For Democrats, it's good vs. evil

freeandfun1

VIP Member
Feb 14, 2004
6,201
296
83
For Democrats, it's good vs. evil

By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Democrats are talking trash these days, lobbing the left wing's frantic and often melodramatic insults at the Bush administration while Iraqi prisoner abuse is still leading the news.

"There is no longer a distinction between the rhetoric used by people on the left fringe of the Democratic Party and the rhetoric used by the leaders of the Democratic Party," Christine Iverson of the Republican National Committee said yesterday.

"This is the same vitriolic stream of political hate speech we've seen since the Democrat primary began. Anger is not an agenda, but anger is the only thing Democrats have been offering the American people. And it's going to backfire," she said.

But the Democrats are forging ahead.

"How sweet it's going to be on June 2 when the Taliban wing of the Republican Party finds out what's happening in South Dakota," said Sen. Tim Johnson during a voter rally Sunday in Sioux Falls for an upcoming special election there for a vacant at-large House seat.

He initially refused to apologize, but finally issued a guarded mea culpa yesterday.

In a Senate speech on May 10, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts noted, "Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management — U.S. management."

Such talk is "anti-American slander," according to Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby yesterday — ignored by the mainstream press and Democratic establishment.

Perennial presidential candidate Ralph Nader also got in on the act, calling President Bush a "messianic militarist" and "an out-of-control West Texas sheriff" during a speech before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York on Monday. Mr. Nader also suggested the president be impeached for purportedly lying about the Iraq war.

Other Democrats have joined the chorus.

In an e-mailed fund-raising appeal for presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York declared that Mr. Bush's re-election would "create an America we won't recognize."

In his own appeal, Mr. Kerry solicited donations but criticized "the slow and inept response by President Bush, which has further undermined America's credibility in the world and created new dangers for Americans."

Even Mr. Kerry's wife, Teresa, chimed in, calling Vice President Dick Cheney "unpatriotic" in a May 7 interview with Telemundo, NBC's Spanish-language network.

Democratic Reps. Bill Delahunt and Barney Frank of Massachusetts recently called the prisoner abuse in Iraq "disgusting and disturbing" and "heartbreaking," respectively — though Mr. Frank also categorized the abuse as "sadomasochistic sexual degradation."

Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington state said abuse images "depict an America I don't know," while Rep. John W. Olver, Massachusetts Democrat, said the situation had created "an unaccountable regime."

There could be a price for all this rudeness, though.

"Voters know the Democrats are angry," said the RNC's Miss Iverson. "But they don't know what they're for — and that's going to turn off moderate and undecided voters in a general election."

Meanwhile, sundry journalists trotted out Nazi themes and overblown comparisons.

Before his ESPN column was sanitized by editors yesterday, Hunter S. Thompson wrote that the prisoner-abuse images were worse than "the foulest atrocities of Adolf Hitler."

The published reference was later tidied up to read, "worse than anything I could have imagined."

ESPN spokeswoman Ashley Swadell confirmed yesterday that "a portion of the column was removed because some readers found the Hitler reference offensive."

The public, indeed, has its limits.

When novelist E.L. Doctorow criticized Mr. Bush in the name of "responsible citizenship" during a college commencement address Sunday, he was booed by the audience — including one grandfather who said the graduation "had been ruined by politics."

Still, trash talk flourishes.

New Yorker writer Seymour Hersh said in a recent TV interview the images hearkened back to the Third Reich, while Air America's liberal radio host Randi Rhodes mixed her totalitarian metaphors and called the Iraq prison the "Nazi gulag."
In a New York Times commentary Sunday, author Susan Sontag compared the prisoner abuse to souvenir "lynching photographs" of American blacks during the Depression.
 
I just wish that people would open their eyes and ears. My friends spout off the same rhetoric that Bush is lying and when i ask them to tell me where he has lied, they just say WMDs and Iraq. When i push them further they just say that im trying to force my opinion on them and end the discussion. People are buying into the BS because its becoming popular to hate bush. Its a trend. Lets hope this trend ends by November or it will be a close one.
 
