Article

2006-02-09 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Jackal 2006-02-09 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11134 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I must admit, she looks different without her leather hip boots, whip and thin mustache.

Posted by Captain America 2006-02-09 00:14|| 2006-02-09 00:14|| Front Page Top

#2 It is the Classic DhimmiDonk Gambit, screech that the other guy is doing precisely what you are doing. High Obfuscation and Mongering Quotients. A'skeers the small children and confuses the middle of the roaders.

Posted by .com 2006-02-09 00:31|| 2006-02-09 00:31|| Front Page Top

#3 Since when has it been part of American patriotism to keep our mouths shut?"

Pretty much through the entire history of the nation, at least with respect to foreign policy.

See especially: WWII

Posted by eLarson 2006-02-09 09:01|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2006-02-09 09:01|| Front Page Top

#4 Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday accused Republicans of "playing the fear card" of terrorism to win elections and..

Translation: "Terrorism Is No Big Deal."

She added, "Since when has it been part of American patriotism to keep our mouths shut?"

The Big Problem with her and her ilk running their mouths is that they haven't offered anything reasonable in terms of alternatives other than appeasement and/or capitulation.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-02-09 09:39|| 2006-02-09 09:39|| Front Page Top

#5 "All we've got is fear and we're going to keep playing the fear card."

Card played by Dems with blacks and other minorities, pro-abortionists, fem-nazis, university professors, etc. "If those Republicans get power, you will be destroyed!". Like that doesn't work, why keep playing it?

Posted by Glomomp Tholuse6283 2006-02-09 09:44|| 2006-02-09 09:44|| Front Page Top

#6 Hillary Clinton is correct. What she is saying is really old news. It is a given that Bush-Rove are exploiting The Iraq War for political gain and winning elections. They played the "fear card in Prez election 2004 and Rove has stated that they are going to do it again in midterm elections 2006.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 11:56|| 2006-02-09 11:56|| Front Page Top

#7 crickets.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-02-09 11:56|| 2006-02-09 11:56|| Front Page Top

#8 What she is saying is really old news.

It is old news. Then, as now, it was a pile of crap too.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-02-09 12:39|| 2006-02-09 12:39|| Front Page Top

#9 Bomb-a-rama:

So youre saying Bush-Rove are NOT exploting the Iraq war for partisan political gain?

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 13:12|| 2006-02-09 13:12|| Front Page Top

#10 Were is all the bad stuff that the Dhimmi party said was going to happen when Gore didn't get elected? Fear mongering is the first and last tactic of the dhimmi party.

Sorry Jackasses we are better off now than we were under Clinton and we live on a school teachers salary. Everything in our family life is better under Bush. I guess that is why we voted for him. We fear you Democrats. You sure have screwed up the state we live in.

Posted by Sock Puppet O´ Doom 2006-02-09 13:52|| 2006-02-09 13:52|| Front Page Top

#11 Your right SPOD - we are better off under Bush. For on we don't have to face Mecca to pray to a false God in the name of a False Prophet (we dont even have to pray if we dont want to) under pain of Death (or humiliation and tax).

When I try to imagine what Gore would have done after 9/11 I thank God for George W Bush!

This is just the same-old Donk FUD (Fear, Uncertainly, and Doupt) they always spread.

Posted by CrazyFool 2006-02-09 14:22|| 2006-02-09 14:22|| Front Page Top

#12 Sorry dudes:

The majority of the country disagrees with you and thinks the country is heading in the WRONG
direction under Bush and the Republican congress according to most major polls.

Furthemore if Gore had been elected Prez, I dont think 9-11-01 would have happened.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 14:36|| 2006-02-09 14:36|| Front Page Top

#13 facts mean nothing to Common Idiocy - ignore

Posted by Frank G 2006-02-09 15:11|| 2006-02-09 15:11|| Front Page Top

#14 "Furthemore if Gore had been elected Prez, I dont think 9-11-01 would have happened."

Man, it takes some industrial-strength stupidity to believe something like that. Are you on drugs or something????

