Since my previous blog entry was an entirely partisan guess about how things are going to turn out…and is already approaching a potentially unwieldy one hundred comments…I invite folks who actually want to discuss this election night to do so here.
Since my previous blog entry was an entirely partisan guess about how things are going to turn out…and is already approaching a potentially unwieldy one hundred comments…I invite folks who actually want to discuss this election night to do so here.
• 
“Every pathetic idiot who voted for Bush should take a long hard look at the way to Armaggedon. ‘Cause that’s where we’re going.”
Actually all of the Democrat whining that you’re all doing is pathetic. I think this was a vote for morality, which the Democratshave lost all sense of. It was giving a finger to the U.N. and all of the Oil-For-Food scandal countries, losers like Michael Moore, the liberal press, and most importantly the terrorists.
And not to pile on but all of you whining about Bush winning, seem to be oblivious to the fact that Republicans strengthened their hold on the House and Senate (which is probably more important than the Presidency) and kicked out the Senate’s Democratic Leader Tom Daschle. And now they’ll be able to get Supreme Court Justices confirmed…. God, I guess it must be really hard to be a liberal democrat today…
‘Not all countries revel in tweaking the U.S.
Blake:
>…. God, I guess it must be really hard to be a liberal democrat today…
Dunno. I’ve never labeled myself as such….. or anything else for that matter. Simply look at situations as they occur, attempt to make sense of them and then form an opinion. Today, I’m floored and again trying to make sense of it is all.
Fred
Well it’s over and Bush has given us proof that fear wins out over hope
“Kerry- If Bush wins, draft”
“Bush- Thats fearmongering”
“Bush- If Kerry wins there will be another 9/11”
Bush and I differ on the definition of fear mongering I guess.
Furthermore, and I apologize in advance for the strong language, the backward ášš state I’m in was one of the 11 to, and I use the states apperent opinion on this, not mine. “Pass the ban and stop those fággøŧš from destorin’ marrige. cause only proper couples like me an my sister should be allowed to marry.”
I’m running a 101 degree fever right now, so I’m pretty light headed and pìššëd øff, and if this pìššëš øff anyone here, Oh bloody well.
“Bush- Kerry will raise taxes and spend more than before.”
Better to lower taxes and spend more, thats good math! All quotes are paraphrased of course.
Before if I were to go on vacation there were severl place that come to mind I wouldn’t go, thinking of my safty. After the first term, theres a lot more now. After the second, well I only hope Canada doesn’t get to pìššëd øff at us. I don’t know if I’ll be able to go anywhere else. Half of them for safty concerns, and the other half for the shame I already feel mounting.
I pine for the days when the GOP tried to use a hummer get a president out of office.
Its the day after the election and I’m quite sick. There hasn’t been a flu shot within 100 miles of me for about a month.
Parting shot for this depressing entry: Unlike PAD I do see a major upside to Bush winning, the daily show is going to be frickin’ great for the next 4 years. Unless freedom of the speech goes away with some of our other dwindling freedoms, such as the right to choose. But hey maybe Bush has a grand plan to not need the draft by getting rid of abortion. Think about it. The poor inner city family that is below poverty level may really need that eighth kid, and when he turns eighteen what options does he have?
Sigh….
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The reason the democrats lost is because they didn’t run on an agenda other than “Bush Is Bad”. Where were the new ideas? “I have a plan” just didn’t cut it. What was this plan? Oh, you’ll tell us after you’re elected? Then, no thanks.
The democrats and all their fringe groups have spent the last year or so calling people stupid if they vote for Bush. Well, people don’t like being called stupid and it probably drove more people towards Bush than against him. The democrats campaign was about fear and hate more than anything else and now they are suprised that the average person didn’t fall for it.
