Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 6:22:28 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

      What is funny is you once again attacking me for something I didn't say, rather than coming anywhere near the words I did put on the screen.

     Here is a crazy idea;  How about actually giving us your thoughts on the question of the OP?  Will the Democrat party lose more votes than they gain/retain by pandering to the anti-war protest bundle?

    Semantics is hiding place for those who lack ideas.


Asked and answered.

If you review the original post, the OP made a comment about a "split" in the Democratic Party. I asked
the OP to explain his point of view, to clarify who would be splitting from who, since the Democratic
Party does not have the sort of divide (conservatives and the religious right) you see in the GOP. 

The OP seemed to have this idea that the Democratic party is divided over whether to be involved in
a stupid boondoggle war, divided over whether to allow big corporations to loot social security, and divided over the threat of Global Warming, etc.  I asked for clarification and sources as I felt the original question had deep logical flaws.

The OP simply went on the attack with a bunch of insults and refused to answer my question.

I often see this when somebody posts an abrasive and inarticulate post, apparently with no other reason
than to incite bickering.  Go figure.  The easiest way to shoot such people down is to ask them to clarify
their points of view, at which point the facade crumbles into dust.  Perhaps your best approach to getting your questions answered would be to discuss it with the original poster, as I have had little or no luck getting an articulate response from him/her/it.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 6:23:44 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

      Can the union hold through the election, or will the party be split?



This is the original post.

I asked "what union?"

In case you dont recall.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 6:36:09 PM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline
quote:

I asked
the OP to explain his point of view, to clarify who would be splitting from who, since the Democratic
Party does not have the sort of divide (conservatives and the religious right) you see in the GOP. 


They have the same sort of divide between those who believe that the party should embody and carry out some sort of ideals, and those who see the party as their stepping stone to personal, political, and financial power over others.
(Hence the figure of speech 'LWOP'  A Liberal WithOut a Party)

Convenient smokescreens and hot button issues such as war, religion, race, abortion, etc. have always served the interests of the latter.

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 6:41:53 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline 		 
Thank you for the response, Alumbrado, but that does not really clarify who is splitting from who.

Or why.  Or when.  Or how.  Or...

I am hopeful the OP will clarify his post.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 6:44:04 PM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		I read your post...And you actually feel that any type of anti-war activity undermined us as a nation?

Here is the problem... all of the people who said we should wait have been proven to be correct....All of the people of this nation were fed a load of crap to justify this invasion....The people who voted for it, though justified upon the load of crap dispensed, can now be publicly criticized for that decision even though it(the decision) was reached via the crap that was dispensed.

Everything that was explained would happen hasn't...virtually everything that could go wrong has. It appears the Iraqi government might be taking the month of August off...I truly  hope this is not the case. 

Being right or wrong matters little anymore....Except maybe come election time...Regardless someone is going to be left to clean this mess up.

I think we should leave...It sucks...But unless tremendous progress can be shown we are now becoming engaged in a civil war that no longer can justify the loss of American legs, arms and lives.  We explain to our men and women in the service and to those soldiers and  American families who have dealt with loss that...As John Belushi said, "You fucked up!...You trusted us."

We then make it clear to all the leaders of countries in the Middle East that if you harbor terrorists and they attack our interests we will try to kill those responsible but you at the end of the day will be held accountable with terminal force. 

_____________________________



(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 6:44:05 PM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline
quote:

Thank you for the response, Alumbrado, but that does not really clarify who is splitting from who.

Or why.  Or when.  Or how.  Or...

I am hopeful the OP will clarify his post.


It does for those who aren't blinded by party loyalty or personal animosity to the extent that you are.

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 6:49:33 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline 		The OP is pretty clear, I thought.

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 7:13:31 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

Thank you for the response, Alumbrado, but that does not really clarify who is splitting from who.

Or why.  Or when.  Or how.  Or...

I am hopeful the OP will clarify his post.


It does for those who aren't blinded by party loyalty or personal animosity to the extent that you are.


Since you are not blinded by party loyalty or personal animosity, would you please clarify who is
splitting from who?

Regards,

Sinergy





_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 7:46:59 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		       Did you happen to notice the topic of the thread?  (You can ask for a clarification of the difference between salt and pepper if you want to, but after the first time, you just get ignored).

     One more time.  (Please recall your oft spoken advice about thinking twice and posting once).  I'll try to pretend I'm writing for that awful new Jeff Foxworthy game show (not my problem. Google it).