Originally posted by insein
I just wish that people would open their eyes and ears. My friends spout off the same rhetoric that Bush is lying and when i ask them to tell me where he has lied, they just say WMDs and Iraq. When i push them further they just say that im trying to force my opinion on them and end the discussion. People are buying into the BS because its becoming popular to hate bush. Its a trend. Lets hope this trend ends by November or it will be a close one.
Frankly, I am beginning to think the left is pushing these lies so hard because they themselve are scared poopless. If they were confident in their beliefs, then they wouldn't be worried. They know their position is weak, so all they can do is attack!
 
Originally posted by nycflasher
Are you talking about Bush and his domestic policies? :D
Be specific..... which domestic policies do you feel Bush is weak on?
 
Originally posted by nycflasher
Are you talking about Bush and his domestic policies? :D

in all seriousness, what are the dems running on? They've firmly established that they are "Anbody But Bush" but they havent established what they are going to do for the country should they win.
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
Be specific..... which domestic policies do you feel Bush is weak on?

It was a joke, but Education and the Enviroment to name a couple.
 
Originally posted by nycflasher
It was a joke, but Education and the Enviroment to name a couple.

I agree. Bush needs to reform Education so that there arnet as many Socialists brainwashing our kids. As for the Environment, good luck running on that.
 
Originally posted by nycflasher
It was a joke, but Education and the Enviroment to name a couple.
Education: Kerry voted against No Child Left Behind. So what is it that Bush is ignoring that you would like to see?

Environment: Be specific.

That is a catch all complaint. What policies has he reversed? Or what policies has he implemented that have a direct impact on the environment in a negative way.

I am not saying that he has a stellar record on the environment. I honestly don't know. But I do know that I consider our national security more important than the environment.
 
Originally posted by Sir Evil
We have terrorism sprouting up everywere and you are worried about education and enviroment?:confused: that is so typical of the left!

Actually, insein asked me which domestic policies I though Bush was weak on so I answered.

Fighting terrorism is a precedent now, but I will ALWAYS be concerned with Education until "no child is left behind."

Take Big D, for example, the brain is a terrible thing to waste. Even worse to taste, though...
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
Education: Kerry voted against No Child Left Behind. So what is it that Bush is ignoring that you would like to see?

Well, he may have gotten No Child Left Behind passed, but following through on it is another thing. Take St. Louis, OH for example. I believe they are still waiting for about 7 billion dollars.

Damn, and I thought I was anxious for my next paycheck...
 
Originally posted by Sir Evil
Glad that you are concerned with the terrorism, that's a plus but there are so many leftists that are concerned with your very same issue's that would find it something more important to argue about in these times which I think is a little weak!

Well, yeah we can't ignore the terror threat and its utmost importance.

And I misspoke in my prior post, I meant that Bush's budget is short of about 7 billion dollars towards NCLB.
 
My point is that NO ONE CANDIDATE is going to be all things to all peoples on any issue or issues. When I weigh everything, Bush is the only man that is running, that has a chance, that I can support.

A lot of crap gets thrown out there, but it really has little or no legs. Like David Horowitz says in the book, "The Art of Political War", the democrats are just better than the republicans at making people think they care. Take education. . . . They claim they want to fund education, but the majority of the money the democrats push for ends up going to the unions (jobs) and not to the teaching the students. Clinton continually kept saying "we need more teachers". We didn't need more teachers, we needed better educators.
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1

Environment: Be specific.

That is a catch all complaint. What policies has he reversed? Or what policies has he implemented that have a direct impact on the environment in a negative way.


Well, for starters(source- www.nrdc.org):

Church leaders chastise President Bush for bad air policies

April 22, 2004: The National Council of Churches, which represents 50 million people in 140,000 denominations, has sent a letter to President Bush expressing "grave moral concern" for the administration's air pollution policies. The scathing letter, sent by Christian leaders to coincide with Earth Day, criticizes the administration's so-called Clear Skies initiative and its weakening of the Clean Air Act's new source review program, noting that those policies typify the White House's ongoing efforts to "weaken critical environmental standards." In addition to the letter, the council ran a full-page ad in the New York Times and is calling on ministers to talk about the problems of air pollution during church services.

"This letter reminds President Bush that he has a moral duty, as well as a legal duty to improve the quality of the air we breathe," said NRDC air attorney David McIntosh. "Religious Americans pray he gets that message."
 
