Griswold Posted November 21, 2004 Share Posted November 21, 2004 In the states Bush won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example, he won Ohio by 2%. In the states Kerry won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example he won PA by only 2%. A philosophical gulf between Red & Blue states, or Red & Blue people simply does not exist. In most cases a Red is Red and a Blue is Blue by only a few percentage points. People saying "fyou to the south" or calling "middle America flyover country" really need to get a grip. People referring to the left & right coasts as out of touch need a reality check of their own as well. The people/party who continue to perpetuate the false Red v. Blue argument will have it explode in their face, and lose the next election cycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted November 21, 2004 Share Posted November 21, 2004 A philosophical gulf between Red & Blue states, or Red & Blue people simply does not exist. In most cases a Red is Red and a Blue is Blue by only a few percentage points. People saying "fyou to the south" or calling "middle America flyover country" really need to get a grip. People referring to the left & right coasts as out of touch need a reality check of their own as well. The people/party who continue to perpetuate the false Red v. Blue argument will have it explode in their face, and lose the next election cycle. 126784[/snapback] The red-blue gulf most certainly does exist. However, the span of the color spectrum in between, which makes up a third or more of the country, is varying shades of purple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshmallow Posted November 21, 2004 Share Posted November 21, 2004 I just think it's funny that "being stupid" has been replaced with "being from a red state" in vernacular. Someone might say, "what is he from a red state." I love that. Blue States= more cultured more educated contributes much more to economy. (more people making over 200g) more likely to get hit by terrorist attack. Red States= more likely to vote with bibles instead of brains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeFerguson Posted November 21, 2004 Share Posted November 21, 2004 I just think it's funny that "being stupid" has been replaced with "being from a red state" in vernacular. Someone might say, "what is he from a red state." I love that.Blue States= more cultured more educated contributes much more to economy. (more people making over 200g) more likely to get hit by terrorist attack. Red States= more likely to vote with bibles instead of brains. 126843[/snapback] http://fromasadamerican.blogspot.com/2004/...ad-my-vote.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 21, 2004 Share Posted November 21, 2004 http://fromasadamerican.blogspot.com/2004/...ad-my-vote.html 126844[/snapback] Bullseye....what a great letter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted November 21, 2004 Share Posted November 21, 2004 Okay...I'll humor you. In the states Bush won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example, he won Ohio by 2%. The 11 states of the old confederacy Georgia Bush +17 South Carolina Bush +17 North Carolina Bush +12 Florida Bush +5 Virginia Bush +9 Texas Bush +23 Louisiana Bush +5 Tennessee Bush +14 Alabama Bush +26 Arkansas Bush +9 Mississippi Bush +20 In the states Kerry won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example he won PA by only 2%. Now the northeastern states: Maine Kerry +8 New Hampshire Kerry +1 Massachusetts Kerry +25 Connecticut Kerry +10 Rhode Island Kerry +21 New Jersey, Kerry +7 Delaware Kerry +7 Maryland Kerry +13 D.C. Kerry +81! New York Kerry +18 Pennsylvania Kerry +2 So clearly looking over those numbers there is a north/south devide. The same would be true if looking at the mountain states vs. the left coast. the only true battleground states are midwestern states. This divide has gotten STRONGER over the last 4 years. Read zell millers book "a national party no more" and i think you will begin to understand why. The south used to be STRONGLY democratic, but slowly has turned more and more repubican. Another quick comment about this divide thing. Both political parties need to pit us against each other in order to have political success. Its sick, but its what they need to survive. We as people need to step up and tell them we are sick of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griswold Posted November 21, 2004 Author Share Posted November 21, 2004 So clearly looking over those numbers there is a north/south devide. The same would be true if looking at the mountain states vs. the left coast. the only true battleground states are midwestern states. These graphics describe my point... look at them and you'll see there is not this monolithic red/blue divide: Red Blue Maps In Detail. There just is no "state by state" divide by political philosophy as commentators, pundits, extreme liberals and extreme conservatives suggest. I think the media pushes the Red/Blue state thing because it makes a easy to make, sound-bite sized story. Extremists push the Red/Blue issue because it gives them something to squawk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I particularly enjoyed reading some of the scathing sarcastic comments from the rabid Bush haters that pretty much validated her entire piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 These graphics describe my point... look at them and you'll see there is not this monolithic red/blue divide: Red Blue Maps In Detail. There just is no "state by state" divide by political philosophy as commentators, pundits, extreme liberals and extreme conservatives suggest. I think the media pushes the Red/Blue state thing because it makes a easy to make, sound-bite sized story. Extremists push the Red/Blue issue because it gives them something to squawk about. 