     The anti-war bundle is not locked in to the Democrat party.  You and your sub typify this.  She has stated that she's taken parts in physical protests with enough energy to draw investigations, you carry the anti-war case loudly and effectively (your methodology is another topic) on an international forum.  You both often state that you are NOT Democrats.

      The Democrats covet and court those votes.  I see last week's House vote and the current spectacle in the Senate as nothing but a long, slow rim job for "Cindy's Treehouse," after she threatened Pelosi's seat.  Look to the many references, here and mostly anywhere, that the Democrats took control on an anti-war platform.

     I believe this is a bad strategy, politically, for the Democrats to take.  Perhaps I typify as well.  A working class guy, who just naturally votes for the Democrat at the top because Republicans suck.  I decided the Dems sucked more in 03'.  What happens to the party's chances in '08 if a lot more people (as discussed on page 2 of this thread) decide it has gone too far?  What if they decide to vote safe?  Or far worse Country?

      
      Doesn't it seem better for the Democrats to go ahead and give a good stfu to a percentage of the base with nowhere else to go, than to risk pissing off another segment that does have someplace to go (the Nixon landslide and Reagan Democrats being recent examples)?


     Clear as mud? 

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 7:54:24 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

We then make it clear to all the leaders of countries in the Middle East that if you harbor terrorists and they attack our interests we will try to kill those responsible but you at the end of the day will be held accountable with terminal force. 



       And when the "leader" is Allah???  We don't have a gun that shoots that far.

     

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 7:58:40 PM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

Thank you for the response, Alumbrado, but that does not really clarify who is splitting from who.

Or why.  Or when.  Or how.  Or...

I am hopeful the OP will clarify his post.


It does for those who aren't blinded by party loyalty or personal animosity to the extent that you are.


Since you are not blinded by party loyalty or personal animosity, would you please clarify who is
splitting from who?

Regards,

Sinergy






Asked and answered.

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 8:02:57 PM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

We then make it clear to all the leaders of countries in the Middle East that if you harbor terrorists and they attack our interests we will try to kill those responsible but you at the end of the day will be held accountable with terminal force. 



      And when the "leader" is Allah???  We don't have a gun that shoots that far.

    


I don't quite get the joke here....we will "take out" the leader of the country.....And he can have a discussion with Allah.

_____________________________



(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 8:07:19 PM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		I don't believe there is a split....The only problem was that the Dems sat on their hands after being clearly voted in on a anti-war vote....I don't see that as Republicans turn against the war that they are going to be accepted by the voters.

But who knows, the way that the Dems pick their candidates anything is fucking possible.

_____________________________



(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 8:14:55 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		      I don't think there would be a "country" DG.  I think there would be a region of chaos and violence where a lot of crazy people would come together with us in mind.  Sooner or later we will get hit hard enough to decide we have to go back  As sadists get to explain now and then, "This?  This is NOTHING to how it's going to hurt."

      I don't want that.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 8:44:24 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline 		 
I understood the topic.  I also understood the sentence in the original post.  The connection between the two
is tenuous at best.

I switch parties depending on which person I want to support or vote against, or depending on whether I want
to vote for a ballot initiative that I will only get the opportunity to vote for in the primary of a particular party.  I
have no loyalty to any party, as my impression of most of them is they will strangle their grandmother for a vote.

I knew Iraq was an insane and incompetent blunder before it ever started.  I have been really dubious about the education level, intelligence, and sanity of anybody who supported that nitwit from the get-go.  But further, I have opposed every war this country has been involved in since I was allowed to legally vote.  I thought World War 2 was sort-of a great idea, no wars since then have made any sense to me.  I dont care whether it was Clinton sending troops to Somalia or Reagan invading Club Med.   People starve.  People die.  It is called Tough Love.  We cannot fix the world's problems, they have to learn to sink or swim on their own.  I am all for sending people to help survivors of tsunamis, earthquakes, etc., but if we need to send guns and kill people, I am not into doing that at all.  I would rather we brought our 60,000 troops home from South Korea.  I dont particularly like having lots of troops in Germany, Turkey, Okinawa, etc.  One of the reasons is because the money I work my ass off to earn (and pay in taxes) is used to support the infrastructures of other countries.  What is most galling about this is that many of these countries hate our guts and do not want us there.  Screw 'em; We have our own infrastructure which needs to be supported.

I registered Democrat because I do not want Hillary Clinton as the Democratic choice, and my only option is to
register with that party in order to vote for Obama, or Gore if he runs.  I will take a vomit bag to the polling place and vote against any of their incumbents out of pure spite.