If the decocrat party wasn’t so intent on stacking the primaries so far ahead and rushing thru the process of finding a candidate, then they might have been able to come up with someone more likeable to middle America. Kerry might be fine to the northeast and California crowd, but his message sure didn’t flow to a lot of the rest of the country. Even a lot of people that weren’t totally behind Bush didn’t believe/trust in what Kerry was saying, so they either voted for the “evil that they knew”, or just stayed home.
Agree with him or not, people know where Bush stands on issues. That’s a lot more that Kerry ever did.
For me, I’m just glad that John Edwards is soon out of politics for a while. If I need a personal injury lawyer, he’s the guy I would want. But not for a governmental leader.
Jeff:
>The poor inner city family that is below poverty level may really need that eighth kid, and when he turns eighteen what options does he have?
Well, he has the option of putting all of his savings into a private Social Security fund and properly managing it so that he has tons when he retires to…. oh, wait. :p
“More people turned out to vote this time. Great. Bush got more of the vote than last time out. Good for him. But Bush still only got 51%. You’re trying to make it sound like he got a clear majority nearer to 75% or something. He didn’t. 51% is not a clear statistical majority.”
Actually, I think it is. At any rate, it is far more of an actual majority than 43% or 49%, right?
“God, I guess it must be really hard to be a liberal democrat today…”
Gloating is bad form…
“Every pathetic idiot who voted for Bush should take a long hard look at the way to Armaggedon. ‘Cause that’s where we’re going.”
So is being a crybaby…
“See, I’m not surprised about it being the will of the people because the people are Americans and they love their evil.”
And then there are those who are just in their own little world. Back away slowly, smiling.
Dhanson– What, a calm, rational, adult response? Who let this guy in?
Unfortunately the American people seem to not believe in the
A voting story:
I was in line waiting to vote yesterday when I started talking to a group of college students in line with me. They were very vocal on their support for Bush. They said they believed him to be a fantastic leader and applauded the war in Iraq.
Actually all of the Democrat whining that you’re all doing is pathetic. I think this was a vote for morality, which the Democratshave lost all sense of.>>
Bigotry, unending greed, lying on an international scale, war profiteering, destroying social security, burning every bridge with governments around the world, a sky rocketing unemplyment rate and placing an unimaginable financial burden on our future generations….these are symbols of morality? The only thing lost here is a sense of reality for your half of the nation.
Sad truth is that half of America’s voters are morons, or acting moronically. They obviously believe the crap that Bush has told them. America is in for a lot of division because those of us who hate Bush are not going to start backing the jerk…”Osama Heart Bush.” Makes a valid point, I should think.
They believe in racism, sexism, and any ism that makes white people feel safe and comfortable.
Talk about sour grapes, yeesh. Just because the majority did not buy all the rhetoric from the left, Michael Moore and Hollywood using every bullet it had in it’s chamber, then all white voters are stupid and evil and the lies start. If that makes you feel better fine, what’s next laying on your back and kicking your feet in the air?
You know, I really AM considering leaving the USA if I can figure it out. It’s more a problem of personal finances than anything else to leave.
Gotta love these guys, go already!! See how it’s like in….Canada? Wait 3 months for an office visit…Mexico? If you can make your way past everyone going the other way to get into the US. Even if you don’t like how things are, if your not willing to stick it out and see more bad than good, GO! Funny I only see this from the left…hmmm.
Okay, so Bush won both the popular vote AND the electoral vote. NOW can we get rid of the electoral college?
-tOjb
10/11 states amended their constitution to define marriage as the union between a man and a woman. In fact, one state, even decided to not allow civil unions.
Florida now says that an underage girl most now notify her parents before having an abortion.
Bush wins and the Republicans gains seats in the Senate and control the House once again.
You liberals better figure something out. Your views are WAY too far left for this country. The people have spoken. PAD, you can say they are stupid, but perhaps its the Dems.
