Don’t tell us, tell Governor Arnold! NECROLIB NOW!
WTF? Pacifists? Why the hell does a list of “unpleasant people” who are often members of the Democratic party have pacifists in it? Since when is pacifism even on the same side of the moral scale as bigotry? When did being peaceful become a negative quality? Did someone resurrect Ghandi and tell him?
Enjoy,
Steven
The essential difference is this:
-
To Democrats evil and ignorance are problems.
-
To Republicans evil and ignorance are opportunities.
I was drawing a comparison with Equipoise’s list. Pacifists would correspond with, and be the opposite of, the “warmongers” he placed in the Republican camp.
Rightly or wrongly, the Democratic Party does not want to be identified as a pacifist party, despite the fact that some Democrats are pacifists.
I’m sorry I characterized pscifists as unpleasant folks. That wasn’t what I meant to say at all.
Depends on who’s calling who what.
“Race-baiters” usually turn out to be people who are fighting for the rights of non-white citizens in the face of overwhelming racism. Usually.
“Radical feminists” usually turn out to be women who are fighting for equal rights in the face of overwhelming sexism. Usually.
“Anti-religious bigots” usually turn out to be those who want you (general you) to keep your fucking religion out of our schools and our courts in the face of Xtians who think it should be their way or the highway. Usually.
“Pacifists” usually turn out to be…well, pacifists.
True that, but I’d put forward the proposition that racists, bigots, sexists and zealots are worse than “race-baiters, radical feminists, anti-religious bigots, and pacifists”.
If I’m a blind partisan, at least it’s for the more humanistic (not to mention, more informed) party. Whatta you guys got?
I’m a she btw.
Honest to Og Equipoise, you have truly outdone yourself.
At present, I count 14 different Bush bashing/anti conservative threads (Pit only) in which GWB is derided with various insults, and those who support his/conservative views are subject to similar invective. Let’s not try to number the hijacked threads, or those in which a gratuitous dropping of similar wisdom has been deposited in other forums.
Now we’ll count the Kerry bashing threads on the same page.
:: chirping crickets ::
Yeah, baby. I can really see concrete evidence of all that love in your heart, and the evil blackness of my own. :rolleyes:
Gee, I wonder why that is? Maybe it’s because
Kerry hasn’t started a way yet based on lies that has resulted (so far) in more than 1,000 dead and maimed US servicepeople and many times that dead Iraqis
Kerry hasn’t attempted to insert his personal religious prejudices in the US constitution.
Kerry hasn’t bled the treasury dry by ill-judged tax cuts and record deficit spending.
Kerry hasn’t reduced social services for the indigent and the chronically mentally ill.
Kerry hasn’t appointed an attorney general who has declared war on the right to privacy.
Kerry hasn’t made attendees at his public appearances swear “loyalty oaths.”
Kerry hasn’t failed to go after Osama bin Laden because it was too difficult to get his “allies” to arrest him.
I can go on, but you (I hope) get the picture. I don’t hate Bush, but I think he is a lousy president who has made an unbroken string of disastrously bad decisions. He’s not very good at his job, so it’s time to replace him. Kerry might be good, maybe not, but we know Bush is terrible. Doesn’t it make sense to change incompetent leadership?
gobear it is your prerogative to vote for whomever you want based on whatever logic you wish to apply. Did my post attack those rights?
I was, instead, refuting the nonsense posted by Equipoise.
Don’t proclaim yourselves to be the party of compassion, love, and tenderness while spewing hatred and insults at GWB and those with a conservative view. That’s all.
I’m not spewing hatred at those with a conservative view. I have a conservative view myself. Bush is not a conservative, but a revolutionary. He and hios cohorts have betrayed the conservative party by attempting to subvert our democracy into a one-party authoritarian state.
Conservatives value balanced budgets. Bush has run up a record deficit.
Conservatives value individual freedom. Bush wants to insert fundamentalist Christian restrictions on liberty into the Constitution.
Conservatives value the military. Bush has lies to sioldiers, cut their benefits, and forced involuntary tours of duty on them.
Conservatives value honor. Bush has waged a low, despicable campaign that disgraces the Republican party.
