Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Woodworking (rec.woodworking) Discussion forum covering all aspects of working with wood. All levels of expertise are encouraged to particiapte. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Bush dishonestly spinning Kerry's debate statements
On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 23:18:51 GMT, rllipham
wrote: Twenty years ago the South was Democrat. How can we trust those guys? They are just a bunch of flip-floppers. Actually, in political terms, not party terms, the South has always tended to be conservative. Landed gentry and all that. However, when the post war reconstruction started with republican carpet baggers (appointed by the party of Lincoln but with the liberal anti-slavery sentiment and to-the-victor righteousness) flooding the South, taking over the government, and offending almost every tenet the citizens held dear, the southerners rebelled the only way they could by taking the opposing political side on the ballot: the Democratic Party. As the carpet baggers were eventually driven out it continued to be politically expedient to register and vote Democratic if you wanted to get into public office. That lasted almost 100 years until Lyndon Johnson strongarmed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through Congress, a decidedly unconservative piece of legislation. Even he said at the time that the passage of that act would turn the "traditionally Democratic" south over to the republicans for a long time. Turncoats like Strom Thurmond and others were only able to come out of the conservative closet as part of that backlash. We're still paying the price 40 years later. And you're right: how can you trust those guys? - - LRod Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999 http://www.woodbutcher.net |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"LRod" wrote in message ... On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 23:18:51 GMT, rllipham wrote: Twenty years ago the South was Democrat. How can we trust those guys? They are just a bunch of flip-floppers. Actually, in political terms, not party terms, the South has always tended to be conservative. Landed gentry and all that. However, when the post war reconstruction started with republican carpet baggers (appointed by the party of Lincoln but with the liberal anti-slavery sentiment and to-the-victor righteousness) flooding the South, taking over the government, and offending almost every tenet the citizens held dear, the southerners rebelled the only way they could by taking the opposing political side on the ballot: the Democratic Party. As the carpet baggers were eventually driven out it continued to be politically expedient to register and vote Democratic if you wanted to get into public office. That lasted almost 100 years until Lyndon Johnson strongarmed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through Congress, a decidedly unconservative piece of legislation. Even he said at the time that the passage of that act would turn the "traditionally Democratic" south over to the republicans for a long time. Turncoats like Strom Thurmond and others were only able to come out of the conservative closet as part of that backlash. We're still paying the price 40 years later. By the way, Clinton's autobiography describes those very times and changes, which he witnessed as an insider, in very much the same way as you did. Interesting stuff for someone a bit too young to have observed it in person. Jeff Harper |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"philski" wrote in message
... Todd Fatheree wrote: "I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations." - John Kerry. Kerry said the above to The Crimson in 1970. Now, some might say "well, that was 34 years ago". But he wasn't 16 years old at the time, he was 27 and I believe he understood what he was saying. IMO, a statement such as this is a core belief not likely to change by keeping a Senate seat warm for 20 years. He lost the election he was running for a the time, so he has apparently learned you can't say that and get elected. So, now he says that if he was presented with a threat and could not get UN support, he would proceed unilaterally. Wow, that's a big departure from Bush's policy. todd So, you are saying that John Kerry can't change, mature, or foment new ideas and opinions? You're saying a "leopard doesn't change his spots"? So how 'bout Shrub's drinking and coking days, and how he "found Christ" and changed his ways? You are quite the narrow minded ass ya know? Philksi At least there's actual evidence that Bush has changed his prior habits. There hasn't been any reason to think that Herman Munster has based on his voting record.. I mean, does this guy have *any* core beliefs? He's had several positions on the war just in the past several months. Boy, this guy sure foments lots of new ideas and opinions...often daily. Now you and Jeff can go back to stroking each other. todd |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 2 Oct 2004 23:22:28 -0400, "Jeff Harper"
wrote: Because it's important and affects most of us. The thread *was* started with a "Pol:" to indicate it was off-topic but that seems to have gotten lost. [Geek] It should have been prefixed with [Pol] not Pol: Some newsreaders (most obviously Outlook) have incorrect behaviour regarding usenet subject lines. Rather than using "" on comments to a thread, they internationalise this to the local language. Swedish and Sv: seems to be the most commonly encountered. Because they can no longer rely on a prefix of , they assume that _any_ prefix ending with a colon is a follow-up marker and strip and replace it with their local version, in this case. To avoid the problem, use [Pol], [Ad], [Ebay], [FA], [Spam] etc. instead. As with any problem, either woodworking or political, it's basically M$oft's fault. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Andy Dingley said:
To avoid the problem, use [Pol], [Ad], [Ebay], [FA], [Spam] etc. instead. Correct, except omit the (SPAM) part. We don't want ANY of that here... As with any problem, either woodworking or political, it's basically M$oft's fault. This is true. ;-) Greg G. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Todd Fatheree" wrote in message ...
At least there's actual evidence that Bush has changed his prior habits. There hasn't been any reason to think that Herman Munster has based on his voting record.. I mean, does this guy have *any* core beliefs? He's had several positions on the war just in the past several months. Boy, this guy sure foments lots of new ideas and opinions...often daily. Now you and Jeff can go back to stroking each other. todd There is a condition known (to those of us who have worked in the field of addiction and substance abuse) as the "dry drunk"--specifically, it is the persistence, in soberiety, of behaviors and personality traits typical of the drunken/still using condition. These are very difficult to change, requiring literally years of constant work in (especially) 12-step groups or similar kinds of therapy. It is also the case that times of stress can create a resurgance of these behaviors and traits. Effectively counteracting these "dry drunk" conditions requires an ability to admit that one's behavior and choices are not working, similar to the admission of powerlessness in the 12-step tradition of sobriety. Persistence in the belief that one need not change, especially in the face of contrary evidence, is one indicator of a full blown episode of "dry drunk" behavior (there are others). Everything the President has said about the war--that he would not have done anything differently, that things are really getting better--fly in the face of all the evidence. We continually engage in new offensives because "the mission is [NOT] accomplished". Now we hear that the reason our troops are dying in greater numbers each month is that we "won" the war too fast! Furthermore, the evidence so far seems to fly in the face of his assertion that the world is safer without Saddam in power. Ask our grunts on the ground in Falluja if that is true. You can't ask those poor souls who've lost their heads--they certainly weren't any safer, but...they still had their heads until Saddam was toppled. And there's no reason to believe, unfortunately, they're the only ones who'll be beheaded. This new twist on middle east terrorism didn't catch hold until after Saddam fell. A safer world indeed! I don't see any credible evidence that Bush is anything other than a sober drunk, if the sober even applies. What I see is a man way out of control, trying desperately (emphasize that) to look otherwise. Dan |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Pol: Bush ad twists Kerry's words | Woodworking | |||
Bush ad dishonest, twists Kerry's words out of context | Home Repair | |||
Bush ad twists Kerry's words | Woodworking | |||
GW Bush | Metalworking |