1
   

Democrats Desert Kerry for Bush

 
 
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 05:14 pm
Democrats Desert Kerry for Bush
Posted March 26, 2004
By Peter Roff - UPI

The Bush-Cheney re-election campaign fired a shot across Sen. John F. Kerry's bow with the release of the list of some 100 people making up the core of what the campaign calls "Democrats for Bush."

The group will be led by retiring Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia, who committed to support President George W. Bush's re-election bid even before the Democrats had a sense of who their nominee would be.

"I was born a Democrat and I expect I'll be a Democrat until the day I leave this earth," Miller said, "but right now this president is the guy I support."

Miller, a two-term former Georgia governor who spent a total of 24 years as a statewide elected official before being appointed to the Senate, had some strong words for his own party at the group's kickoff.

"The direction the Democrats are headed is not based on what is good for America but what is good for the party, and at historic times like these, Americans deserve more," Miller said.

Other Democrats participating in events Wednesday on Bush's behalf included former Florida Lt. Gov. Wayne Mixson, who served under Bob Graham, and Ken Trentham, a former Bollinger, Mo., county commissioner.

The effort, which campaign officials say is one of many coalitions that will be assembled for the campaign, is further evidence that the Democrats' once powerful national majority, grounded in its control of state and local offices, is disintegrating. The number of Democrats crossing the aisle in presidential campaigns made a dramatic upswing during the Reagan years, especially in the South. The number of elected Democrats re-registering as Republicans averaged one per week over the eight years of the Clinton-Gore administration.

The group's charter members include a few party notables, such as former Democratic National Committee Executive Director Brian Lunde, former U.S. Attorney General Griffin Bell, former Kentucky state Democratic Chairman Larry Townsend, and former Oklahoma U.S. Rep. Bill Brewster. Most, however, are not nationally known but include several former statewide elected officials, several former U.S. representatives, a handful of local party leaders and close to two score current and former state legislators.

The Massachusetts senator's campaign downplayed the significance of the event, saying through a spokesman, "Miller's new leadership role will be a lonely post." Calling Miller "Zigzag Zell," the campaign released a set of talking points asserting that Kerry, a 19-year veteran of the Senate, and Miller, who was appointed to his seat in July 2000 after the death of Republican Sen. Paul Coverdell, have similar voting records on defense and national security issues.

The senator's campaign also released a series of quotes attributed to Miller that lauded Kerry's leadership, including one in which he called him, "one of this nation's authentic heroes."

During a conference call after the announcement, Miller pledged to carry forward his efforts to bring Democrats into the Bush camp. "Each of us knows fellow Democrats, whether they are family, friends or colleagues, that are of a like mind on the need to have a president that is firm in his beliefs," he said.

A letter Miller will send to the other charter members of the coalition asks each of them to recruit five Democrats who will continue the chain.

Writing to "Dear Fellow Democrat," Miller said, "We each have our own reasons for taking this position. Whether you support President Bush for the leadership he has provided in the war on terror, reducing the tax burden for families and businesses, or standing firm to strengthen American families, we agree that the times demand a president that provides steady leadership."

Calling on them to reflect on the party's roots, Miller said, "President Bush is acting on the ideals we have supported for years: promoting prosperity and equal opportunity; helping Americans most in need; defending America's security and promoting freedom. National Democratic leaders have lost sight of this fact in their raw desire to defeat George W. Bush."

Miller's letter includes a description of what he believes will be Kerry's initial public policy initiatives should he win the election: "Just consider what the first 100 days of a Kerry administration would look like: massive spending increases, immediate tax increase for families and businesses, dismantling our efforts to fight terror at home and overseas, and lost jobs due to excessive regulation."

The campaign hopes that Miller's active participation in the president's re-election campaign, while helping convince Democrats that Bush deserves a second term, may also help offset pro-Kerry comments coming from Republican U.S. Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, both of whom have recently contested the Bush campaign's use of Kerry's voting record on national security and defense issues.

Bush-Cheney '04 Campaign Chairman Marc Racicot, a former governor of Montana, called the Democrats for Bush event an illustration of "the tremendous depth of support President Bush enjoys throughout the country. This president's steady leadership in times of change appeals to all voters, regardless of their political affiliation."
-----------------------------

Peter Roff is a senior political analyst for UPI, a sister news organization of Insight.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,603 • Replies: 23
No top replies

 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 05:40 pm
Interesting. I wonder how much a democrat costs to buy these days?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 05:46 pm
You know there are both Republicans and Democrats out there who decide things on the issues and the facts instead of following other sheep in the politics of personal destruction? There are both Republicans and Democrats who honestly believe George Bush is the right man for the job at this time. I don't know why it keeps surprising me that there are some who can't fathom that.

Foxfyre
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 05:52 pm
I can fathom that.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 05:55 pm
Sometimes I just have to let the cynicism shine on though though. Try it. Sometimes it's so much more fun than trusting that everything is as it appears on the surface.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 05:58 pm
Well I have to agree with that. Almost nothing is as it appears on the surface these days. Smile
0 Replies
 
suzy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 08:00 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
You know there are both Republicans and Democrats out there who decide things on the issues and the facts instead of following other sheep in the politics of personal destruction? There are both Republicans and Democrats who honestly believe George Bush is the right man for the job at this time. I don't know why it keeps surprising me that there are some who can't fathom that.

Foxfyre


Well, Foxfyre, that's an easy one and it has little to do with sheep. Fact is,
Miller is a very conservative democrat and he sees things differently than many other democrats, and always has. The core beliefs of the democratic party and the actions of Bush just don't jibe in any way, shape or form. I decide things on the issues and the facts, myself, but I decide them with my core beliefs and morals intact. I certainly would not step outside my party for someone whose beliefs don't mesh with mine at all, and whose actions are quite contrary to what I have always known as democracy. Does that make me a democrat sheep? I don't think so.
And what does the politics of personal destruction have to do with this?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 08:13 pm
It's a PR ploy. Suggest disarray and weakness.

