. must stay in Iraq until the mission is completed, it hardly got any press. But when Murtha says "cut and run!", it's everywhere for a week.

    Murtha's comments carry more weight because he actually served in combat and is a military hawk as well. Big deal what Lieberman says!

    Murtha was a company grade officer during Vietnam then went to the reserves, and his opinions about the Iraq war have been refuted by every senior retired officer out there on either side of the political spectrum.
    Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
     
    FriendlySkies
    Posts: 3540
    Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:57 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 6:31 am

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):
    How about "Screw the Party" - what does the COUNTRY want for a change?? That'd be a switch wouldn't it!

    If that actually mattered to politicians, then we'd always have a moderate president....

    The biggest reason I hate politics, right there.
     
    BN747
    Posts: 5344
    Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 5:48 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:08 am

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 31):
    Jimmy Carter was obliterated in the election because his presidency was a failure in nearly every sense of the word.

    Pure BS! His presidency was a sealed failure due to:

    1) An 'intentional' failed Hostage rescue attempt. If they'd had succeeded, Carter would have been hailed a hero (even though it was military brass engineered the planning) Everything the Israelies did RIGHT in Entebbe (1976) our great brass would screw it up royally in 1980 (Operation Eagle Claw). Undoubtedly, had they put their heart into it rather than shucking the commander-in-chief because they felt he wasn't hawkish enough (his nixing the B1 Bomber). In the end, they got their man, Reagan-along with a Trillion dollar defense built-up that yielded a bunch of crap that didn't work anyway. Money went everywhere in the military.. except the rank and file. Just like today, the military prefers a hawk--while he sticks it to the rank and file. Heaven forbid, if the rank and file every got hold of 'a clue'.

    No president other than FDR spend the majority of his time concentrating on domestic issues.. Carter was (and still is) a man who loves America and works relentless to guide it to what it can truly be.. unlike Reagan who was in love with the 'image' of America and spent what few waking hours he had hyping that 'image'. What we've seen Carter do after his presidency was no different than what he was doing while in office. The Press (and corporate America) has never cared for a 'President of ALL the people' aka Clinton and Carter.

    It's amazing how everyone forgets what they originally wanted, on the heals of extensive criminal lying and deceit (serious sh*t here, not blow job/sex lies) aka Richard Nixon, Spiro Agnew and Gerald Ford's ridiculous pardon. America had had enough... and wanted a fresh start and honesty in Gov't. Carter promised and gave it to them. It turns out honesty left a nasty taste in the mouths of corporate America and the military--they apparently had all they could take and did something about it, the 1st act of 'national spin control' by defining Carter in their own way and making people who say things like "his presidency was a failure in nearly every sense of the word"... and believe it was true. One thing's for certain, we apparently love a good liar and being bullsh*tted to death... Nixon should have just hung in there.. perhaps the American people would have come to their senses and preferred the good ol' liar and a cheat, and kept him in office.

    As for the Dems to get back into the WH... yeah, become more conservative so we have TWO conservative parties to choose from... that oughta do it.

    BN747

    [Edited 2005-12-08 23:09:56]
    "Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
     
    dl021
    Posts: 10836
    Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:20 am

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    An 'intentional' failed Hostage rescue attempt. If they'd had succeeded, Carter would have been hailed a hero (even though it was military brass engineered the planning) Everything the Israelies did RIGHT in Entebbe (1976) our great brass would screw it up royally in 1980 (Operation Eagle Claw). Undoubtedly, had they put their heart into it rather than shucking the commander-in-chief because they felt he wasn't hawkish enough (his nixing the B1 Bomber). In the end, they got their man

    OH my dear God....are you actually saying that the commanders involved intentionally killed their own men in order to make their president look bad? Seriously...are you actually saying that?

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    Carter was (and still is) a man who loves America and works relentless to guide it

    OK...I'll agree to that point. He was incredibly inept in his selection of methodology and personnel to run the economy and the various functions of government. I'm a personal fan of Jimmy Carter as I think he does that which he believes to be right. I recognize his one great success, the peace agreement between Israel and Egypt (where he actually sprinted between cabins to shuttle negotiate between two men who hated each other).