I wont register Republican at this point because I have yet to see a candidate of theirs I had any measure of respect for.  If they run somebody who is not mentally defective or under criminal indictment and I might register Republican to vote for them in the primary.

So please dont accuse me of being a running dog Democrat with party loyalty trumping my common sense.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/17/2007 9:22:09 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

So please dont accuse me of being a running dog Democrat with party loyalty trumping my common sense.

Sinergy



      Huh??? 

    Glad you agree that not alienating voters such as myself is more important for the Democrats than trying to win votes such as yours.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/18/2007 12:27:33 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

I don't believe there is a split....The only problem was that the Dems sat on their hands after being clearly voted in on a anti-war vote...



       Doesn't that fact indicate there are at least some cracks, DG?  Promises were made (the nature of politics, I know) that I don't think they ever had any intention of keeping.

      Can the Dems fool the anti-war bundle again AND prevent the defection of the middle? 

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/18/2007 2:07:26 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

since the Democratic Party does not have the sort of divide (conservatives and the religious right) you see in the GOP. 
They don't? Just because their religion is outside the traditionalist definition, the anti-war 'cult' is no less extreme. Should you need an example I'd refer to the election of Senator Joe Lieberman after the lost Democratic primary. 

Many others would disagree and have gone so far as to say so in no uncertain terms:
quote:

Make no mistake about it: We, the majority of Americans, want this war ended -- and we will actively work to defeat each and every one of you who does not support an immediate end to this war.
Nearly every Democrat set to run for president in 2008 is responsible for this war. They voted for it or they supported it. That single, stupid decision has cost us 2,592 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Lieberman and Company made a colossal mistake -- and we are going to make sure they pay for that mistake. Payback time started last night.
I realize that there are those like Kerry and Edwards who have now changed their position and are strongly anti-war. Perhaps that switch will be enough for some to support them. For others, like me -- while I'm glad they've seen the light -- their massive error in judgment is, sadly, proof that they are not fit for the job. They sided with Bush, and for that, they may never enter the promised land.


Now at first I wasn't quick to assign this as a party specific representation from a person, although given a place of high honor at the last convention, does not speak or represent a party. However, according to his own quote later in the article he is employing the use of the royal 'us' in his warning to the Democratic party members who don't line up behind the anti-war banner.
He goes on to end the statement quoted by saying.
quote:

P.S. Republicans -- sorry to leave you out of this letter. It's just that our side has a little housecleaning to do.

"Our side" combined with the other references in the article make it clear within the party there an polarizing issue. Every time Speaker Pelosi appears before the cameras and the crowd noise is picked up by the microphones its obvious.

This has no bearing on my position. I stand behind the belief that, for the foreseeable future, the only good incumbent is one who loses.

I also stand behind my initial assessment of last November's election results. Prior to the resulting change in the majority of both houses of Congress there was no way for the Democratic party to lose the 2008 Presidential election while obtain significant majorities in both houses. Now - there is a way for both not to occur. AMAZING.

The best way to showcase a person's or a political party's lack of leadership and integrity is to put them in power.

A simply majority vote in Congress is all that is required to stop funding. The Democrats have a simple majority. It could be voted on tomorrow or during the next pajama party and the war is over. Each day, and with each facade of action, more voters who put them in as the majority are begin disenfranchised. It matters not to me or anything I hold important that you believe that to be the truth or not. It doesn't even matter that you agree with it. Enough do, enough are, and enough of the slim majority that effected last November's change are now realizing that once again in November they should vote NO to anyone representing the status quo regardless of party.

Edited to add quote source: http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?id=197

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 7/18/2007 2:42:24 PM >

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/18/2007 2:19:44 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

I stand behind the belief that, for the foreseeable future, the only good incumbent is one who loses.




Well said.

FirmKY


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement - 7/18/2007 4:03:50 PM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		Well if last nights vote was any indicator ...The Dems will keep backing the Reps up against the wall...As we draw closer to the election you will see more and more Reps jump ship to save their skin....Especially those up for re election.

Anyone who suggests that the Dems are to blame equally for the war or even to suggest the Reps that  voted for war should be blamed doesn't have a realistic understanding of politics and the events that transpired to produce that vote.

If someone leads with that train of thought they are not worth the argument.

The Dems dropped the ball when they took control.  But  as votes continue to be held and Reps continue to back a resented President and an extremely unpopular war, if this continues it will be a landslide....And then it will be back to politics as usual.

< Message edited by domiguy -- 7/18/2007 4:04:40 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Democrats and the Anti-war movement Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094