126979[/snapback] Wow!... Look at it... As Cal said... It is a varying shade of purple! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 These graphics describe my point... look at them and you'll see there is not this monolithic red/blue divide: Red Blue Maps In Detail. There just is no "state by state" divide by political philosophy as commentators, pundits, extreme liberals and extreme conservatives suggest. I think the media pushes the Red/Blue state thing because it makes a easy to make, sound-bite sized story. Extremists push the Red/Blue issue because it gives them something to squawk about. 126979[/snapback] Also... WTF? Gives in Shannon County, South Dakota? In a sea of purple and red... It is total blue? Even Rapid City's county isn't that clear. All I can make out is that BadLands National Park is partly in the county, and Pine Ridge Indian Res? Then again, that is where "Wounded Knee" is? I don't blame them for voting Democrat, God knows the indigenous people already seen (historically) one massacre there... Do they know something? Of course! Why suffer from the Republicans again... 1890 still sticks in their mind? That would be Benjamin Harrison (1889-1893). You know? Old "Tippecanoe's" grandson. That could lead me off on another tangent down a few roads... Kinda funny how things still run deep along party lines? Yet, in the 1880's, Harrison served in the United States Senate, where he championed Indians, homesteaders, and Civil War veterans. HTF can he champion Indians and homesteaders? Did he talk with "forked tongue?" Again... Do the ancestors today see the "double talk?" God knows, things have been passed down generationally. Of course this is needless rambling yet, it goes to show you how things still run deep... Not even other Indian res's in the west seem to run that blue. I return you to your regular scheduled program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich in Ohio Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 In the states Bush won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example, he won Ohio by 2%. In the states Kerry won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example he won PA by only 2%. A philosophical gulf between Red & Blue states, or Red & Blue people simply does not exist. In most cases a Red is Red and a Blue is Blue by only a few percentage points. People saying "fyou to the south" or calling "middle America flyover country" really need to get a grip. People referring to the left & right coasts as out of touch need a reality check of their own as well. The people/party who continue to perpetuate the false Red v. Blue argument will have it explode in their face, and lose the next election cycle. 126784[/snapback] I think that you are correct in your overal percentages, but basically you are missing the point. What I see when I look at the country map which is broken down by counties, is that the overwhelming percentage of counties around the nation are in fact red. This cannot be overlooked. That is not to say that these counties are all Pro conservative...but it does in fact mean that the majority of people in those counties are conservative. From this perspective, you can draw no other conclusion then conservative values are the prevailing views of most of America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Okay...I'll humor you.The 11 states of the old confederacy Georgia Bush +17 South Carolina Bush +17 North Carolina Bush +12 Florida Bush +5 Virginia Bush +9 Texas Bush +23 Louisiana Bush +5 Tennessee Bush +14 Alabama Bush +26 Arkansas Bush +9 Mississippi Bush +20 Now the northeastern states: Maine Kerry +8 New Hampshire Kerry +1 Massachusetts Kerry +25 Connecticut Kerry +10 Rhode Island Kerry +21 New Jersey, Kerry +7 Delaware Kerry +7 Maryland Kerry +13 D.C. Kerry +81! New York Kerry +18 Pennsylvania Kerry +2 So clearly looking over those numbers there is a north/south devide. The same would be true if looking at the mountain states vs. the left coast. the only true battleground states are midwestern states. This divide has gotten STRONGER over the last 4 years. Read zell millers book "a national party no more" and i think you will begin to understand why. The south used to be STRONGLY democratic, but slowly has turned more and more repubican. Another quick comment about this divide thing. Both political parties need to pit us against each other in order to have political success. Its sick, but its what they need to survive. We as people need to step up and tell them we are sick of it. 126905[/snapback] That must mean that those who live in the disgusting, crime infested slum that is our national's capital are in fact the smartest Americans of all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I wish I could e-mail the woman who posted that letter which seems more and more idiotic everytime I read it. She is pro choice and for gay marriage and yet voted essentially to over turn Roe v. Wade and ban gay marriage. Why? Because she was upset about the constant drum beat of Kerry's Viet Nam service. Hmmmm.......However, she didn't seem to care about the constant drum beat of 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 of the right. She was upset by all the "I hate Bush" stuff yet the swifties and flip-flopper attacks that dominated the