    But the economy plunged and we were, paraphrasing his own words, fatigued and malaised by the end of his term.

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    unlike Reagan who was in love with the 'image' of America and spent what few waking hours he had hyping that 'image'

    Reagan loved his country and whether you like it or not our economy took off and we won the cold war under his leadership. There's no changing that history.

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    and wanted a fresh start and honesty in Gov't. Carter promised and gave it to them.

    Yeah....a fresh start and zero based budgeting. We really took off there, and the business leaders cut their own throats in order to make him look bad. Yeah..... that's possibly the nuttiest thing I've read of your writings.

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    Nixon should have just hung in there.. perhaps the American people would have come to their senses and preferred the good ol' liar and a cheat, and kept him in office.

    Well, you got us there. President Nixon did nothing more than get us out of Vietnam, open relations with China and win two elections in landslides. So there was no balancing things out and even President Clinton never invited him back to the White House or asked his advice.

    President Nixon violated his oath of office, and should have been impeached. President Ford should not have pardoned him, unless there was a good reason to prevent him from going to trial. President Clinton simply violated his oath and perjured himself in court, and should have been tried for that.
    Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
     
    We're Nuts
    Posts: 4723
    Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 6:12 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:22 am

    Wonderful, being lectured on how to win by their worst enemy. I'm sure the Democrats would love this.

    How about: "What the Republicans need to keep all of their viable candidates out of jail by 2008" - now there's a think tank I'd like to eavesdrop on.
    Dear moderators: No.
     
    ANCFlyer
    Posts: 21391
    Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:32 am

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    1) An 'intentional' failed Hostage rescue attempt. If they'd had succeeded, Carter would have been hailed a hero (even though it was military brass engineered the planning) Everything the Israelies did RIGHT in Entebbe (1976) our great brass would screw it up royally in 1980 (Operation Eagle Claw). Undoubtedly, had they put their heart into it rather than shucking the commander-in-chief because they felt he wasn't hawkish enough (his nixing the B1 Bomber).

     redflag  redflag  redflag  redflag  redflag 

    Soldiers do not generally dishonor themselves - and do NOT purposely fail missions and in the process get people killed and maimed - because they don't like the President. If that were the case there'd be no military left in the US - as most military persons I know couldn't give a hoot in hell about Clinton, thought he was a coward, and wouldn't have pissed on him if he were on fire . . . they were bound to do their duty to by their oath and they did it, despite the man in Oval Office.

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    Carter was (and still is) a man who loves America

    No question. Excellent diplomat, lousy president.
    FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
     
    cfalk
    Posts: 10221
    Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:41 am

    It seems that BN747 has returned to the Land of Oz, where GWB is the Wicked Witch and the military are evil flying monkeys.
    The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
     
    BHXFAOTIPYYC
    Posts: 1442
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:47 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:06 am

    Maybe the ultimate 21st century politics would be to be able to vote for policies, not parties. It is a shame it always has to be "the lessor of two evils".
    Breakfast in BHX, lunch in FAO, dinner in TIP, baggage in YYC.
     
    Superfly
    Posts: 37735
    Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:20 am

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 31):
    Well, you say you agree with Slammers point but proceed to insult people you refer to as "red-staters" saying we don't want someone smart?

    Well I hate to say it but it's true. The spin the GOP/fox news put on Gore in 2000 was that he a "smarty pants". They used his intelligence and impeccable resume against him. We all new Dubya had no chance against Gore's debating skills and command of knowledge on issues that are important to the voters. Hence that's why Gore won more votes than Dubya.

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 31):
    Gore a conservative? He was a reed that bent with the wind.

    Oh really?
    Prove it.
    Just look at his voting record. His voting record showed that he was rather independent and unfortunately cast votes in support of Reagan's bloated Pentagon spending. Go see for yourself. It's public record.

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 31):
    Jimmy Carter was obliterated in the election because his presidency was a failure in nearly every sense of the word.