Well, I won't argue with needing "better" educators.
But actually, we DO need more teachers.
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
Education: Kerry voted against No Child Left Behind. So what is it that Bush is ignoring that you would like to see?

Clinton blasts Republicans on education, lauds administration record

April 14, 2000
Web posted at: 5:02 p.m. EDT (2102 GMT)

ATLANTA (CNN) -- President Bill Clinton said Friday that his administration remains committed to improving education, while Republicans continue to offer election-year proposals lacking in substantive reform.

"The majority of people in the other party in Congress are still resisting the investments our schools need," Clinton said in a speech to the Education Writers Association in Atlanta.


President Clinton spoke Friday in Atlanta.

"Even the apparently appealing plans advanced by Republicans are in trouble because of the combined impact of their proposed tax cut and defense spending increases," he added.

The Republican-led Congress on Thursday gave final approval to its $1.83 trillion budget blueprint for fiscal year 2001 that includes at least $150 billion in tax cuts -- addition to spending increases in defense and domestic programs -- a budget the president said would "greatly underfund" education.

Deep tax cuts are central to the campaigns of GOP presidential candidate Texas Gov. George W. Bush and congressional Republicans.

Clinton, who supports a much smaller tax cut, has repeatedly said the GOP plan is shortsighted, and on Friday added that the tax cut is untenable considering the other priorities set by Republicans.

"I support a tax cut. But mine is considerably more modest," he said. But I have applied arithmetic to my proposal."

The president added that his administration's "major contribution" in the nation's current economic boom is "the return of arithmetic."

"We brought arithmetic back to the budget. We replaced supply-side economics with arithmetic," he said, "and lo and behold, it worked."

The president's remarks coincided with the release of an Education Department progress report, "Challenging the Status Quo: The Education Record 1993-2000," that lists the administration's education-related accomplishments -- including expanding Internet access in schools and increasing reading and math scores as well as school accountability.

According to the report, 67 percent of high school graduates now go on to college, up 10 percent from when he took office in 1993. And Clinton pointed out that reading scores of 9-year-olds in the highest poverty schools "rose almost an entire grade level" on the national assessment of education progress between 1992 and 1996, reversing a downward trend.

Noting that his administration is striving to fulfill promises to provide the nation with 100,000 new teachers, Clinton said that he has urged states to use their budget surpluses to raise teacher pay.

"It's very difficult to make progress that you can't measure," the president said as he called for increased accountability for teachers, students and schools, while praising innovative initiatives such as charter schools. "There must be some way of measuring our movement."

Taking aim once again at Republicans, the president said the House Education Committee on Thursday "passed a so-called reform bill that eliminates after-school programs, abandons our class size efforts, which are totally bipartisan, and fails to modernize a single school in yet another year."

The bill in question would reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which provides needy school districts with billions of dollars in federal funds.

"That comes on top of the Senate's education bill, which rolls back reform even more, Clinton added.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 
Environment:

Will be affected by the nuclear fallout after the first dirty bomb goes off.


Education:

Hard to teach dead kids.


These are valid issues, but they won't matter if we elect a terrorist appeaser.
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Environment:

Will be affected by the nuclear fallout after the first dirty bomb goes off.


Education:

Hard to teach dead kids.


These are valid issues, but they won't matter if we elect a terrorist appeaser.

How does Kerry appease terrorism? I mean, if you are going to call an armed force's veteran a terrorist appeaser please explain...
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Environment:

Will be affected by the nuclear fallout after the first dirty bomb goes off.


Education:

Hard to teach dead kids.


These are valid issues, but they won't matter if we elect a terrorist appeaser.

Is that a defense of Bush's Educational and Enviromental records?
 
Originally posted by nycflasher
Is that a defense of Bush's Educational and Enviromental records?

Nope. What I'm saying is that neither of these 2 issues will matter if we're all 6 feet under, or NYC is unihabitable due to a chemical or nuclear attack.

Kerry being a "war hero" means nothing in regards to the current war. His idea of combatting the jihadists is to handle it as a law enforcement issue, or run to the UN for help......
 

Forum List

Back
Top