Okay, I’ve got it. We’ll have TWO Americas… because when you think about it, that’s what this election is all about: how 51% of the people get to further their version of America over the America of the other 49%. So we’ll give the West Coast to the extreme liberals, the East Coast to the extreme conservatives, and the 80% of America’s population that just wants to live peaceful, prosperous lives without screaming about whose candidate did what can live in the middle.
The great thing about my system is that Middleground America controls the country’s breadbasket, so both extreme sides will have to earn their keep in order to get food.
Seriously, though, as a voter that lives in one of those “Ban Gay Marriage” amendment states, doesn’t America’s famous religious freedom imply a built-in opposition to religious tyrrany? I mean, let’s be honest about this, the “Ban Gay Marriage” movement wouldn’t exist without conservative Christians; it’s primarily a religious issue. How is this not a clear-cut case of forcing a religious belief upon a whole?
-tOjb
Well, don’t worry about that pesky ol’ freedom of speech PAD’s been using. Once the Supreme Court is packed with ideologues we won’t have that to kick around anymore. Not to mention the overturn of Roe v Wade. I guess I better just go get that lobotomy I’ve always wanted, since the government probably won’t let me think anymore…
Well, don’t worry about that pesky ol’ freedom of speech PAD’s been using. Once the Supreme Court is packed with ideologues we won’t have that to kick around anymore. Not to mention the overturn of Roe v Wade. I guess I better just go get that lobotomy I’ve always wanted, since the government probably won’t let me think anymore…
And conservatives are called fear-mongers…
Bill Mulligan:
Actually, I think it is. At any rate, it is far more of an actual majority than 43% or 49%, right?
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. Bush had a 3% majority. Bush’s people are talking about it as if it was a 75% majority.
Bush won fair and square. I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with is the gloating that began almost immediately over how he got the most presidential votes ever, which is based on a statistical fallacy.
Bill Mulligan quoth: “”More people turned out to vote this time. Great. Bush got more of the vote than last time out. Good for him. But Bush still only got 51%. You’re trying to make it sound like he got a clear majority nearer to 75% or something. He didn’t. 51% is not a clear statistical majority.”
Actually, I think it is. At any rate, it is far more of an actual majority than 43% or 49%, right?”
51% is a simple majority. It’s not a statistical majority bacause it represents only those votes that were counted. You’ll think I’m splitting hairs here, but that, after all, is what statistics are all about. It’s not a statistical majority because the margin for error has to be greater than 1%. Votes discounted, not counted, misread, etc.
And even if it is, so what? I hope that, instead of claiming that the country is more behind him than ever, Bush wakes up and realizes that his side just got more people off their butts and out to the polls than the other side. We’re still at, what, 60% of eligible voters this time ’round? Bush has a lot more bridge-building within this country to do over the next 4 years. And his GOP handlers had better recognize this, or come 2008, they might find themselves in those unemployment lines they claim don’t exist.
They’ve got both houses, the Executive, and it looks like at least one Supreme Court seat to fill over the next 4 years. No more excuses for them. If they succeed and our Nation surges ahead into a glorious golden age, fantastic for everyone. But if not, they don’t have anyone to point the finger at anymore….
sore losers.
it’s no wonder ya’ll lost dissing the mentality of a majority.
but it all balances out in the end because we get 4 more years of listening to liberals bìŧçh and moan and demos hate bush as much as repubs hated clinton.
You liberals better figure something out. Your views are WAY too far left for this country. The people have spoken. PAD, you can say they are stupid, but perhaps its the Dems.
* Tom Coburn R-OK: said “lesbianism is so rampant in some of the schools in southeast Oklahoma that they’ll only let one girl go to the bathroom.”
* Tom Bunning R-KY: admitted he was unaware that a group of Army reservists had refused a convoy mission in Iraq, and said he hadn’t read a newspaper in weeks and relied on Fox News for information.
* A vetoed Missouri bill, the Infant’s Protection Act, allowed the use of force against abortion providers (and the language suggests that lethal force would be acceptable) to stop any illegal abortion. The bill left unclear just what constituted an illegal abortion.