On PBS newshour tonight, conservative columnist David Brooks said "The democratic party has never been so united."

Earlier today, on another thread, I posted a link to a yahoo group called "Republicans for Kerry".
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 03:05 am
Talking points that are mostly speculation and supposition (or fabrication) are carefully spoonfed to the masses to create a mindset that is negative and vitriolic. There are few facts or no facts to support them of course, but it doesn't matter. They sound good to those who want to despise the current administratio and are eagerly parroted as evidence. The goal is not to elect a more qualified and competent leader. The goal is to destroy and bring down the current one. This is the politics of personal destruction.

Those of the opposition given to reasoned thought and logic, those who look past the code phrases to look for the truth, those who can acknowledge and appreciate the good as well as criticize the bad are to be respected and admired.

The rest, I think, are sheep.

Foxfyre
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 03:13 am
Blatham is right, it's just PR. There are traders in every party. The good democrats far outweigh the bad ones. I'm confident that the Democratic party is united enough to elect Kerry so this doesn't concern me at all. The bigger concern is that Ralph Nader. He's the only thing that could ruin the election and hand Bush four more years.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 03:38 am
roverroad wrote:
Blatham is right, it's just PR. There are traders in every party. The good democrats far outweigh the bad ones. I'm confident that the Democratic party is united enough to elect Kerry so this doesn't concern me at all. The bigger concern is that Ralph Nader. He's the only thing that could ruin the election and hand Bush four more years.
Gee, I wonder how Zell Miller feels about being a PR ploy? How do you get a U.S. senator to be that? Is it just possible that he has the integrity to not be a sheep?
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 03:42 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Gee, I wonder how Zell Miller feels about being a PR ploy? How do you get a U.S. senator to be that? Is it just possible that he has the integrity to not be a sheep?


I find it hard to take a Democrat senator seriously who would vote for Bush after all he's done. He's obviously never was a real Democrat if he would vote for someone that is so incredibly far right wing.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 06:23 am
The far left accuses Bush of many despicable things. So far there is nothing to prove these accusations other than the desire to believe the worst about them. I take seriously those who are willing to see the whole picture and/or who will wait for the evidence before condemning somebody.
0 Replies
 
suzy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 10:38 am
No evidence? You want to talk about sheep? There's evidence EVERYWHERE!
Start with his unfunded mandates. How much did he really care about those, and how much was just trying to appear as though he cared?
Bush has set us back in many ways, and the evidence is everywhere. One need only pay attention with an open mind and not believe the sound bites without investigating further.
And how long are we supposed to "wait" before condemning him? Til 2008, perhaps?
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 10:55 am
kickycan wrote:
Interesting. I wonder how much a democrat costs to buy these days?


I love Democrats, when a Republican switches sides, he is lauded as:

"Breaking ranks to take a moral stand against the Administration"

Yet when a Democrat switches sides he is villified as:

"Being bought by the other side."


LOL you have to love them.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 10:59 am
Fedral wrote:


I love Democrats, when a Republican switches sides, he is lauded as:

"Breaking ranks to take a moral stand against the Administration"

Yet when a Democrat switches sides he is villified as:

"Being bought by the other side."


I'm not a democrat. I'm a cynical son of a bitch. LOL
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 11:05 am
kickycan wrote:


I'm not a democrat. I'm a cynical son of a bitch. LOL


LOL I can accept that. Laughing
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 11:17 am
Suzy writes:
Quote:
No evidence? You want to talk about sheep? There's evidence EVERYWHERE!
Start with his unfunded mandates. How much did he really care about those, and how much was just trying to appear as though he cared?
Bush has set us back in many ways, and the evidence is everywhere. One need only pay attention with an open mind and not believe the sound bites without investigating further.
And how long are we supposed to "wait" before condemning him? Til 2008, perhaps?


What unfunded mandates do you mean? And if you can name them, can you show how they are different from any other unfunded mandates enacted in every administration in this and the previous century? And you do realize that the president only signs the bills? They are debated and passed by Congress?

We could debate the merits pro and con re unfunded mandates and whether they are ever justified. But to demonize a president because of them is not the way to go. If you have evidence of Bush's wrong doings more than your perception or the sound bites being doled out by the Democrat National committee, I'll listen however.
0 Replies
 
suzy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 12:06 pm
How about education and special education, prescription drugs and even homeland security? The Bush administration has imposed extensive new costs on states without providing the funds. The No Child Left Behind Act imposes new standards on the states and mandates higher test scores as a condition of federal education aid but actually cuts by several billion dollars the funds needed to upgrade teaching. While Bush ran for president, he criticized many in Washington for passing unfunded mandates -- laws that require action from the state without providing money. Yet, under his watch, Congress passed one of the largest unfunded mandates in recent history: Bush's very own No Child Left Behind. With federal budget deficits nearing all-time highs and the tab for Iraq expected to grow, Bush and Congress are unlikely to provide the states with the billions of dollars they seek to quickly adapt to the new system.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 12:20 pm
Suzy
Suzy, don't forget the undisclosed secret cost overrun of Bush's "wonderful" prescription drug plan that is already underfunded before it starts. And don't forget the Bush lies that made its approval possible.

I expect this latest politically-motivated drug plan bill to be reversed soon, by both liberals and conservatives, who were lied to about the costs.

BBB
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Democrats Desert Kerry for Bush
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 08:30:12