| Author |
Message |
    
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3630
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 9:39 am: | 
|
SIX FOR '06
That's the "plan" or "banner" that Dems are collectively running under, although they admit that Bush-bashing will also be (quite understandably) a big part of their efforts. The six general areas of focus are:
- National security
- Jobs and wages
- Energy independence
- Affordable health care
- Retirement security
- College access for all
As always, the real question is: what specific steps do they propose to make improvements in these areas? It's easy to say "we're gonna make sure everybody can retire and enjoy waffles and peaches every morning for the rest of their lives" but quite another to spell out a detailed plan. I hope they do, because the last thing Dems need right now is a pile of "Contract With America" bull. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7600
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 9:59 am: |
|
yes, nothing about international terrorism..Silly dems, always missing the point.
+National security something the dems trail Bush on 3 to 1 by the way does not do enough to address the spread of Islamic terrorism.+ |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4572
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:03 am: |
|
It's OK. Bush is fostering the spread of Islamic terrorism pretty well without any help fom the Democrats. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3632
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:37 am: |
|
I thought international terrorism and national security were one and the same now? "Fight them over there so we don't have to over here," and all that tripe. Or is national security limited to the sort of stuff for which the administration has nothing but lip service, like protecting ports and chemical plants? |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7601
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:38 am: |
|
No he's not..You really say foolish things sometimes.. If it's not America's fault, it's the fault of Israel in your mind..
You really don't get it. |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4573
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:48 am: |
|
Here is one simple fact that does not work to our advantage. More people now view the United States as the Empire of Star Wars than was the case before Darth Bush was President. So, if this is part of defending against terrorism, then we are doing well. If you believe this is a good thing, you probably believe that bleeding wounds are something a scuba diver wants to have when swimming in shark-infested waters.
The latest round of fighting in the Middle East is going very badly for the United States and Israel. Some diplomatic opportunities and progress may yet come from this, but I don't doubt that Bush can screw this up too. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7603
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:58 am: |
|
I see so the WTC 93, The USS Cole etc. etc. These attacks were because of George Bush? Those attacks were because America was loved?
As for those who oppose the US and Israel going to war against terrorism..Too bad. Don't awake a sleeping giant.
I just thank god liberal Americans have become powerless during these crucial times in American and Middle East history. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3636
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 11:40 am: |
|
Tjohn, if you're the guy who manufactures shark suits or provides dead diver recovery services, then you may very well behave that way.
I'm just glad that the polls and the money raised for election campaigns are putting liberal Americans way ahead of their careless, misguided, corrupt, incompetent right wing counterparts. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5781
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 11:57 am: |
|
Pander and Run
By Peter Beinart
Friday, July 28, 2006; A25
Washington Post
After years of struggling to define their own approach to post-Sept. 11 foreign policy, Democrats seem finally to have hit on one. It's called pandering. In those rare cases when George W. Bush shows genuine sensitivity to America's allies and propounds a broader, more enlightened view of the national interest, Democrats will make him pay. It's jingoism with a liberal face.
The latest example came this week when Democratic senators and House members demanded that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki either retract his criticisms of Israel or forfeit his chance to address Congress. Great idea. Maliki -- who runs a government propped up by U.S. troops -- is desperate to show Iraqis that he is not Washington's puppet. And the United States desperately needs him to succeed because, unless he gains political credibility at home, his government will have no hope of surviving on its own.
Maliki took a small step in that direction this week when he articulated a view of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict quite different from that of the Bush administration. His views were hardly surprising: Iraq is not only a majority-Arab country; it is a majority-Shiite Arab country. And in a democracy, leaders usually reflect public opinion. Maliki's forthright disagreement with the United States was a sign of political strength, one the Bush administration wisely indulged.
But not congressional Democrats. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid demanded that Maliki eat his words or be disinvited from addressing Congress. "Your failure to condemn Hezbollah's aggression and recognize Israel's right to defend itself raise serious questions about whether Iraq under your leadership can play a constructive role in resolving the current crisis and bringing stability to the Middle East," wrote Reid and fellow Democratic Sens. Richard J. Durbin and Charles E. Schumer on July 24.
