Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Sympathies on the election

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Sympathies on the election
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was hoping that the Republicans would win Florida and the Senate, and that Democrats would win the house, so this day is not as sweet for me as those who think that I am a conservative might expect. Just listened to Mondale's concession speech, and there's something I'd like to get off my chest.

While I personally found the typical leftist up-on-a-coffin approach to a political rally to be repugnant, I do recognize that THIS WAS THE SORT OF FUNERAL THAT PAUL WELLSTONE WOULD HAVE WANTED. In that light, I found Ms. Noonan's article where she pretends to write a letter from Wellstone in heaven ... not only wildly innacurate, but partaking of the same sort of grave-dancing opportunism that Ms. Noonan was (rightly) accusing the Democratic party of employing.

There is only one issue here in which I feel inclined to gloat:

I hope that some leftists here have the courage to admit that they have underestimated the intelligence of our president. If you don't have the courage to openly admit this, I hope that you at least realize it and begin to deal with him as an intelligent adversary, because if you don't, your party will suffer much more humilliating routes in 2004 and 2006, and I don't want to see that -- I'd rather see this country continue with the sort of balance of views and power that has always made it safe from tyrrany.


Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete,

welcome back, you've been missed.

LetterRip


Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Falken224
Member
Member # 684

 - posted      Profile for Falken224     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I hope that some leftists here have the courage to admit that they have underestimated the intelligence of our president.

'Bout time we had someone else here saying that.

Welcome the heck back, Pete. We missed ya. Raise some hell.

-Nate


Posts: 340 | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I hope that some leftists here have the courage to admit that they have underestimated the intelligence of our president. If you don't have the courage to openly admit this, I hope that you at least realize it and begin to deal with him as an intelligent adversary, because if you don't, your party will suffer much more humilliating routes in 2004 and 2006...

That somewhat assumes that winning back the Senate was an intelligent choice of the President. Certainly it will make it easier to pass certain bills, but if there are any problems (and there always are problems), there are no Democrats in power to blame. Any errors, gaffes, slip-ups, or snafus that occur in the next two years will rest squarely on the Republicans shoulders, and by extention, on Bush's shoulders.

So if winning the battle while jepordizing the war is considered intelligent, then perhaps you are right. But in the long run, this may have been the stupidest thing Bush has done.


Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Baldar
Member
Member # 669

 - posted      Profile for Baldar   Email Baldar   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Any errors, gaffes, slip-ups, or snafus that occur in the next two years will rest squarely on the Republicans shoulders, and by extention, on Bush's shoulders.


Then I can assume any gains, wins and improvements will also be claimed by Bush with equal fervor?

Seems your advocating a type of mediocracy rather than a meritocracy of politics.


Posts: 3834 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Come now, Baldar. Any gains, wins and improvements would have been claimed by Bush even if there were some Democrats in power. Everybody tries to claim those, regardless of whether they are responsible or not. (It just means now that Democrats will have a harder time in claiming those.)

You've been in the corporate world, Baldar, so you should know the saying that one "ah, sh*t" cancels out a ton of "attaboys." The same works in politics, if not more so. Whether this is right or wrong is beside the point. Politicians get kicked out for their mistakes more often than kept in for their accomplishments.


Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Animist
Member
Member # 674

 - posted      Profile for Animist   Email Animist   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just a little thing that annoys me...

DEMOCRATS ARE NOT LEFTISTS.

If you want to find real Leftists got to http://www.alternet.org or http://www.zmag.org/ZNET.htm


Posts: 461 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Baldar
Member
Member # 669

 - posted      Profile for Baldar   Email Baldar   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am saying it goes both ways, where there is much given a great deal is required. The senor Bush won by a large majority but then lost out to what the press called "one of the seven dwarves" since no main candidate would run against him, we ended up with president Clinton.

Again the dem's were outcampaigned by the republicans and this was done in no small matter with the help and organization of Bush, of course he can claim the credit.

Also if Bush pulled against a program and it still passed and was a success everyone knows he would not be able to take credit, in CA John Davis tried to take credit for the "amber alert system" that he actually blocked. The ad he used lasted two days before he got smart and shut up about it. People know where a president stands on most issues and opposing parties make sure people know about the gaffes of support or lack therof.

Corporate world has a number of different organizations, in some places many errors are forgiven because of a long string of successes. In others one error can be career ending with a company. Politics is much more transparent than the corporate world and so you generally are given a great deal more leeway than you would in politics.