I don’t think liberal views are far left. I suspect that, mostly, the conservatives in power are so far right that they’ve convince people that right is center, and modestly progressive is way left.
Oh go on.
You point out two quotes and one defeted bill and that is your argument that this country isn’t anywhere near the views of the left?
Fine, I’ll use the elction results.
Correction, my line should have read:
“You point out two quotes and one defeted bill and that is your argument against the left’s views being too far left?”
Jim in Iowa: Opposing gay marriage is fundamentally NOT the same as saying a Jew cannot marry a Catholic. There is a reason why a ban on gay marriage won overwhelmingly in 10 (and possibly won in 11) states. There is a clear, physical difference between men and women.
Luigi Novi: There is a clear, physical difference between a Caucasian and an African.
Jim in Iowa: That difference is (apart from medical intervention), only a man and woman together can have a child. Having kids is not the sole purpose of marriage, but it is a fundamental one in principle. A mixed racial couple can have a child. A gay couple cannot.
Luigi Novi: People get married because they
To grimmer:”Who are these countries?”
Israel, Japan, Australia are some of the major
ones …England…. Tony Blair really put his neck on the line and because it was the right thing to do…That’s being a leader who acts because it’s right, not because of public opinion…. instead of a sheep. Or a country trying to cover up the fact that they were being paid to look the other away and to vote against U.N. sanctions against Iraq by Saddam(ala the Oil-For-Food program) by opposing our actions against Iraq. Like France.
To Fred Chamberlain: “I’ve never labeled myself as such…. or anything else for that matter. Simply look at situations as they occur, attempt to make sense of them and then form an opinion.” Oh, c’mon you must have some kind of idealogy or center to base your opinions on! I don’t look at a problem and say: “Well, I’m conservative and this is the conservative way of thinking so this is what I must think…. ” Or do you lick your finger, stick it in the wind to see which way it’s blowing? C’mon…
And to your response to Jeff:”….putting all of his savings into a private Social Security fund and properly managing it so that he has tons when he retires to…. oh, wait.”
I think you’re trying to make a point here about the problems of bankrupting the Social Security system or something….Did you mean IRAs or something… I mean as far as if somebody investing their savings in a soc. sec. fund. Doesn’t work that way. The government takes money out of your paycheck and gives it back to you when you retire, but most people invest in other alternatives because the soc. sec. check isn’t enough, or it might not be there….
“Bigotry, unending greed, lying on an international scale, war profiteering, destroying social security, burning every bridge with governments around the world, a sky rocketing unemplyment rate and placing an unimaginable financial burden on our future generations….these are symbols of morality? The only thing lost here is a sense of reality for your half of the nation.” Posted by wolfe
i see you’re drinkin’ the liberal Kool-aid…These are all talking points from the Liberal Manual…Bigotry? I say sanctity of marriage. There’s no persecution going on…Voters like myself just don’t want our government puting the stamp of approval on things that we believe are immoral and disgusting… Doesn’t mean that people can’t engage in whatever behavior that they want in their own homes…
Unending greed? I say giving tax cuts to EVERYONE so that that can have and decide what to do with their OWN money…
Lying on an international scale? He might have had wrong info about the WMDs, but Bush had the same info that France, Russia, Great Britain, etc. had and acted accordingly. Iraq had over a decade to comply with the inspectors of the U.N. and did nothing but stall and lie. And really despite what the ‘unbiased’ reportings of the media. Just a few weeks ago they glossed over the fact that the U.N. reported having lost weapons grade nuclear materials from Iraq’s nuclear program. Doesn’t that qualify?
Burning every bridge…? What? Whenever other countries need help, who is the first one to help? We send more foreign aide money than any other nation in the world.
A sky rocketing unemplyment rate? Bush inherited a declining economy and then, if you’ve forgotten, our country was attacked which had a huge negative economic impact….Our economy is rebounding and the unemployment is declining if you’ve been paying attention to the figures….