    Incorrect.
    First of all, John Anderson took away many liberal voters that never trusted Jimmy Carter. Had it been a two-way race, Reagan still would have won but it would have been a 49%-51% loss instead of a 41%-51% loss. He was the President during a time that was very difficult.
    The man certainly told the truth every time he spoke.
    Bring back the Concorde
     
    slider
    Posts: 6817
    Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:32 am

    Quoting BN747 (Reply 33):
    1) An 'intentional' failed Hostage rescue attempt.

    What a load of complete horseshit!!!

    This statement illustrates your total ignorance about this matter. I have a 60 page term paper I can send you if you're interested in learning more about the entire evolution of the US Special Forces, Charlie Beckwith and the creation of Delta Force, the total historical and structural problems with Special Forces in the US military that predated Teheran and Desert One and how they did the absolute best they could given the resources, track record and commitment level at the time.

    Furthermore, if you think it was anyone's INTENT to whip up a sandstorm in the middle of the Dasht e Kavir salt flats, have a chopper blindly crater into a C-130 and wreck another helo putting the number of helicopters needed below the minimum and thus sinking the mission, then you have to be one of the biggest lunatics who has ever posted here.
     
    FDXmech
    Posts: 3219
    Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:51 am

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):
    He was the President during a time that was very difficult.

    Yep. And FDR, Lincoln, Truman happened to luck out being elected in easy time's.

    Please, Superfly, the man's high point was being listed in the credits for, "The Longest Yard".
    You're only as good as your last departure.
     
    diamond
    Posts: 3000
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:56 am

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 28):
    Sep of Church and State: No Position

    Why?

    Blank.
     
    ANCFlyer
    Posts: 21391
    Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:59 am

    Quoting Diamond (Reply 42):
    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 28):
    Sep of Church and State: No Position


    Why?

    Don't Yell at me . . . who the hell do you think you are anyway?

    I never gave it a tremendous amount of thought - I don't have a position on it really . . . because it doesn't make a shit to me, that's why.

    I don't give a damn if they have a prayer before a City Council meeting or not! I could care less if the 10 Commandments are in some Courthouse in Alabama! I really don't give a hoot whether kids are allowed to pray in School or to which God(s) they decide to do it to.

    Is that better? Tough shit if it isn't. Get off your high horse hero. . .

    Next silly question?

    [Edited 2005-12-09 03:01:36]
    FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
     
    diamond
    Posts: 3000
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:01 am

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 43):
    who the hell doyou think you are anyway?



    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 43):
    Is that better? Tough shit if it isn't.



    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 43):
    Next silly question?

    Dude, really. Did you not get enough hugs when you were a kid? Geez, calm down.
    Blank.
     
    ANCFlyer
    Posts: 21391
    Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:02 am

    Quoting Diamond (Reply 44):
    Dude, really. Did you not get enough hugs when you were a kid? Geez, calm down.

    You're the one yelling not I . . . seems you're the one with lack-o-nookie as a rugrat.
    FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
     
    diamond
    Posts: 3000
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:01 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:09 am

    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 45):
    You're the one yelling not I . . . seems you're the one with lack-o-nookie as a rugrat.

    Not yelling - emphasizing.

    Deal, you shrinking violet.
    Blank.
     
    ANCFlyer
    Posts: 21391
    Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:16 am

    Quoting Diamond (Reply 46):
    Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 45):
    You're the one yelling not I . . . seems you're the one with lack-o-nookie as a rugrat.

    Not yelling - emphasizing.

    Deal, you shrinking violet.

    Childish, elementary display. . . beneath you usually.

    You have got to remember to kid me only when I'm having a good day . . .

    And use the occasional girly smileys -  wink  silly 

    [Edited 2005-12-09 03:39:09]
    FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
     
    dl021
    Posts: 10836
    Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:18 pm

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):
    We all new Dubya had no chance against Gore's debating skills and command of knowledge on issues that are important to the voters.

    HUnh? Gore lost the debates because he was an assmonkey in the first one, a shrinking violet in the second one and flat wrongheaded in the third one as far as the American public was concerned. His vaunted (by you and my cousin) debate skills were nowhere to be seen while he was being rude and boorish during the debates, or while he was too busy trying to restrain himself.