Posts: 3834 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thank you LR and Falken! I missed you as well.

Animist -- it bothers you that Democrats aren't leftists? Well it bothers me that some leftists have pretended to be Democrats. If the Democratic party responds to this grand catastrophe to their party by throwing out the leftists, and becoming a true liberal party rather than a mere tool of the left, then I will switch parties with enthusiasm.


Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I hope that some leftists here have the courage to admit that they have underestimated the intelligence of our president. If you don't have the courage to openly admit this, I hope that you at least realize it and begin to deal with him as an intelligent adversary, because if you don't, your party will suffer much more humilliating routes in 2004 and 2006...

That somewhat assumes that winning back the Senate was an intelligent choice of the President.

No, it doesn't. I was speaking of tactical intelligence, wheras you are changing the subject to strategic intelligence.


quote:
Certainly it will make it easier to pass certain bills, but if there are any problems (and there always are problems), there are no Democrats in power to blame. Any errors, gaffes, slip-ups, or snafus that occur in the next two years will rest squarely on the Republicans shoulders, and by extention, on Bush's shoulders.

So if winning the battle while jepordizing the war is considered intelligent, then perhaps you are right.


Ah, now here it is you who are making the assumptions: you assume that Bush's end-game is the same as the Clinton-Gore end-game: to fabricate a "legacy" by taking credit for everything good that happens in the country while blaming others for everything bad that happens. If that were Bush's end-game, then you are right that Bush's victories in this election would reflect strategic stupidity, although these victories would still reflect tactical brilliance. Grok?


Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry, Pete, I didn't realize that there were different types of intelligence. I thought intelligence was intelligence. Does this mean that Bush can be intelligent in some aspects and dumb in others?

quote:
[Y]ou assume that Bush's end-game is the same as the Clinton-Gore end-game: to fabricate a "legacy" by taking credit for everything good that happens in the country while blaming others for everything bad that happens.

Not quite. If a budget does not get passed on time, it won't be the Democrats fault. If there is a huge deficit, it won't be those pesky tax-and-spend Democrat's fault. If an ecomonic stimulus package doesn't work, it won't be because the Democrats diluted it. If the military doesn't get enough funding, it won't be because they had to compromise with the Democratic Senate.

Any time the government doesn't work right (and with a government this big, it will never work perfectly regardless of who's running the show), the blame will sit squarely with the Republicans, whether it is their fault or not. Depending on how big the mistakes were, and how much they are emphasized, it could cost the Republicans big in the long term.


Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant Morgan
Member
Member # 194

 - posted      Profile for Grant Morgan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Holy Schnikes! Pete's back!!?

Where have you been? I was just thinking this morning that if we only had Pete and Kentuckian back aboard, this board would be just about perfect . . .

Welcome back, man.


Posts: 136 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WmLambert
Member
Member # 604

 - posted      Profile for WmLambert   Email WmLambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Animist: If your links were meant to show some really whacko left wing politicos, then you succeeded. However, it appears you meant to claim the people represented in these extreme examples were not Democrats, and if so, then you failed. the editor and driving force behind the first web sight was the Democratic campaign manager for Ruth Messinger and David Dinkins. The other site, Znet is more about trashing the GOP than in describing who they are. But Jim McDermott was lionized by the same folks there,

Much better to say that not all Democrats share the idiocy of some of their associates. There are good, honest people in all parties, and only a few trying to cause harm on purpose. Let's point at those instead.


Posts: 1372 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Animist
Member
Member # 674

 - posted      Profile for Animist   Email Animist   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
(William?) Lambert:

Alternet is more moderate than ZNet; some of them are indeed Democrats (see Pete's post; sometimes Leftists pretend to be Democrats. A Communist I used to know spoke of fellow commies being elected on Democratic tickets in local elections, for example.)

Z Magazine is basically the voicebox of the Leftists of the world. Nearly every article posted there was written by a socialist of some form or another, including various Marxist-Leninists, Maoists, anarchists, and Green Party types.

Pete:

No, it doesn't bother me. It's just a fact, and to describe Democrats as "Leftist" is a huge distortion (just like calling the media "Leftist" or the Bar Association "Leftist," as OSC recently did). There are somet Leftists in the Democratic Party, but not many in the national government (maybe Paul Wellstone could have been called a Leftist, but maybe not).

I'm not a Leftist, and I find the idea of living under socialist rule of any kind rather chilling, though I have advocated voting for Greens in the past.


Posts: 461 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1