Again, all the usual liberal talking points…. Anyway….
-Blake
kevingreen wrote:
“Um…the UN was formed largely by efforts from the US. They can’t have done a very good job of it if it was immediately anti-American…
It’s also based in New York, which doesn’t seem like a very sensible place to be based if you’re an anti-American organisation…”
Exactly why the U.N.’s anti-American has been so frustrating over the years.
kevingreen wrote:
“Um…the UN was formed largely by efforts from the US. They can’t have done a very good job of it if it was immediately anti-American…
It’s also based in New York, which doesn’t seem like a very sensible place to be based if you’re an anti-American organisation…”
Exactly why the U.N.’s anti-American stance has been so frustrating over the years.
RE: “Do we need to get divorced since we don’t have kids” comment —
The function of marriage is NOT solely to have kids. That alone does not define a marriage. However, I would strongly suggest (and some psychiatrists say there are actual studies that demonstrate) that a child being raised by his or her biological parents is without question better than any other option, all things being equal.
There is no question that a stable home environment is essential for developing a healthy child. The overwhelming evidence so far is that divorce has a devestating effect on children. The current evidence for gay marriage in Europe where it has now been legal for 10 years is that gay marriages are even less stable than traditional marriage. In addition, gay marriages are not monogamous even when they do stay together.
Can a gay couple be stable? I am sure some can. Can they be more loving than a “tradtional” couple going through divorce? Of course, some can. But is that a reason to change the very definition of marriage? No. We are now reaping the effects of no fault divorce and how it has impacted kids and families. We will pay even more if we change the definition of marriage.
………………………….
For those wanting to read a wide variety of reviews about “Voices of Iraq” check out this site:
http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/voicesofiraq/
………………………….
Jim, 51% of 105 million is not more statistically significant than 51% of forty. More people turned out to vote this time. Great. Bush got more of the vote than last time out. Good for him. But Bush still only got 51%. You’re trying to make it sound like he got a clear majority nearer to 75% or something. He didn’t. 51% is not a clear statistical majority
By definition, a majority of votes IS 51%. Bush got more than half of those who did go out and vote. That is a fact. That is a majority. You can say it is not a landslide. You can say it is not an avalanche. Fine. But to say it is not a majority is to redefine the very meaning of the term.
Clinton did not get over 50% in either election. That means he did not win the popular vote. Bush did.
When you realize that roughly 40% will vote for a Democrat if his name is Micky Mouse, and 40% will vote for a Republican if his name is Bugs Bunny, the fact that Bush won 51% is statistically significant. The fact that Republicans added to their number in both the house and the senate adds weight to that significance.
Finally, 51% of 105 million IS more significant than 51% of 40 IF the number of possible voters is the same (or close to the same) in both examples. It shows more people were motivated to come out and vote. So yes, I have no problem saying these numbers mean something — because they do. They mean that Bush has united more people than he has divided in this country. And considering the rhetoric on both sides in the last 4 years, that is not a small accomplishment.
………………………………..
For some reason, I can only sporadically get on this site, so sorry for doing one long post.
Jim in Iowa
You liberals better figure something out.
Oh, some of us have. We realize that we’re on the cusp of a theocracy, and trying to figure out how to avoid the bloodbaths (figurative or, alas, literal) that will follow.
I’m entirely too numb to put together anything major here at the moment, but for now —
To Bill and a handful of other reasonable conservatives who’ve been on this thread — thank you for not gloating. Thank you for at least attempting to keep alive the dying art of civil discourse. Thank you for proving by example that not all Bush supporters are slack-jawed maroons. You’re Good Folks.
To those who’ve come here to gloat (and just in case you think I don’t mean you, I *specifically* would like to point out James Tichy, Blake, “Eric!”, and our lovely pseudonymous kamikaze pilots, though others may fit the category as well) — thank you for embodying the stereotype of mean-spirited conservatism. It’s not enough that you gained in the House, gained a majority in the Senate that borders on filibuster-proof (and thus, by implication, have won the courts), and won the White House. No, you have to make sure everyone who’s NOT you feels appropriately bad about it.
Thank you for making plain how little you care about the common good, and how much you care only about Your Side Winning.
And rest assured that if you’ve ever got the balls to say these things to my face, you’ll wind up chewing on ’em.
I may be back here in a day or two. But for right now, having read this thread … frankly, not only do I not need to be here, I rather heavily need NOT to be.
TWL
Jim in Iowa: Opposing gay marriage is fundamentally NOT the same as saying a Jew cannot marry a Catholic. There is a reason why a ban on gay marriage won overwhelmingly in 10 (and possibly won in 11) states. There is a clear, physical difference between men and women.
Luigi Novi: There is a clear, physical difference between a Caucasian and an African.
Are you deliberately ignoring the sexual, gender difference that I clearly referred to later in my post? A Caucasain and an African can mate, two men or two women cannot. You are comparing apples to oranges and deliberately ignoring what I clearly stated.
Jim in Iowa: That difference is (apart from medical intervention), only a man and woman together can have a child. Having kids is not the sole purpose of marriage, but it is a fundamental one in principle. A mixed racial couple can have a child. A gay couple cannot.
Luigi Novi: People get married because they
There is no question that a stable home environment is essential for developing a healthy child.
While this may be true, it also depends on how narrow your idea of a
Correction, my line should have read:
“You point out two quotes and one defeted bill and that is your argument against the left’s views being too far left?”
No, just making a point that just as often as not, the right’s positions are too far right. Sorry if that was unclear.
Fine, I’ll use the elction results.
The results suggest a grudging acceptance of right-wing foreign policy (*not* social policy), driven more by uncertainty and fear than conviction and belief of the philosophy behind it.
Lincoln was the first Republican president. He was the one who freed the slaves.
Oh gimme a break.
Lincoln no more fits the description of a Republican in the year 2004 than Reagan does.
Or perhaps, pre-Regan Republicans, since Reagan is the one that set us on this current ultra-right wing path.
You liberals better figure something out.
Oh, some of us have. We realize that we’re on the cusp of a theocracy, and trying to figure out how to avoid the bloodbaths (figurative or, alas, literal) that will follow.
Last time I checked, neither Alan Keyes nor Pat Robertson were elected.
Your fear is baseless. I can say with utter confidence it will not happen. We are too pluralistic of a country, and Bush is by no means a believer in theocracy. Nor is Cheney.
I know it is hard to grasp, but it is possible that a large majority (roughly 70% of all Americans by many polls) opppose gay marriage (to take an example), not because of a desire to establish a theocracy, nor even because of a common, shared religious belief, but because they, based on their own, personal belief system, think it is wrong.
For a theocracy to work, there would have to be a much stronger shared religious belief system. Protestants and Catholics may unite on gay marriage and being pro-life, but there are far too many differences for them to ever unite to create a theocracy. Not to mention there are many practicing Muslims who agree on many with conservatives on many of these social issues.
This fear of Christians by a few of you on the left is disappointing. Historically, Christians have acted far more to liberate than dominate in American culture. In the last 30 years since Roe V. Wade, arbirtrary actions by judges have created a new atmosphere. Issues that would never have won a vote by the people are now being imposed on the people. While some rulings were justified, some are actions to move forward a political agenda that never was able to pass either a direct vote of the people or a representative vote in a legislature. That will inherently cause division and dissatisfaction and feelings of disenfranchisement on either side.
Let me admit that some on my side would be saying similar things about Kerry if he had been elected (and said them about Clinton in ’92). The fact is, except when judges step in and make arbitrary decisions, our constitutional system has done a good job of correcting itself when needed.
I know there are some radical exceptions on the religious right side (as there are on the liberal left), but this fear of Christians as a whole is just plain bigotry based on lies and false allegations. The fact that we may disagree on some issues (such as abortion, gay marriage, etc.) does not mean we are going to become the next Nazi Germany any more than a Kerry election means we are going to become a godless communist country. Let’s debate the merit of ideas rather than attacking the people who hold those ideas.
Jim in Iowa
I continue to be amazed by the number of people posting here who believe this election is the end of the world. I guess I have my problems with both candidates, but have never seen this election as a sign of the Apocalypse, no matter which way it went.
Perhaps the doomsayers are right, and we face an end to free speech and a budding dictatorship, but I just don’t see it happening. I would suggest a trip to the library for some intense reading of history–both of this country and of some REAL totalitarian dictatorships. Those of you who are lamenting the end to free speech might want to take note of the fact that you are speaking freely right now and no one has broken in your door to haul you away yet.
This is not a perfect country, but complaint alone doesn’t make things better–effort does. As a nation, we have done things I disagree with, but as a nation we have also done great things. And we have the potential to make things better for ourselves and for our children. If you don’t like the now, you have the ability to work toward a future you may be happier with. I recall a quote, though I’ve forgotten who to attribute it to: “Democracy is the worst form of government in the world–except for all the others.”
“Democracy is the worst form of government in the world–except for all the others.”
Winston Churchill
While this may be true, it also depends on how narrow your idea of a
I continue to be amazed by the number of people posting here who believe this election is the end of the world. I guess I have my problems with both candidates, but have never seen this election as a sign of the Apocalypse, no matter which way it went.
Once again, someone summarizes well in a few words what takes me 5 posts to try to say.
Well said, Dhanson.
Jim in Iowa
Just read on CNN that Bush said he had a “broad, nationwide victory” Um, when I looked at the numbers, I don’t see a nationwide victory. I see close to half the country realizing that are in desparate need of a change.
Be afraid….be very afraid.
Tim,
I hope you get to read this. Let me say that I genuinely respect your passion and I know that this is a very hard thing for you. I totally disagree with you that things will be at all as bad as you fear and I hope you don’t go through with your considerations on leaving the country. At the very least, look forward to 2008, the first election in 50 years that will have totally fresh faces–no incumbent presidents or vice presidents trying to advance their career. It could be a real chance for a campaign that will make a difference.
Gloating is low class and indicative of, as you say, soeone who is more concerened with being on the winning side than they are with any philosophy or belief system. I think that a lot of the Kerry supporters are beng ridiculous here but one can cut them some slack on account of being tired and unhappy. No such excuse for any republican who feels the need to rub faces in the dirt. Only a fool thinks that they will always be on the winning side and memories are long. I rather hope that when it’s my turn to be bummed out by an election my friendly opposition will remember this day and go gently on me.
For the record, had kerry won as I expected him to, my post was going to be a takeoff on a classic Simpsoms line: “I, for one, WELCOME our new Democrat overlords!”
Anyway, take care and ignore the turkeys. The fact that you actually bothered to say nice things about folks who differed with you on an issue of such personal importance instantly makes you a bigger man then they could ever hope to be.
My point about gay marriage is that if the norm (as so far has been the case) is to cycle partners every 2 years, that is clearly not a “stable” environment for a child.
Where do you get your statistics? Most homosexual relationships I know about last far longer than a lot of heterosexual ones.
I am curious. Those of you who support gay marriage, why do you think gays want to be considered married? (Saying that it doesn’t matter, it is none of our business, doesn’t answer a valid question. It just avoids it.)
They simply want to live their lives with the same rights, responsibilities, commitments and equalities as all other Americans.
I am curious. Those of you who support gay marriage, why do you think gays want to be considered married?
Probably for the same reason heterosexuals want to be married. It
“Democracy is the worst form of government in the world–except for all the others.”
Winston Churchill
Thank you Den W., for helping me out with the attribution for this quote!