A good conservative needs to hold his nose and vote for Kerry for the good of the country. Bush is a woefully incompetent administrator who has allowed a radical clique to pois our name around the world and weaken our freedoms at home.
Vote Kerry for one term, then vote GOP in 2008 when they nominate Giuliani.
Thanks for the offer, but I can’t go there. Rather than Rudy, I hope McCain can be drafted to run against Billary in 08. At least between those two candidates we would be spared the military service comparison angst.
“Billary?” Bill is done, and Hillary is unelectable. Assuming Kerry loses, I predict that we might see Obama run. (Maybe)
Can we perhaps not confuse people with a conservative point of view with those that support GWB?
We really need to make a clear distinction between conservatives and Republicans in general and Bush apologists in particular. There are a number of prominent conservatives who have shown their integrity by denouncing Bush and recommending voting for someone else, occasionally even Kerry. I doubt very much that Bush will get the kind of unified support from registered Republicans he thinks he’s going to get; he has betrayed far too many core conservative principles. Also, there are people who think integrity, principle, and the Rule of Law are more important than who is in power. Many of those people are Republicans and worthy of respect.
Conservatives who support Bush are either :
-
Ignorant of the reality (polls suggest this is the largest number).
-
Nearly devoid of principle and are mainly concerned with holding power.
or
- Have principle but are naively hoping that allowing Bush to stay in power would be better than allowing a possible liberal to be in charge.
Frankly, if I were a conservative, I’d be pissed as hell at Bush for his betrayal of core conservative values and for utterly squandering a nearly 90% postive approval rating. Bottom line: if Bush were truly a great leader, he would NOT be facing a frighteningly close re-election battle.
Certainly. 
Amen and thank you! I’m an Independent, mostly because I’m cussed but also, oh yeah, neither party has The Answer. At best it’s a balancing act of philosophies and gritty realism.
I’m not voting for Kerry because I’m a weepy tree-hugging pacifist (gasp!) dirty liberal. I’m voting quite specifically against George W. Bush because he’s made a blatant mockery of everything worthy in conservatism. And there’s a lot, folks, when it walks the talk.
His performance as president has sucked. He got hit with a very hard load but that goes with the job. I never expected him–or any president–to make everything just hunky dory for everybody. Fat chance. I did expect him to make the best hard decisions, under fire, for the future–and convey them well. He blew it, domestically and internationally.
George W. Bush is just a puppet, all spin and sound bytes, wrapped in the rhetoric of conservatism. He’s a disgrace to the philosophy, which most definitely includes “activist” judges and the full unlovely gamut.
I don’t know about any one else, but I’m saving myself in case he gets elected.
We will have to switch sides, perhaps in this event. It could be fun.
I saw a great bumper sticker today. It read:
“If you want it, I’m for it!”
Vote Kerry 2004
gobear, if conservatives like you were in control of the Republican Party, we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in now. Independent-minded liberals like me would have a genuine choice in this election. I say that because normally I’d be willing to weigh the pros and cons of each candidate, recognizing that neither can meet all my expectations, and choose the one who overall is closest to offering the leadership, policies and programs I desire. If a particular conservative candidate better met my standards, so be it – my vote would go there. A balance of power in which the conservative and liberal philosophies remain in lively tension is, I believe, the heart of our political system.
But not in this election. For the sake of the sane Republicans, for the survival of a true conservative philosophy, no less than for the preservation of liberal ideals, Bush has got to go. I happen to align with Kerry far more than with, say, McCain on the issues, but if a McCain Republican were the GOP candidate, and were elected, I could respect him and look forward to an administration based on principles and policies that, though I might not agree with them, still would have a rational basis in furtherance of the nation’s welfare that I could accept. For all the reasons you’ve pointed out, the current administration uses the conservative facade to hide a far more radical, and radically destructive, agenda than your average wild-eyed liberal could ever dream of.
It seems the ballot designers in Cuyahoga County, Ohio agree with the thread title and are abusing their position to rig the election (in their county). Unless, of course, someone has a good explanation for why the ballot looks like that?