conservative air waves for 3 months didn't seem to phase her. She thinks privatizing social security and elimenating the income tax are two of the dumbest ideas she has ever heard yet, she voted for the guy whose mission it is to make those ideas a reality. Why? Because she found Kerry's positons confusing. Ummm, okay. She had "confusing" on one side and "dumbest ideas ever" on the other and she opted for "dumbest ideas ever". She has wept at the sight of innocent Iraqis killed in this war by bombs built with her tax dollars but, so what? She still thinks it was the right thing to do. She doesn't agree with Kerry's interest in allies because she learned in school that other peoples opinons don't matter. Apparently she slept through history class and never learned the value of allies in war from the Revolutionary War where the help of France was the deciding factor and the Civil War where the lack of allies billsfanone the South. She voted for Bush because he has clearly defined values even though they are values with which she does not agree. Pleeez. Sounds like a guilty conscience looking to rationalize having voted for a whole mess of things she is against. When Roe v. Wade is overturned I guess she will blame Kerry for that because he was a Viet Nam vet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Okay...lets say you have 2 colors, lets say black and white. Now add a little white to the black and it still looks pretty black. Add a little black to the white and your white just got pretty gray. Point is, (and I could be wrong), that one blue vote will color a county more purple than one red vote will. I think a government funded story is in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Okay...lets say you have 2 colors, lets say black and white. Now add a little white to the black and it still looks pretty black. Add a little black to the white and your white just got pretty gray. Point is, (and I could be wrong), that one blue vote will color a county more purple than one red vote will. I think a government funded story is in order. 129253[/snapback] I thought about that. That is why there are other charts below it. It would have been nice to use distinct colors for varying percentage points. Yet... It does take a good color eye to pick up in the 50% range! In general the pop is purple... The general vote was only 3 million off. The way we reduce things (county to state to electoral) sends an illusion of one-sidedness. Solid red is harder to pick up than solid blue... Note my Shannon County ref. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I wish I could e-mail the woman who posted that letter which seems more and more idiotic everytime I read it. She is pro choice and for gay marriage and yet voted essentially to over turn Roe v. Wade and ban gay marriage. Why? Because she was upset about the constant drum beat of Kerry's Viet Nam service. Hmmmm.......However, she didn't seem to care about the constant drum beat of 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 of the right. She was upset by all the "I hate Bush" stuff yet the swifties and flip-flopper attacks that dominated the conservative air waves for 3 months didn't seem to phase her. She thinks privatizing social security and elimenating the income tax are two of the dumbest ideas she has ever heard yet, she voted for the guy whose mission it is to make those ideas a reality. Why? Because she found Kerry's positons confusing. Ummm, okay. She had "confusing" on one side and "dumbest ideas ever" on the other and she opted for "dumbest ideas ever". She has wept at the sight of innocent Iraqis killed in this war by bombs built with her tax dollars but, so what? She still thinks it was the right thing to do. She doesn't agree with Kerry's interest in allies because she learned in school that other peoples opinons don't matter. Apparently she slept through history class and never learned the value of allies in war from the Revolutionary War where the help of France was the deciding factor and the Civil War where the lack of allies billsfanone the South. She voted for Bush because he has clearly defined values even though they are values with which she does not agree. Pleeez. Sounds like a guilty conscience looking to rationalize having voted for a whole mess of things she is against. When Roe v. Wade is overturned I guess she will blame Kerry for that because he was a Viet Nam vet. 128940[/snapback] I absolutely LOVE how you guys just refuse to deal with the fact that the majority of Americans have rejected your left wing views. And of course, you couldn't even get through the first sentence without calling her views "idiotic" (yet another 'open minded' Dem!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I wish I could e-mail the woman who posted that letter which seems more and more idiotic everytime I read it. She is pro choice and for gay marriage and yet voted essentially to over turn Roe v. Wade and ban gay marriage. Why? Because she was upset about the constant drum beat of Kerry's Viet Nam service. Hmmmm.......However, she didn't seem to care about the constant drum beat of 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 of the right. She was upset by all the "I hate Bush" stuff yet the swifties and flip-flopper attacks that dominated the conservative air waves for 3 months didn't seem to phase her. She thinks privatizing social security and elimenating the income tax are two of the dumbest ideas she has ever heard yet, she voted for the guy whose mission it is to make those ideas a reality. Why? Because she found Kerry's