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):
    The spin the GOP/fox news put on Gore in 2000 was that he a "smarty pants". They used his intelligence and impeccable resume against him

    Hunh? In your twisted view, maybe. There's a difference between being smart and telling people whatever they want to hear. The whole thing where he had the contrived appearances and the "I invented the internet" or the "I picked tobacco...no wait my sister died from tobacco"...depending on the audience is what put people off.

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):
    Just look at his voting record. His voting record showed that he was rather independent and unfortunately cast votes in support of Reagan's bloated Pentagon spending. Go see for yourself. It's public record

    He voted whatever way he thought it would take to get reelected. Eventually he was so bad about it his own state refused to vote for him to be President.

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):
    John Anderson took away many liberal voters that never trusted Jimmy Carter.

    He did not get more than about 6% of the votes.....oh, yeah, and as a Republican John Anderson took votes away from President Reagan as he represented the liberal end of the Republican party. There was no liberal democrat who would have voted for Anderson, as he was definitely a Republican. Where do you get your 'facts' on this? Don't tell me you believe everything you read in Wikipedia. The majority of Anderson voters came from liberal Republicans rather than liberal Democrats.

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):
    First of all, John Anderson took away many liberal voters that never trusted Jimmy Carter.

    Once again....Anderson was a Republican. Not a democrat.

    Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):
    Had it been a two-way race, Reagan still would have won but it would have been a 49%-51% loss instead of a 41%-51% loss.

    With 6% of the vote he actually prevented the loss from being closer to 60% to 40% rather than by the actual 10 percentage points or so. However the electoral college was a complete landslide. Reagan carried like 40 states.

    [Edited 2005-12-09 04:21:30]
    Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
     
    BN747
    Posts: 5344
    Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 5:48 am

    RE: What The Democrats Need To Win Back The Whitehouse

    Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:54 pm

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 34):
    OH my dear God....are you actually saying that the commanders involved intentionally killed their own men in order to make their president look bad? Seriously...are you actually saying that?

    HELLO??? Does the term military incompetence ring a bell??? Does McClellan ring a bell? Does Custer? And god knows how many others who followed? Just like there are bad cops.. there are bad soldiers TOP-to-BOTTOM. There's planning when 'your hearts in it' and there's planning when
    your heart is not in it.' With the Israelis pulling off rescuing a much larger hostage group (4 years earlier), tell me how on earth the 'greatest nation on earth' can't match that feat. Not only NOT match... but not even come remotely CLOSE! Yes as much as it breaks your heart... we have blundering incompetent generals (Westmoreland and Tommy Franks stand out like an ILS glide slope). Generals who compromise integrity for personal gain... Gen. Richard Secord to Col. Oliver North. You people slay me with this 'unless we catch them red-handed.. it didn't happen NOR does it exist. These guys didn't were in it alone, we'll never know how deep in the dirt these guys really were and we'll never know all the players. People in power know how much they can get away with, most are capable of keeping their composure and integrity in check.. but there are ALWAYS that select few who abuse power all day long and never get caught... and just because you say there's no proof (because they were not caught), doesn't mean it never happened or they never do. Yes it's amazing after coming off a Vietnam loss-related lull and no major conflict anywhere on earth... the bored military planners could not pull out the stops and rescue those hostages. The following and well-planned Arms-For-Hostages fiasco that ensued suggest this may very well have been the fuse that lit that particular stick of dynamite. It is still rumored (and claimed by exiled Iran President Bani Sadr) that Geo. (I was-not-in-the-loop) Bush Sr. met in Paris with him on a deal to hold the American hostages until Nov '80 General Election in exchange for sell of arms by the New Reagan/Bush administration. Yeah, North fell on the sword.. but we know very well that scheming higher-ups have finger prints all over this baby. So compromised integrity isn't doesn't stop with the suits it lurks among the uniformed brass too. I saw some scary idiots (officers) when I was in, and I know you and ANC did too while you were in, so don't give me that crap.

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 34):
    But the economy plunged and we were, paraphrasing his own words, fatigued and malaised by the end of his term.

    The economy tanked WORSE under Reagan... did you forget Americans standing in the cheese lines, tens of 1000s thrown out on the street (from Mentally Institutions) to pay for Reagans trillion-dollar buildup?