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2006-02-09 15:13|| 2006-02-09 15:13|| Front Page Top

#15 there were warning signs that I think Gore would have reviewed and taken action on rather than arrogantly telling the people telling him these things to "piss off" as Bush did prior to 9-11.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 15:21|| 2006-02-09 15:21|| Front Page Top

#16 CS - Polls aren't worth the bullshit the're based on. Anyone can produce a poll which says exactly what they want.

The only poll which matters was back in November '04. I think the November '06 poll will be more of the same. You see people are learning about the little tricks used to (for example) influence polls (Question: Do you wish we did not have to go into Iraq. Answer: Yes. Conclusion: most Americans oppose the war in Iraq!). And the tricks the Media uses to influence public opinion (Highlight the deaths and bombing in IRAQ! Never mention the good news (reconstructions, Democracy taking a foothold). And if some idiot soldiers do something stupid gloat and focus on it exclusively for an entire year!).

And if Al was president 9/11 would have happened -- and Al would have simply tried to 'understand why they hate us' while bending over and grabing his ankles.....

Posted by CrazyFool 2006-02-09 15:26|| 2006-02-09 15:26|| Front Page Top

#17 CBS:

The majority of Americans were against the Civil War and just about every war we've been in.

You liberoids liked the Civil War (that was waged by a Republican prez)

Posted by Captain America 2006-02-09 15:32|| 2006-02-09 15:32|| Front Page Top

#18 Those were the same warning signs the Clinton/Gore administration chose to ignore for eight years. I have yet to see any action by AG that shows he would have done anything besides continue selling the nation's most sophisticated technology to the Chinese. And I'll add that these illegal technology transfers were the prime reason I voted against AG in 2000. I did not trust him on nat;l security issues.

And I still don't trust him or his party.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2006-02-09 15:34|| 2006-02-09 15:34|| Front Page Top

#19 Crazy Fool & Seafarious:

those are your opinions and I can respect that, I just totally disagree with you.

In my humble opinion, President Bush means well, but he is a incompetent bumbler, who makes bad decisions that cause more problems than they solve. (spread democracy to middle east, hamas elected, attack iraq-no wmids are a prime examples)

Politics historically happens in cycles and over the last few years Republicans have been in the controlling position, but it is my firm belief that all of that is about to change. The majority of american people are starting to get sick of Bush and the Republicans and I think it's going to show in 06 & 08.

You repubs seem to forget that Clinton was in office for 8 yrs and at one point Dems controlled all three major division of govt as the repubs do now.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 15:45|| 2006-02-09 15:45|| Front Page Top

#20 forget? That's why we took them away - because you lost the electorate in all three institutions. Now you're losing the Judicial branch as well. Yeehaw!

Posted by Frank G 2006-02-09 16:01|| 2006-02-09 16:01|| Front Page Top

#21 The diffence is Democrats started with control and immediately lost control of the House abd Senate.
1992: Clinton elected with 43% of votes (Clinton owes presidency to Perot).
1994: Democrats lose both House and Senate.

2000: Bush wins Electoral College
2002: Republicans increase margin in House and Senate.

Posted by ed 2006-02-09 16:17|| 2006-02-09 16:17|| Front Page Top

#22 "You repubs seem to forget that Clinton was in office for 8 yrs and at one point Dems controlled all three major division of govt as the repubs do now."
Gore was in office for eight years too. Look where it got him.

Don't assume an endless cycle of Republican/Democratic oscillations. This recent Dean, Gore, Kerry, Polosi lunacy is pretty darned inept compared to the likes of Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson. And Carter and Clinton had best shut up because their Iran/OBL records will make interesting political ads.

Posted by Darrell 2006-02-09 16:21|| 2006-02-09 16:21|| Front Page Top

#23 Made a mistake:
2002: GOP wins Senate going from 49 R:50 D:1 I (Socialist) to 51 R:48 D:1 I

Posted by ed 2006-02-09 16:23|| 2006-02-09 16:23|| Front Page Top

#24 ed:

For some reason you seem to think those repub results are permanent...I dont think so.

the bottom line on clinton is that he won, not once but twice and all three branches were under
Democratic control during his term for a period.