positons confusing. Ummm, okay. She had "confusing" on one side and "dumbest ideas ever" on the other and she opted for "dumbest ideas ever". She has wept at the sight of innocent Iraqis killed in this war by bombs built with her tax dollars but, so what? She still thinks it was the right thing to do. She doesn't agree with Kerry's interest in allies because she learned in school that other peoples opinons don't matter. Apparently she slept through history class and never learned the value of allies in war from the Revolutionary War where the help of France was the deciding factor and the Civil War where the lack of allies billsfanone the South. She voted for Bush because he has clearly defined values even though they are values with which she does not agree. Pleeez. Sounds like a guilty conscience looking to rationalize having voted for a whole mess of things she is against. When Roe v. Wade is overturned I guess she will blame Kerry for that because he was a Viet Nam vet. 128940[/snapback] She's telling your side how to get her vote, and you continue to illustrate her point. Insults. I for one am glad you will never get it. BTW-the bush hatred people outspent the swifties 50-1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I absolutely LOVE how you guys just refuse to deal with the fact that the majority of Americans have rejected your left wing views. And of course, you couldn't even get through the first sentence without calling her views "idiotic" (yet another 'open minded' Dem!). 129315[/snapback] I can deal with it. I have a hard time accepting some of my views... In fact, with immediate emotion, I am very conservative. It is just God gave me the ability to reason away ones stupid first choices. It is called doing the "right thing." Call me elitist... Thank You! Most people don't want to think... Everything is first emotion... The rest is discarded. Look at what a simple dick reply I get with certain posts. You think I lay them out there to hear only my view? Of course not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I absolutely LOVE how you guys just refuse to deal with the fact that the majority of Americans have rejected your left wing views. And of course, you couldn't even get through the first sentence without calling her views "idiotic" (yet another 'open minded' Dem!). 129315[/snapback] Which "left wing" view would it be that she "rejected"? She is pro-choice and thinks gays should be able to get married. She even goes on about how welfare saved the lives of her friends as they would have starved. Of course, she is also against taxing the rich to pay for the food her friends ate, maybe we should tax the poor instead? Her views, as she states them herself, are blatantly contradictory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 She's telling your side how to get her vote, and you continue to illustrate her point. Insults. I for one am glad you will never get it. BTW-the bush hatred people outspent the swifties 50-1. 129320[/snapback] Lets see, to get her vote, all we have to do is fund those welfare programs she likes that kept her starving friends alive. Wait a second, we did. Oh, I see, we taxed the rich to do it and she doesn't like that. Maybe in her next letter she will tell us how to pay for those programs. We also have to be pro-choice and pro civil unions. Wait a second, we were. We have to be against privatizing social security. Wait a second, we are. We have to be for a higher minimum wage. Wait a second, we are. We have to be against flat taxes and a fed. sales tax. Wait a second, we are. We have to be pro-union. Wait a second, we are. We have to be strong on protecting the environment. Wait a second, we are. We have to be for separation between church and state. Wait a second, we are. We have to be for rolling back the excesses of the Pat. Act. Wait a second, we are. Oh wait, people were rough on the President unlike the kid gloves treatment oh so gentlemanly conduct of the Republican party. Ann Coulter writes a book accusing every democrat in the nation of treason and it is the left that is disrespectful. John Ashcroft accused everyone who thought maybe the Patriot Act went further than necessary of sympathizing with terrorists and it is the left that is vitriolic? Perhaps she is the one person in the world who has not heard of hate spewed by Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Bob Jones, Dobson, Coulter, Hannity, Liddy or Schlesinger over the last 12 years or so. Yeah, the left finally fought back and started to give as good as its taken, shame on them. We should just do what Bush did to get her vote. Take the exact opposite of every position she holds, eschew her every value, smile a lot, wave some flags and repeat 9/11, 9/11, 9/11. That ought to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Lets see, to get her vote, all we have to do is fund those welfare programs she likes that kept her starving friends alive. Wait a second, we did. Oh, I see, we taxed the rich to do it and she doesn't like that. Maybe in her next letter she will tell us how to pay for those programs. We also have to be pro-choice and pro civil unions. Wait a second, we were. We have to be against privatizing social security. Wait a second, we are. We have to be for a higher minimum wage. Wait a second, we are. We have to be against flat taxes and a fed. sales tax. Wait a second, we are. We have to be pro-union. Wait a second, we are. We have to be strong on protecting the environment. Wait a second, we are. We have to be for separation between church and state. Wait a