    The malaise is well-coined phrase to keep people from realizing what they need to do was reflect on where the Nation had been and what it had been thru (Nixon) and how not get there again. So yeah.. malaise.. that's a good one.

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 34):
    Reagan loved his country and whether you like it or not our economy took off and we won the cold war under his leadership. There's no changing that history.

    Reagan loved an image, he never gave a rat's ass about the common people, if he did, he never would have slashed the social programs that he did. Spare me the 'He won the cold war' nonsense, intelligence already knew the Soviets days was numbered.. Lech Walesa/Solidarity was proof of that (and classified intell that you nor I were privy to... told even a more dire story).
    Changing history? History written by people who believe what you wrong above is 'writing history in the same tradition as Washington & the Cherry Tree, the Indians were Evil Doers (as our teachers taught us), Jefferson hated slavery-but owned hundreds (as our teachers taught us), Custer was a hero (as our teachers taught us), the Alamo was an attack by the marauding mexicans (as our teachers taught us)... need I go on? It's just a matter a time before 'your history' starts saying Iraq attacked us.. so we struck back.. and thus a lie becomes the truth and therefore history that can't be changed. No wonder the youth of today don't trust the elders on anything... they can smell the bull from a mile away as soon as they start thinking for themselves.

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 34):
    Yeah....a fresh start and zero based budgeting. We really took off there, and the business leaders cut their own throats in order to make him look bad. Yeah..... that's possibly the nuttiest thing I've read of your writings.

    Business leaders then were completely of a conservative Nixon-hue... why on earth would the support a left-leaning, truth-teller like Carter (although he was a successful business man in his own right). And the oil companies made a killing during his term... and Carter was doing EXACTLY what Hugo Chavez is doing right now (low priced oil to the needy/poor)-- and they sure as hell got him back for that. After seeing that.. why would the corporate mentality-of-the-day stand with a guy like that? Profit before everything and at all cost was the mantra of the day.

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 34):
    Well, you got us there. President Nixon did nothing more than get us out of Vietnam, open relations with China and win two elections in landslides. So there was no balancing things out and even President Clinton never invited him back to the White House or asked his advice.

    Oh god.. tell me your high on crack.... 'Got us out of Vietnam'??? He's the one who drove up the death count! And we didn't get out.. we lost. Oh.. yeah.. History. Seriously, how hard was dumping Taiwan and saying we're going with Red China (as China was known then)? Give me a break! That was China's non-negotiable standard to every nation on the planet! Korea did it, Japan did it, Europe did it...and so on, and we followed (we were the last). So for us to tell an old ally, 'Sorry Pal, China is where the action, we gotta go--good luck"... yep that was a bold and daring move!

    Quoting DL021 (Reply 34):
    President Nixon violated his oath of office, and should have been impeached. President Ford should not have pardoned him, unless there was a good reason to prevent him from going to trial. President Clinton simply violated his oath and perjured himself in court, and should have been tried for that.

    Not worth responding to...

    Quoting Slider (Reply 40):
    What a load of complete horseshit!!!

    This statement illustrates your total ignorance about this matter. I have a 60 page term paper I can send you if you're interested in learning more about the entire evolution of the US Special Forces, Charlie Beckwith and the creation of Delta Force, the total historical and structural problems with Special Forces in the US military that predated Teheran and Desert One and how they did the absolute best they could given the resources, track record and commitment level at the time.

    Okay.. you're really not worth responding to... I don't care if you wrote a 1000-page term paper on the subject, you're no more an expert than a neighborhood plumber. Just because you look at a battalion of troops doesn't mean you know what's going on down in the minds of those you're staring at... nor do you know what they are capable of ....or trained for. Just because you read a report on that battalion.. does it mean you insight on classified and related intell? NO.. it doesn't. My dad was one of the originators of the Special Forces... there's nothing your report or Charlie Beckwith's opinion can tell me I don't know already.


    BN747
    "Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, Baidu [Spider] and 24 guests

    Popular Searches On Airliners.net

    Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

    Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

    Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

    Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

    Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

    Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

    Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

    Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

    Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

    Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

    Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

    Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

    Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

    Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

    Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos