0
   

2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

 
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Nov, 2003 04:09 pm
Al Gore never said he invented the internet -- if anyone can find where he said he "invented" the internet, please provide a link.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Nov, 2003 04:35 pm
timber, Your otherwise very well crafted posts have gone down a notch by making the statement that Gore invented the internet. We all know different; that's a statement made out of context that all should know by now. Shame.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Nov, 2003 05:02 pm
I think Timber's attitude and posts lately have been really off-putting. I confess I was offended at his mean reaction to what I hoped was a friendly, newsy post about Gore's speech. Shame indeed.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Nov, 2003 05:11 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
Al Gore never said he invented the internet -- if anyone can find where he said he "invented" the internet, please provide a link.
And Bush never said the war in Iraq was "over". Now, get over yourself. (And you can quote me on that.)
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Nov, 2003 05:13 pm
Only Libruls can have fun, huh? Get a grip and take a think at yourselves.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Nov, 2003 06:16 pm
Where did I say Bush said the war was "over?" Get over yourself.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Nov, 2003 01:54 pm
Dean will not be accepting public funding -- his supporters are lined up 85% against public funding, 15% for. There seems to be jubilation at the website -- deanforamerica.com -- and though IMO some of the language used to make the "declaration" is over the top, I really like the rallying cry he has chosen: "The tea is in the harbor!"
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Nov, 2003 02:16 pm
Middle America is not noted for its fondness of tea. Apart from its symbolic connection with The American Revolution, one of the side-effects of the Boston Tea Party was a shifting of taste toward coffee, by some historians' assessments. I find the irony of that rallying cry both rich and pointed.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Nov, 2003 02:26 pm
Oh! Tea! Harbors! I find your tone really off-putting. Shame.

Its not even a slant anymore. Its a nutty avalanche; emphasis on nutty.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Nov, 2003 03:37 pm
I wish Dean every success in the Democrat primaries. I believe of the serious contingent among the ten dwarves he will be the easiest for Bush to beat.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Nov, 2003 03:47 pm
Yup, Dean is lining up for his position among other Democrat Greats ... McGovern, Hart, Dukakis, Gore ... I support his Candicacy Campaign wholeheartedly.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 02:29 pm
Damn! I missed Gore's MoveOn.Org speech. Oh well, I found this, which I'm sure is equally entertaining:

Quote:
http://www.cpusa.org/images/ezcpbanner06_02.jpg

Action Alert #10
Author: National Organizing Department
First published: 11.07.2003 10:11


IN THIS ISSUE:

CREATE AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S DISTORTION OF EVIDENCE FOR WAR ON IRAQ.

The Communist Party USA urges your full support for the campaign being launched by MoveOn.org to support a call for an independent investigation into lies that George W. Bush administration told to justify going to war against Iraq.

CPUSA


(edited to correct link)
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 02:41 pm
Well, that's a shame, timber; it was a stemwinder.

Here, I'll post some excerpts for you:

Quote:
I want to challenge the Bush Administration's implicit assumption that we have to give up many of our traditional freedoms in order to be safe from terrorists.

Because it is simply not true.

In fact, in my opinion, it makes no more sense to launch an assault on our civil liberties as the best way to get at terrorists than it did to launch an invasion of Iraq as the best way to get at Osama Bin Laden.

In both cases, the Administration has attacked the wrong target.

In both cases they have recklessly put our country in grave and unnecessary danger, while avoiding and neglecting obvious and much more important challenges that would actually help to protect the country.

In both cases, the administration has fostered false impressions and misled the nation with superficial, emotional and manipulative presentations that are not worthy of American Democracy.

In both cases they have exploited public fears for partisan political gain and postured themselves as bold defenders of our country while actually weakening not strengthening America.

In both cases, they have used unprecedented secrecy and deception in order to avoid accountability to the Congress, the Courts, the press and the people.

Indeed, this Administration has turned the fundamental presumption of our democracy on its head. A government of and for the people is supposed to be generally open to public scrutiny by the people -- while the private information of the people themselves should be routinely protected from government intrusion.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 03:24 pm
Gee, Timber, what's to fear from an investigation of the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq? Got you worried?
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 04:08 pm
Thoroughly unworried, Tart. I'm perfectly confident the witch hunt will receive all the attention and success it merits. I'm sure it will serve most effectively to yet further distance The Democrats fom The Electorate.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 04:37 pm
Oh, I understand now; this is what timber's so worried about:

The Capital Times wrote:
Wisconsinites have grown increasingly displeased with President George W. Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, according to the latest Badger Poll.

His "poor" rating has risen to 30 percent, and his combined rating of "fair" to "poor" is 54 percent.

That is a dramatic change from April, at the beginning of the war, when only 10 percent gave him a "poor" rating and his combined rating of "fair" and "poor" was 23 percent.,

At the upper end of the scale, the 40 percent "excellent" rating he received in April for dealing with Iraq dropped to just 14 percent in October, and Bush's overall good-to-excellent approval number plunged from 75 percent to 46 percent.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 05:25 pm
The following is 100% Correct!!!
Quote:
I want to challenge the Bush Administration's implicit assumption that we have to give up many of our traditional freedoms in order to be safe from terrorists.

Because it is simply not true.

In fact, in my opinion, it makes no more sense to launch an assault on our civil liberties as the best way to get at terrorists than it did to launch an invasion of Iraq as the best way to get at Osama Bin Laden.

In both cases, the Administration has attacked the wrong target.

In both cases they have recklessly put our country in grave and unnecessary danger, while avoiding and neglecting obvious and much more important challenges that would actually help to protect the country.

In both cases, the administration has fostered false impressions and misled the nation with superficial, emotional and manipulative presentations that are not worthy of American Democracy.

In both cases they have exploited public fears for partisan political gain and postured themselves as bold defenders of our coIn both cases, they have used unprecedented secrecy and deception in order to avoid accountability to the Congress, the Courts, the press and the people.

Indeed, this Administration has turned the fundamental presumption of our democracy on its head. A government of and for the people is supposed to be generally open to public scrutiny by the people -- while the private information of the people themselves should be routinely protected from government intrusion.untry while actually weakening not strengthening America.


Now I suppose, I will be painted RED. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 06:07 pm
Timber, Lately you've been capitalizing phrases like The Republican Party and The Bush Administration and The Electorate. Any particular reason? Just interested...
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 06:49 pm
Just to differentiate them from generic. Its no recent style development ... I've long done that. Oh, and I think you'll find I very rarely use "Bush Administration" (I won't say "never", but I don't recall using it) ... most often its "Current Administration"
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2003 07:08 pm
There ya go again, PDiddie ... I say I'm not worried, and why, and you trot out " ... this is what timber's so worried about ... "
If there's anything for anyone to worry about, its down there at the bottom of that Cap Times piece:
Quote:
... State Democratic Party Director Kim Warkentin said Bush's re-election will hinge on those numbers.

"He can't win on the war alone," she said. "It really comes back to the economy."


If I were a Dem, that'd be real worrisome along about now. Still, keep your hopes up; things might get worse. I don't think you should count on that, but that's pretty much what your camp is obliged to count on. Tough place to be. Don't envy you folks a bit.
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/12/2025 at 07:33:21