Bill,
As you must know, some of us are devastated. While many on this board think a lot of us were only anti-Bush, most of us truly believed in the Kerry/Edwards ticket and the promise of a brighter future, based on our political philosophies. Since we are opposed to many, if not most, of this administrations policies, we are afraid of the future. This is not fear-mongering. This is simple reality based on past perfomance. This is still not the direction we want this country to go in.
Now, I also hear some of you accusing us of being whiners because our candidate did not win. Please give us time to mourn the (temporary) passing of our hopes and dreams. Then, I challenge all those who worked so tirelessly to elect Kerry to keep at it. There are elections every year and we need to stay involved and start working for change at the local level on up. The only way to change the direction of this country is to NOT give up. We lost a battle, but there are more ahead.
Where do you get your statistics? Most homosexual relationships I know about last far longer than a lot of heterosexual ones.
I will have to look it up. It is from a poll done in 5 (?) European countries that have had legal homosexual marriage for 10 years. It is quoted by a number of conservatives, such as by Jim Dobson and Rep. Dave Barton of Texas. I looked up the original info at one point but don’t know if I can find it right now.
Jim in Iowa
s. yarish wrote:
“Just read on CNN that Bush said he had a “broad, nationwide victory” Um, when I looked at the numbers, I don’t see a nationwide victory. I see close to half the country realizing that are in desparate need of a change.”
Here in Chicago, the heart of Democratic country, the news of a Bush victory has them stunned. Some people are actually walking around today as if in a daze. A few folks I know have even said something to the effect, “This country is now more divided than ever.”
To which I respond, “hogwash!” In 1992, Clinton won the presidency with 43 percent of the poplular vote, Bush the Elder had 38 percent, and Ross Perot (who I voted for) had 18 percent. THAT, my friends, is divided!
“We have nothing to fear, but fear itself”
Some Democrat said that a lifetime or two ago. Since then, all the “big picture” stuff has slowly come to light. Churchill meeting secretly with Hitler, the A-bomb, dividing up of Europe, etc. I hope I live long enough to find out that Saddam died in that first attack and the guy they have in prison is one of his doubles, and that Bin Ladden died of kidney failure in 2002.
Wouldn’t that funnier than Hëll to learn?
I forgot to post one comment:
I admit I am pleasantly surprised by Kerry’s concession speech today. My opinion was that he would concede and not throw this into the courts, but that he would wait a lot longer until all the votes had been counted. I respect the fact that he was willing to look honestly at the facts and not drag this out for no reason. His desire to repair the damage was not just words today, he acted them out. It was a classy thing to do.
Jim in Iowa
I’m not a republican, I’m not a democrat. I believe in stem cell research. I believe in marriage being man and woman, but I also believe in human rights. I believe in better education for our schools. I am a card carrying member of the N.R.A. I believe that the economy is not dictated by the administration, but by the magic-weilders on wall street. I believe that should we, hevean forbid, get attacked again, we will hit back harder. I also believe that we need to focus on our national security, and as the big dog on the block, we need to make our stances perfectly clear. Can we win the war on terrorism? Doubt it, but we can bite back so dámņ hard that it will make the terrorists think long and hard about biting us on our own land in the first place.
The election is over. The great thing about democracy is that we can choose. The great thing about this country is that we can openenly dissagree with the choice. We can love it, hate it, or be indifferent to it. I don’t think Bush is evil or mad with power. I don’t think that Kerry would have done any better, or progessed any further. The choice has been made. Let’s just accept it, support the country, go to work, go home to spend time with our kids, pray for a safe return for our troops and move on. Hatred is just a waste of energy.
And Mr. David…..I love your work.
Jim,
Yes, it was a classy speech and he would have made a classy president.
I’m guessing it’s never too soon to start printing up those “Don’t blame me, I voted for Kerry” bumper stickers we should be needing in the next few years.–PAD
I’d like to order a few hundred for my closest friends.