second, we are. We have to be for rolling back the excesses of the Pat. Act. Wait a second, we are. Oh wait, people were rough on the President unlike the kid gloves treatment oh so gentlemanly conduct of the Republican party. Ann Coulter writes a book accusing every democrat in the nation of treason and it is the left that is disrespectful. John Ashcroft accused everyone who thought maybe the Patriot Act went further than necessary of sympathizing with terrorists and it is the left that is vitriolic? Perhaps she is the one person in the world who has not heard of hate spewed by Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Bob Jones, Dobson, Coulter, Hannity, Liddy or Schlesinger over the last 12 years or so. Yeah, the left finally fought back and started to give as good as its taken, shame on them. We should just do what Bush did to get her vote. Take the exact opposite of every position she holds, eschew her every value, smile a lot, wave some flags and repeat 9/11, 9/11, 9/11. That ought to do it. 129371[/snapback] She expressed seven clear points of what NOT to do. You're still not going to get it, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfanone Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 In the states Bush won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example, he won Ohio by 2%. In the states Kerry won... with few exceptions he did not win by a landslide. Example he won PA by only 2%. A philosophical gulf between Red & Blue states, or Red & Blue people simply does not exist. In most cases a Red is Red and a Blue is Blue by only a few percentage points. People saying "fyou to the south" or calling "middle America flyover country" really need to get a grip. People referring to the left & right coasts as out of touch need a reality check of their own as well. The people/party who continue to perpetuate the false Red v. Blue argument will have it explode in their face, and lose the next election cycle. 126784[/snapback] Excellent post!!!! I said the same thing, far less eloquently, a few weeks ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 She expressed seven clear points of what NOT to do. You're still not going to get it, though. 129392[/snapback] And I pointed out no less than ten different issues in which the democrats reflected exactly her views. It didn't matter to her. In your hurry to agree with her, you are not exactly using a critical eye for anything she says. Maybe if you read her post as closely as you read mine, you might see some of the contradictions which are so obvious I can't believe you are missing them. I can only conclude that you are just ignoring them as they might get in the way of your already made up mind. Her 6th and 7th point for instance complain about Bush haters and post election anger at the red states. Where is the balance? If this upsets her, then why was the same and even worse from Bob Jones, Dobson, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Schlesinger etc, etc, etc, etc, etc not enough to keep her from voting for the party she whose platform she says she rejects almost in total? That doesn't seem to you to be at all inconsistent? Tell me, since I don't get it and you do, why this is not inconsistent? Her 4th point, well Kerry said over and over and over and over that he wouldn't put our national security in the hands of any other nation. Not good enough for her. What was he supposed to do? Slice his palm with a switchblade and swear a blood oath? You don't see her comment that she learned in "high school" that you don't put stock in what other people think to be just a tiny bit dismissive and naive? Kerry wasn't talking about smoking a joint because your friends are, he was talking about having allies in a wartime effort. Any fool who has even a vague understanding of military history understands that all things considered, it is better to have allies than to not have allies. She is worried about taxing the rich yet she thinks all those programs that helped her poor friends were worthwhile. Again, you don't see an inconsistency there? She isn't explaining her vote to us, she is explaining it to herself so she doesn't have to take responsibility for the consequences of her vote, the election of a President and a party with which she entirely disagrees. I agree with her on one thing, that kind of sophistry really does need explaining. I can see why she felt the need to draft an open letter explaining why, although it looks on the surface that she is an idiot who voted against he own views, it is really the fault of the democrats for not finding a way to appeal to her contradictions. See, Bush isn't her fault and if Roe gets overturned and all this other stuff she does not want to see happen happens, these "dumbest ideas ever", it aint her fault now is it? She needs to take some personal responsibility, she voted for Bush, fair and square. I can live with it. So should she instead of rationalizing it and discovering that surprise, surprise, turns out it isn't her fault after all. She is no snake handling evangelical. She just votes like one so pardon me if I don't really care that deep down there is a difference. She is like all these "moderate republicans" who are pro-choice, against banning gay marriage and support separation between church and state. Who cares if they are or are not? Those are not issues important enough to them to effect their voting so who cares if they are pro-choice or not? Who cares if they are gay lovers or gay bashers? The result is the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 wave some flags and repeat 9/11, 9/11, 9/11. That ought to do it. 129371[/snapback] seemed to be more successful than shouting Haliburton! or Flightsuit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 seemed to be more successful than shouting Haliburton! or Flightsuit! 129648[/snapback] Well to be fair they did toss in a "liberal" helping of "family values, family values and family values" along with "flip-flopper, flip-floppr, flip-flopper" to name just a few choice morsels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Well to be fair they did toss in a "liberal" helping of "family values, family values and family values" along with "flip-flopper, flip-floppr, flip-flopper" to name just a few choice morsels. 129665[/snapback] You need to find another voter registration project to work off some of your hostilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 And I pointed out no less than ten different issues in which the democrats reflected exactly her views. It didn't matter to her. Now you're starting to get it. In your hurry to agree with her, you are not exactly using a critical eye for anything she says. Maybe if you read her post as closely as you read mine, you might see some of the contradictions which are so obvious I can't believe you are missing them. I can only conclude that you are just ignoring them as they might get in the way of your already made up mind. Not agreeing, just understanding. Her 6th and 7th point for instance complain about Bush haters and post election anger at the red states. Where is the balance? If this upsets her, then why was the same and even worse from Bob Jones, Dobson, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Schlesinger etc, etc, etc, etc, etc not enough to keep her from voting for the party she whose platform she says she rejects almost in total? That doesn't seem to you to be at all inconsistent? Tell me, since I don't get it and you do, why this is not inconsistent? Dobson? You got to be kidding. I don't think any of those, except for maybe Coulter sunk to the same level as the Bush haters. But that's just me. Her 4th point, well Kerry said over and over and over and over that he wouldn't put our national security in the hands of any other nation. Not good enough for her. What was he supposed to do? Slice his palm with a switchblade and swear a blood oath? You don't see her comment that she learned in "high school" that you don't put stock in what other people think to be just a tiny bit dismissive and naive? Kerry wasn't talking about smoking a joint because your friends are, he was talking about having allies in a wartime effort. Any fool who has even a vague understanding of military history understands that all things considered, it is better to have allies than to not have allies. We had allies. Everyone that participated in Gulf War I, except for France. Plus some new ones that were formally part of the Soviet Union. Germany didn't help with Gulf War I. She is worried about taxing the rich yet she thinks all those programs that helped her poor friends were worthwhile. Again, you don't see an inconsistency there? And those programs are not going away because Bush is President. She isn't explaining her vote to us, she is explaining it to herself so she doesn't have to take responsibility for the consequences of her vote, the election of a President and a party with which she entirely disagrees. I agree with her on one thing, that kind of sophistry really does need explaining. I can see why she felt the need to draft an open letter explaining why, although it looks on the surface that she is an idiot who voted against he own views, it is really the fault of the democrats for not finding a way to appeal to her contradictions. Illustrates her point perfectly. She doesn't agree with you about everything, so she is an idiot. I love it. See, Bush isn't her fault and if Roe gets overturned and all this other stuff she does not want to see happen happens, these "dumbest ideas ever", it aint her fault now is it? She needs to take some personal responsibility, she voted for Bush, fair and square. I can live with it. So should she instead of rationalizing it and discovering that surprise, surprise, turns out it isn't her fault after all. She is no snake handling evangelical. She just votes like one so pardon me if I don't really care that deep down there is a difference. She is like all these "moderate republicans" who are pro-choice, against banning gay marriage and support separation between church and state. Who cares if they are or are not? Those are not issues important enough to them to effect their voting so who cares if they are pro-choice or not? Who cares if they are gay lovers or gay bashers? The result is the same. 129642[/snapback] Did you know Billy Graham is a life long Democrat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Did you know Billy Graham is a life long Democrat? 