You seem to forget that democrats dominated the congress for much of the 20th centurn and its only in the last 20 years or so that repubs started to get a piece of that pie..lol

I give Newt Gingrich a lot of credit for that because he had good ideas and knew how to sell them to the public.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 16:27|| 2006-02-09 16:27|| Front Page Top

#25 there were warning signs that I think Gore would have reviewed and taken action on rather than arrogantly telling the people telling him these things to "piss off" as Bush did prior to 9-11

You are mistaken. Our intelligence services were far too hamstrung prior to 9-11 to deliver the proper information to any sitting President, be it Bush or Gore. Presumably you are referring to what is known as the Able Dangerscandal, which strikes me as complete fiasco that occurred due to an excess of political correctness in the FBIs legal department. Yes, the warning signs were there. Unfortunately, there didnt happen to be in the oval office.

Would Gore have acted swiftly, decisively, and (most importantly) controversially before tragedy struck had he known? We will never know for certain, but I have my doubts.

Posted by Secret Master 2006-02-09 16:28|| 2006-02-09 16:28|| Front Page Top

#26 Darrel:

I think you seriously undestimate the democrats and overestimate the republicans...

the problem for democrats is they keep writing off the south/midwest and those are the areas where the republicans have made most of their recent gains. democrats have got to get down there and fight for those voters.

Essentially if Gore or Kerry had one just one or two southern/midwestern states, the results would have been different..Bush hardly won by a landslide in either of those elections, which is what you try to make it sound like.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 16:31|| 2006-02-09 16:31|| Front Page Top

#27 CS, you tried to state some equivalency between Clinton and Bush. I showed you where you were wrong. Clinton came into office with both House and Senate control. He then proceeded to lose both in the next election and never regained either houses. Bush came into office with only the House under GOP control. The next election, the GOP won control of the Senate and increased House margins. Hardly equivalent. LoL in you want, but Democrats control neither the Office of the President, House of Representatives, Senate, and now the Supreme Court. If it makes you feel better, you'll always have the Washington Post and the New York Times. Talk about Selected, not Elected.

Posted by ed 2006-02-09 16:37|| 2006-02-09 16:37|| Front Page Top

#28 ed:

I give credit to Newt Gingrich for what he accomplished during the Clinton years for republicans. What I am trying to get thru your head is that what republicans currently have isnt PERMANENT. IF you believe that then you are deluding yourself. Democrats at some point in the near furture are going to start making a comeback as republican voters, particularly the middle class/lower middle class and independents realize that they were duped by Karl Rove and company.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 16:44|| 2006-02-09 16:44|| Front Page Top

#29 Problem is if Gore/Kerry had focused on a southern state they may will have simply traded for a northeastern state or two.

Like I said I think a number of things have emerged in the past decade or so which will shift the political landscape. One is the Internet and Blogs - where people can get their own un-predigested news and have open discussions (like here on Rantburg) or see the 'closed' discussions (such as on DU / KOS / etc....). No longer can Cronkite declare the Tet offensive a 'humiliating defeat' - Rather / Mapes tired much the same with the National Guard story and were busted - by bloggers. Back before the Internet & Blogs, Rather and Maples probably would have gotten away with it (Along with the silencing of the Switftboats) and we would have President Kerry right now.

Posted by CrazyFool 2006-02-09 16:46|| 2006-02-09 16:46|| Front Page Top

#30 So youre saying Bush-Rove are NOT exploting the Iraq war for partisan political gain?

Is terrorism a legitimate serious concern, or isn't it?

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-02-09 16:55|| 2006-02-09 16:55|| Front Page Top

#31 Crazy Fool:

You would have had President Kerry or Gore if
they had won Ohio and Florida respectively.

thats how close those elections were. the electorate is essentially split down the middle.
democrats cannot write off the south as they have in the last two prez elections and expect to win.

Posted by Common Sense 2006-02-09 16:57|| 2006-02-09 16:57|| Front Page Top

#32 CS is just playing the newest game in the Dem's strategy book. Its a version of killing your parents and throwing yourself on the mercy of the court cause you're an ophan.

The Dem leadership at the national level have chosen the anti-war strategy just like the Whigs during the War of 1812. They know they've handed the Reps the means to hammer them in the next election. So they play this hand which is "Don't you use that". Come on, the Dems for years have played a similar card with the black community for decades - "the Republicans hate black people". They play it all the time, they play it at every opportunity. They just played it again at the funeral the other day. They never give their opponent the benefit of the doubt that there are principles of real 'equality' before the law and that 'regardless of color, race or creed' means exactly that. Nope, nope, the Reps just hate black people. Keep saying it and don't let up. Now its our turn on the war.

CS and his cell are trying to sell the 'guilt' card so that Reps won't make up commercials that consist of nothing but the words and images of what the Dem leaders and leadership have said about this war for years. CS knows that the successes in the ME can no longer be covered up or obstructed by their patrons in the MSM. CS knows the MSM can't be relied upon to protect his buds.

News bulletin for you CS. We don't buy your guilt trips anymore. We're going to fight this in the same manner that you, your Kossock buds, your DU buddies, and Mr. Soros played. Now the old fart Republicans in Congress and still in the upper levels of the RNC, don't have the guts to play the game and actually still believe that they can rationally convince your crowd that they're not Nazis. The Blogsphere however is not beholding to the RNC or the old farts. We don't care to be loved by neo-Stalinists or transnational progressives. We understand that they won't take prisoners and therefore we won't either.

Now be prepared to take your lumps this November. And its not going to get better anytime soon.

Your best bet is to plan 8 to 10 year out to reconstitute the national party with Dems like Bill Richardson in NM and other local and state leaders who won't be beholding to the Kos Kiddies. Heck, even Mao turned on the Red Guard to retain control of the party.

Posted by Speremble Snalet3763 2006-02-09 17:06|| 2006-02-09 17:06|| Front Page Top

#33 CS, Republican control will last as long as the Dems continue to endanger the USA. You would be surprised at the number of non-Republicans here (like me) who will never vote for a Democrat as long they continue their unthinking, uncritical, head in the sand policies wrt the true nature of our enemies. Just to make your day. In the 2004 elections, I pulled the straight Republican ticket for the first time in my life. I'll be damned if I'd vote for an members of a party that nominated a traitorous ponce like Kerry to become the president of the United States.

PS. Re: Ohio and Florida. you are forgetting two little factors. The red states are fast gaining population (and electoral votes). In addition redistricting is occuring, placing even more districts out of Democratic reach.

Posted by ed 2006-02-09 17:10|| 2006-02-09 17:10|| Front Page Top

#34 CS, Republican control will last as long as the Dems continue to endanger the USA.

This is what a lot of Democrats don't seem to understand - the first order of business is survival.

Maroon their type on a deserted island, and they probably wouldn't last very long.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-02-09 17:30|| 2006-02-09 17:30|| Front Page Top

#35 The Dems should have learned in 2004 that you've got to have something better than snooty Kerry/Kennedy Monday-morning quarterbacking to win. The "known" Dems have a legacy that is not pretty and will kill them in the political ads.

As for the south, they controlled it once. I started out as a registered southern Democrat like my parents -- but we haven't actually voted socialist, er - Democratic, for a long time. Maybe that's because we want people of good principle in office, not the socialists, poll-chasers, and raving lunatics that are on the Democratic podiums today.

Posted by Darrell 2006-02-09 17:42|| 2006-02-09 17:42|| Front Page Top

#36 FORT SUMTER was fired upon or defended by ordinary honest men whom predomin did what they did for their beliefs, and under God, NOT LIKE NOW WITH THE WAFFLERS. So many escargots, Not enuff maple hotcakes or steaks.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-02-09 22:56|| 2006-02-09 22:56|| Front Page Top

00:00 2b
23:57 Frank G
23:48 2b
23:47 2b
23:39 2b
23:38 Bomb-a-rama
23:37 Frank G
23:37 2b
23:33 2b
23:31 Sock Puppet O´ Doom
23:30 Damn_Proud_American
23:27 Robert Crawford
23:23 Charles
23:19 phil_b
23:16 2b
23:16 Frank G
23:12 2b
23:10 JosephMendiola
23:07 Jules
23:04 JosephMendiola
23:04 FOTSGreg
23:00 tipper
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:56 JosephMendiola