How, exactly, publicly humiliating Maliki and making him look like an American and Israeli stooge would enhance his "leadership" was never explained in the missive. But of course Reid's letter wasn't really about strengthening the Iraqi government at all; that's George W. Bush's problem. It was about appearing more pro-Israel than the White House and thus pandering to Jewish voters.
Reid's letter is not an anomaly; it is part of a pattern. In February Democrats (and some Republicans) slammed the Bush administration for allowing a company from the United Arab Emirates to take over operation, though not management, of several U.S. ports. Democrats insisted that they were standing up for homeland security, but in fact homeland security experts overwhelmingly said the move did not represent a security risk. The principle animating the Democrats' attack was not security, it was politics. The Bush administration, playing against type, argued that America's long-term security required treating Arab countries with fairness and respect, especially countries, such as the UAE, that assist us in the struggle against jihadist terrorism. One might have thought that the Democrats, after spending years denouncing the Bush administration for alienating world opinion and thus leaving America isolated and weak, would find such logic compelling. But what they found more compelling was a political cheap shot -- their very own Panama Canal moment -- in which they proved they could be just as nativist as the GOP.
Then, in June, the media reported that the Iraqi government was considering an amnesty for insurgents, perhaps including insurgents who had killed U.S. troops. Obviously the prospect was hard for Americans to stomach. But the larger context was equally obvious: Unless Maliki's government gave local Sunni insurgents an incentive to lay down their arms and break with al-Qaeda-style jihadists, Iraq's violence would never end. Democrats, however, rather than giving Maliki the freedom to carry out his extremely difficult and enormously important negotiations, made amnesty an issue in every congressional race they could, thus tying the prime minister's hands. Once again, Democrats congratulated themselves for having gotten to President Bush's right, unperturbed by the fact that they may have undermined the chances for Iraqi peace in the process.
Privately, some Democrats, while admitting that they haven't exactly been taking the high road, say they have no choice, that in a competition with Karl Rove, nice guys finish last. But even politically, that's probably wrong. The Democratic Party's single biggest foreign policy liability is not that Americans think Democrats are soft. It is that Americans think Democrats stand for nothing, that they have no principles beyond political expedience. And given the party's behavior over the past several months, it is not hard to understand why.
The writer, a monthly columnist for The Post, is editor-at-large of the New Republic and author of "The Good Fight: Why Liberals -- and Only Liberals -- Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again."
|
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5344
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 12:07 pm: |
|
Quote:National security something the dems trail Bush on 3 to 1
Another shocking (or is it?) lie by the right. If you guys can't campaign on the truth, don't you really think you ought to lose in November?
The real truth: Dems don't trail 3-1, 2-1 or even by percentage points. Dems actually lead Bush on national security. Here's Rasmussen in February: \quoteFor the first time ever, Americans have a slight preference for Democrats in Congress over the President on national security issues. Forty-three percent (43%) say they trust the Democrats more on this issue today while 41% prefer the President.}Here's this week's Newsweek
Quote:Bush has also taken a hit when it comes to how Americans view his handling of terrorism and national security. The Gallup poll found his approval rating on his handling of terrorism dropped four points since June, to 47 percent. Americans who approve of the administration’s handling of Iraq remained virtually unchanged at 35 percent. On a related note, the survey found that 37 percent of those surveyed approve of how Bush is handling the situation in the Middle East—though more than two thirds of those polled said they believe the administration “does not” have a “clear and well-thought-out policy.”
When the truth isn't good enough, you really need to reconsider your stance. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5346
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 12:17 pm: |
|
Interestingly, Republicans have much the same platform, only with a different twist.
- National security: An excellent way to funnel taxpayer dollars to your favored corporations
- Jobs and wages: The former just scarce enough to avoid riots, the latter just low enough to keep the soup lines from going out into the street
- Energy independence: Over our dead bodies
- Affordable health care: Over your dead bodies
- Retirement security: For mutual fund managers
- College access for all: All of our kind, that is. Too much of that gets around and wages would go up, and we can't have that. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7607
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 1:13 pm: |
|
What Tom is saying is that the Dems have nothing new or different to offer. He only hopes Notehead isn't the next DNC chairman. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5347
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 1:30 pm: |
|
No, what I'm saying is that the real motivations of the Republican party have nothing to do with what is actually good for typical Americans. Of course, they can't admit that and so will try to deflect. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3637
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 1:59 pm: |
|
Well, they deflect, or or they actually claim victory where none exists. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7608
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 2:08 pm: |
|
 |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5669
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 2:10 pm: |
|
 |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7609
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 2:39 pm: |
|
 |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5670
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 2:46 pm: |
|
Even better than a joke picture, is a real example:
Quote:Republican Leaders Tie Passing an Increased Minimum Wage to Estate Tax Cut
WASHINGTON Jul 28, 2006 (AP)— Congress would pass an increase in the minimum wage before leaving Washington for vacation, but only as part of a package rolling back taxes on the heirs of multimillionaires, a Senate leadership aide said Friday.
...
In advancing the tax plan, GOP leaders excluded a measure popular with small businesses that would make it easier for small businesses and the self-employed to band together and buy health insurance plans for employees at a lower cost.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2248129
These guys actually act like caricatures of themselves. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7610
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 3:13 pm: |
|
like Sticky Fingers Berger.
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3639
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 3:20 pm: |
|
Speaking of criminals... this guy is perfect material for the GOP. He's got a bright future with them if he can stay out of jail. 
"The young Nevada man designated to chair the upcoming 2005 Young Republican National Convention in Las Vegas has been accused of embezzling registration fees from around the country to pay off bar tabs, personal loans and credit card debts."
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Feb-16-Wed-2005/news/25877618.html |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7611
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 3:53 pm: |
|
Like this guy?
http://www.house.gov/jefferson/ |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3665
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 3:57 pm: |
|
How many Republicans can you compare the same Democrat to? There's corruption and criminal behavior on all sides. But it appears this crop of Republicans has raised it to an art form. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5350
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 4:17 pm: |
|
That hits it on the head, Rastro; a hundred crooked Republicans, every one of them excused by Jefferson.
The GOP (Greedy Oligarchs Party) has outdone itself on today's cynical move on minimum wages. They'll throw a few peanuts towards hourly laborers struggling below the poverty line, but only if they can be sure Paris Hilton gets a few million as part of the deal. While at the same time excluding a discussed benefit for small-business owners. It used to be if you were a business person you felt you had the GOP to look out for you; not any more, you've got to be mega-wealthy.
Disgusting. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1363
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 6:28 pm: |
|
I love this.
You guys are definitely taking whining to a new level. I didn't think you could get any better but you have. I see the excitement building in your every post. You can not only see victory in the future, you can also smell it. The very thought takes you back to your teen years and that date with slutty Sally. All you have to do is not screw it up and you'll be at the reservation by 10. Unfortunately, deep within, you realize you can't close the deal and will have yet another lonely drive home. But hey, if you get home early enough you can catch the Daily Show and rejuvenate! 2008 is just around the corner. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5358
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 6:41 pm: |
|
 |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1368
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 8:01 pm: |
|
tom,
Overplayed. Stick with the Six for '06. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5360
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 8:11 pm: |
|
strawberry's posted that crying baby thing about 200 times, and mine is overplayed?
I don't think you're being objective! |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1374
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 9:22 pm: |
|
tom,
The difference is it's his. Get your own schtick.
As for objectivity, your right. I do like your posts even though we disagree so keep it coming. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2894
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:54 pm: |
|
I see that no one reacted to cjc's post of the Beinart column. What do you all think? Is it OK that this guy who has his job as a result of our efforts supports the Hezbollah terrorists and opposes Israel? Why shouldn't we be pissed? Is this what we get when we promote "Democracy"? If so, what's so good about it? Weren't we better off when we had guys like the Shah, Franco, Marcos, Battista, pro-American dictators? |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5365
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 10:45 am: |
|
We were giving support to the government in Gaza when they were anti-Hezbollah, but when they <ahem> changed their mind, we withdrew our support. So what are we going to do with the Iraqi government?
Look at it another way, one of the few viable terrorist links Saddam had was his monetary support for families of suicide bombers. So we've installed a new government expressing support for these same bombers.
Where are we going with this? |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1378
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 11:15 am: |
|
I know where I'm going, the pool. Please have the world's problems solved when I get back. Libs on MOL are pretty good at fixing stuff. |
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 2021
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 12:13 pm: |
|
Remember you're not supposed to dive into an above ground pool...and remember to take your cigarettes out of your jeans before you go swimming. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page