129719[/snapback] So is Zel Miller, your point? All I am doing is taking her at her own words. She says she is pro-choice, she says she wants gays to be married yet she voted for the guy who wants to end choice and keep gays from getting married, even if he has to amend the Constitution to do it. I think voting for someone who you freely admit does not reflect the vast majority of your views is stupid. Her entire letter was an attempt to explain that somehow, despite all appearances to the contrary, that made sense. I don't agree. I find her explanations and excuses to be self contradictory and naive. Take the allies thing, we at least seem to agree that having allies is better than not having them. You say we had as many nations as we did in the Gulf War, she didn't. I don't know if 2 interpreters from Swaziland replaces a few thousand troops but if that is your measure of an ally, fine. When it comes to combat troops it was us, us, us, us and a the British. Was that the case in the Gulf War? I think that comparison is laughable but she didn't even manage that. Instead, her argument was some smart alek comment about what she learned in High School. If she thinks we did enough to get allies fine, that would be an educated opinion but it sounds to me that she just swallowed the Bush BS about "handing over our foreign policy to France". We will just have to disagree about Hannity and Limbaugh and the rest. You haven't had the pleasure of being called a baby killing, cowardly, immoral, unAmerican, femminazi loving, tree hugging, commie sodomite by them every day for the last 12 years or so. Live through a decade or so of dehumanizing deligitimizing rhetoric like that and come to me crying like a baby girl about the terrible Bush bashing that went on for all of 3 months. Boo-freaking-hoo. Maybe you didn't read Bob Jone's letter to Bush about the pagans who hate Christ? Maybe you missed Falwell saying that the 9/11 attacks were God's punishment of America for its indulgence of homosexuals? Perhaps you don't recall Limbaugh telling the NAACP to "get a liquor store and practice robberies" or when he called Chelsea the "White House dog"? Were you not around when Savage called asians "little soy eaters" or told a caller "you should only get Aids and die, you pervert." Tell me again about the left being vitriolic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 So is Zel Miller, your point? All I am doing is taking her at her own words. She says she is pro-choice, she says she wants gays to be married yet she voted for the guy who wants to end choice and keep gays from getting married, even if he has to amend the Constitution to do it. I think voting for someone who you freely admit does not reflect the vast majority of your views is stupid. Her entire letter was an attempt to explain that somehow, despite all appearances to the contrary, that made sense. I don't agree. I find her explanations and excuses to be self contradictory and naive. Take the allies thing, we at least seem to agree that having allies is better than not having them. You say we had as many nations as we did in the Gulf War, she didn't. I don't know if 2 interpreters from Swaziland replaces a few thousand troops but if that is your measure of an ally, fine. When it comes to combat troops it was us, us, us, us and a the British. Was that the case in the Gulf War? I think that comparison is laughable but she didn't even manage that. Instead, her argument was some smart alek comment about what she learned in High School. If she thinks we did enough to get allies fine, that would be an educated opinion but it sounds to me that she just swallowed the Bush BS about "handing over our foreign policy to France". We will just have to disagree about Hannity and Limbaugh and the rest. You haven't had the pleasure of being called a baby killing, cowardly, immoral, unAmerican, femminazi loving, tree hugging, commie sodomite by them every day for the last 12 years or so. Live through a decade or so of dehumanizing deligitimizing rhetoric like that and come to me crying like a baby girl about the terrible Bush bashing that went on for all of 3 months. Boo-freaking-hoo. Maybe you didn't read Bob Jone's letter to Bush about the pagans who hate Christ? Maybe you missed Falwell saying that the 9/11 attacks were God's punishment of America for its indulgence of homosexuals? Perhaps you don't recall Limbaugh telling the NAACP to "get a liquor store and practice robberies" or when he called Chelsea the "White House dog"? Were you not around when Savage called asians "little soy eaters" or told a caller "you should only get Aids and die, you pervert." Tell me again about the left being vitriolic. 129833[/snapback] There's just nothing better than making the same argument in the same thread 5 or 6 different times. You feeling OK? I especially liked the "allies" part of it. Let's keep pretending Russia, China, France, and Germany were actually morally opposed to the war. Because they're like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 There's just nothing better than making the same argument in the same thread 5 or 6 different times. You feeling OK? I especially liked the "allies" part of it. Let's keep pretending Russia, China, France, and Germany were actually morally opposed to the war. Because they're like that. 129841[/snapback] I could care less why they were not part of the war effort. That is not the point really. She was critical of the idea of allies. Prefectly sound criticisms of Kerry could have been made that he wasn't going to have any more luck than Bush did in getting any help from anybody anywhere. Also, the one you make that these allies are morally bankrupt. There are plenty of good arguments to make on this issue. She didn't make them though. She just coughs up some bromide about learning in High School that you don't put too much stock in what other people think. Sorry, I wasn't as impressed as those who cheered her letter. Sometimes the nail isn't driven on the first strike, you need to drop the hammer until its done. I have made the point in other threads that there is a change the democrats need to make but it doesn't have anything to do with the so called moral values crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts