That’s because the Dems don’t traffic in hate, friend.
The text of Ron Reagan, Jr.'s speech to the Democratic National Convention:
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/ny-reagan-speech,0,1139544.story?coll=all-newslocal-utl
Why would anybody attack the man for making that speech, as compared to the ranting and raving that Miller delivered?
So criticism of a man’s record is “hate”?
You Democrats really are a party of nervous pantywaists.
Goddamn you, you’re exactly right. Dems are walking on eggshells right now because we’re so afraid of making Kerry say anything about his views, other than he wants health insurance for everyone and more taxes on the rich. God forbid Kerry actually say anything, for that would make him a flip-flopper. Thank you, Senator Kerry, for having the guts to sit around for six months and let your opponent define you. Bang-up job so far.
I can’t think of a single issue ad that Bush has put out that has not been an attack on Kerry. And we Dems are on the defense, rather than fighting back and talking about how Bush has been a terrible President.
Too many Dems are looking back at Clinton and his mantra that if Dems run on the issues, we’ll win. They forget too easily that Clinton knew how to draw distinctions between him and his oppoents, and show why his ideas were better. Kerry better reassess his campaign strategy, pronto. He can’t just wait for the debates.
Do you honestly consider Zell Miller’s speech “criticism of a man’s record”?
And as a Democrat, I’ve made clear that I thoroughly enjoyed the convention so far. It has made me far less nervous. Pantywaist? In the words of your beloved leader, “Bring it on!”
And I have to ask about this whole segregationist business. Certainly he was a segregationist at one time. He changed his tune though, to his credit. But this past isn’t one to be proud of.
Those Dopers bringing it up though, I have to ask - does it invalidate his keynote address at the 1992 Democratic Convention, and his endorsement of Bill Clinton that same year?
I don’t recall that it was ever brought up. It’s that strange double standard that causes liberals to excuse the segregationists in their midst.
Senator Byrd, please pick up the white courtesy phone.
Whether or not you agree or disagree with Zell Miller, love him or hate him, it was quite something to see what will probably be the last example of old-style oratory at a convention. It’s becoming something of a lost art.
No, it invalidates his claim that “he was born a Democrat, and will die a Democrat”. It invalidates any claim he has to consistency.
You only see it from older Southerners and some black politicians these days.
http://miller.senate.gov/speeches/030101jjdinner.htm
I think it was Emerson who said, " A foolish consistency is the hob-goblin of little minds." Miller, who, from his speech last night and his post-speech wig-out, shows just how little mind one can have and still be a U.S. Senator, doesn’t even appear to have a foolish consistency, much less any other kind.
Er, no. But the specfic sort of bile-spitting, rant-tastic criticism spewed by Cheney and Miller – that’s hate. I’m no fan of either the DNC or the RNC, glorified pep-rallies that they are, but anyone who watched/is watching both and doesn’t think the RNC has been an incubator of hate ten times more severe than the DNC, is, in my opinion, blinded by partisanship.
Get with the program. The term these days is “girlie-men.”
I’m actually more interested in seeing someone reconcile Miller’s RNC speech with his flattering introduction of Kerry (linked below by Hentor the Barbarian) in March of 2001. A lesser man would be tempted to use the term “flip-flop,” but I’m sure I’m merely misunderstanding something.
-P
I weighed in on that speech in another thread.
That was an introduction of Kerry as a speaker at a party fundraising dinner, back when Zell Miller still cared about party loyalty. A more meaningless speech cannot be imagined, and of course you’re not going to say anything bad.
Anyone who doesn’t understand that hasn’t worked very much in party politics.
Are you suggesting that there’s a more solid basis for this speech than that one?
Hmmmm…
Keynote address at a party national convention versus an introduction to a dinner. Especially when that keynote address will bring the wrath of his old political allies down on his head.
Yes. I am suggesting exactly that. It’s pretty damn obvious, isn’t it?
It’s no more obvious than asserting that the Democrats are still “his political allies”. We’ve already noted that it’s no more than a name for him; that his true party affiliation is with the Republicans.
But thanks for clearing up that the Miller who appeared last night, bug-eyed, ranting, duel-challenging, is the true one, the one who feels most at home with the GOP, and the one the GOP most wants to represent it as its keynote speaker.
And? In exchange for the wrath of people he obviously isn’t very loyal to, he’ll get showered with praise by the party he secretly longs to join. Zell the Pretender goes where the wind blows, and right now, folks like him are blowing (toward) Bush.
Never trust the integrity of this Dixiecrat, he who went from being a fervent segregationist to being a “friend of black people…see I have them workin’ in the office and everything!” just as soon as Jim Crow became unpopular.
If you can find cites that show vitriol spewed by the DNC of magnitude that is even HALF of that spewed by the RNC, by all means post them.
Good olfactory senses. In the most literal sense of the word, I most certainly am afraid of “4 more years”.
As posters have already pointed out-- no, it would not have been hateful of Miller to provide criticism of Kerry’s record. It is hateful, though, for him to perpetuate blatant lies about Kerry’s record in order to persuade people to “the cause”.
Let’s review some of the lies spewed forth by Miller:
“*But don’t waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution.
They don’t believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy. *”
It appears that Miller might have misspoke here. Maybe he meant to say “France” or something, rather than “Kerry”.
“*Now, while young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrat’s manic obsession to bring down our Commander in Chief. *”
No our nation is being torn apart by ridiculous remarks like “girlie-men” and “You Democrats really are a party of nervous pantywaists.”
“Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending. … John Kerry, who says he doesn’t like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security.”
Actually, Kerry never said he would get UN approval to “defend America”, he was meaning that he won’t be acting unilaterally with our military, when our actions will have dramatic effects on foreign regions/other countries. Statements like this are completely dispicable, IMHO.
“As a Senator, he voted to weaken our military. And nothing shows that more sadly and more clearly than his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harms way, far away.”
Even more hogwash. Having been to war, does anyone really think Kerry would send our troops to combat without proper equipment? Kerry wasn’t denying the troops their protective armor (why doesn’t anyone ever bring up the fact that Bush actually threatened to veto this bill, if it didn’t go his way?), or any other equipment necessary for combat.
If you’re interested (I know I would be, if I were being misled like this), Shayna has provided a wonderful cite for further details on Kerry’s voting record, in this thread:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=274223
LilShieste
Only when it’s a series of lies, delivered in the form of a stemwinding rant.
We Dems will continue to attack Bush. However, we will stick with the facts, which more than suffice.
I see. And this integrity problem bothered the Democratic Party so damn much that it prevented them from allowing Zell Miller to serve as governor, as senator, and to address their own convention as keynote speaker.
Oh wait. That happened in an alternate universe.
Sorry, you can’t have it both ways here.
OK, come to Jesus time, Moto. Look me in the eye and tell me you think Miller’s speech was a reasonable and articulate statement of political opinion. Tell me that you really believe that Kerry cackled wickedly and voted to keep our soldiers vulnerable. Deliberately. Maliciously. Treasonously.
Because that’s what the man said. Plainly, openly, without caveat. Either Miller is a rabid partisan, spreading vicious lies, or Kerry is a traitor and a scoundrel.
You got a third option? Let’s hear it.