West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: King Tech Quadafi on November 03, 2004, 01:29:34 PM
-
With the dust settled and the smoke cleared, and the outcome of this election guaranteed, several conclusions can be made regarding the state of US politics, the fate of both political parties, the War on Terrorism etc
The Democratic Party inherently is the biggest loser in this entire affair, and none of it is the fault of the Bushes or the Karl Roves. Theyre doing what they need to in order to ensure electoral success, its the Democratic Party's own fault.
No, the biggest criticism of the Democratic party has nothing to do with the reasons Bush and Co wants you to hate them, namely theyre weak on terror, they appease Saddam, theyre a bunch of "liberal elites" of whatever the hell the Republicans have managed to think up this morning. No, the problem with the horribly inept Democratic party is twofold:
1- Their complete and utter lack of balls
2- Their complete and utter detirioration of their principles and target electorates.
1. Where was the Democratic party when the Patriot Act was voted on? Where was the Democratic Party when preparations against Iraq began? Under the pretense of national unity and solidarity following 9/11, the Party failed in every way imaginable to not only distinguish between themselves and the Republicans. This is where the election was lost, following 9/11. They also, instead of leading public anger, began overwhelmed by it themselves, hence their blind support for War on Iraq. This is the problem, if youre Bush lite from the beginning how could u possible attempt to replace the man?
2- Workers and Organized Labour began leaving the Democratic party starting with the Reagan years, but this election the movement of the labour base was more specific and greater. The Democrats have taken their minority votes for granted, its sidelined its civil liberties electorate, its alienated minorities with ridicolous social positions etc
In conclusion, Bush was destined to win this from the beginning, and the Democrats conceded this election to him long ago. Theyre putting all their eggs in the 2008 basket. Kerry in any other campaign would not have even been looked at twice, but this year he was the Democratic candidate.
Techs natural response to all this nonsense is of course the whole damn things corrupted, its all bullshit. But for the Americans whose mentality is not that complex, not that open, etc think about what I said about the Democratic party. Why - in a campaign where essentially u should be doing whatever u can to win- was the candidate opposing Bush John Fuckin Kerry? Could the Democratic party done all theyve can to replace Bush? What happened to their balls and principles and electorate? What happened to the media following 9/11? Think about these things, and then see if you can say with a straight face that saying this is all bullshit is really conspiracy talk, or disgruntled freedom hating Islamic talk? Or whatever else terms and distinctions are used in your country to deflect criticism and hide the truth.
Heres to four more years, not of Bush or of Republicans, but heres to four more years of a corrupt, greedy and bloodthirsty American political system. We aint the only victims, hopefully after this election, some of you Yankees will realize this.
-
Pretty much in agreeance with what you say. Kerry was definetly a placeholder.
-
I feel ya man... :(
-
good post
-
Great points and post.
-
so you're gonna shut up now? :)
-
The stench of cheap booze and male strippers has entered the thread, Im done here guys, read what i said, learn something. Peace.
-
Tech, you always come correct with your political talk
-
People say, why can't the Democrats doa better job. The Democrat party is a party full of people that actually believe in a united country. When 9/11 happened, to show they support the president and are not going to play political games, the Democrats stood with Republicans to show a united front for the American people. In the end, they allowed too much, they bend too much and Bush took advantage of it all and is not letting go. The Democrats choice Kerry, not the Democrat committe, but the Democrat people. It was the people that voted to nominate Kerry, and that surprised a lot of people, including myself. We'll see what happens next, but I expect to see Obama in 2008. His the only Democrat I think that is not damaged from this election. Edwards was exposed as a lawyer... lol... and that's a bad thing I guess. Hilary was voted 3rd scariest woman in politics behind Candy Rice and some reporter. I don't think Hilary would run, unless it's against Rice... lol.
-
With the dust settled and the smoke cleared, and the outcome of this election guaranteed, several conclusions can be made regarding the state of US politics, the fate of both political parties, the War on Terrorism etc
The Democratic Party inherently is the biggest loser in this entire affair, and none of it is the fault of the Bushes or the Karl Roves. Theyre doing what they need to in order to ensure electoral success, its the Democratic Party's own fault.
No, the biggest criticism of the Democratic party has nothing to do with the reasons Bush and Co wants you to hate them, namely theyre weak on terror, they appease Saddam, theyre a bunch of "liberal elites" of whatever the hell the Republicans have managed to think up this morning. No, the problem with the horribly inept Democratic party is twofold:
1- Their complete and utter lack of balls
2- Their complete and utter detirioration of their principles and target electorates.
1. Where was the Democratic party when the Patriot Act was voted on? Where was the Democratic Party when preparations against Iraq began? Under the pretense of national unity and solidarity following 9/11, the Party failed in every way imaginable to not only distinguish between themselves and the Republicans. This is where the election was lost, following 9/11. They also, instead of leading public anger, began overwhelmed by it themselves, hence their blind support for War on Iraq. This is the problem, if youre Bush lite from the beginning how could u possible attempt to replace the man?
2- Workers and Organized Labour began leaving the Democratic party starting with the Reagan years, but this election the movement of the labour base was more specific and greater. The Democrats have taken their minority votes for granted, its sidelined its civil liberties electorate, its alienated minorities with ridicolous social positions etc
In conclusion, Bush was destined to win this from the beginning, and the Democrats conceded this election to him long ago. Theyre putting all their eggs in the 2008 basket. Kerry in any other campaign would not have even been looked at twice, but this year he was the Democratic candidate.
Techs natural response to all this nonsense is of course the whole damn things corrupted, its all bullshit. But for the Americans whose mentality is not that complex, not that open, etc think about what I said about the Democratic party. Why - in a campaign where essentially u should be doing whatever u can to win- was the candidate opposing Bush John Fuckin Kerry? Could the Democratic party done all theyve can to replace Bush? What happened to their balls and principles and electorate? What happened to the media following 9/11? Think about these things, and then see if you can say with a straight face that saying this is all bullshit is really conspiracy talk, or disgruntled freedom hating Islamic talk? Or whatever else terms and distinctions are used in your country to deflect criticism and hide the truth.
Heres to four more years, not of Bush or of Republicans, but heres to four more years of a corrupt, greedy and bloodthirsty American political system. We aint the only victims, hopefully after this election, some of you Yankees will realize this.
Personally i think you're missing the real deal, homie. I mean you are pointing the finger against Democrats and Kerry, saying Democrats did a terrible job, and Kerry wasnt the right man. But, even if i agree with you on this thing, i think it's a whole different point of view. I think this one, more than ever, was a "PRO President" or "AGAINST President" (Bush) election. People had the chance to give props to Bush (by re-electing him) or to CHANGE him. So no matter who was the opponent (Kerry or whatever), no matter the job of Democrats, if you didnt want Bush to continue his job, you had a chance to CHANGE him. Not only to vote Kerry, but to CHANGE Bush. Well, people TRUSTED and VOTED for Bush. So no matter how wack they were Kerry and the Democrats, people still kept the faith in Bush, and you cant defeat it.
-
With the dust settled and the smoke cleared, and the outcome of this election guaranteed, several conclusions can be made regarding the state of US politics, the fate of both political parties, the War on Terrorism etc
The Democratic Party inherently is the biggest loser in this entire affair, and none of it is the fault of the Bushes or the Karl Roves. Theyre doing what they need to in order to ensure electoral success, its the Democratic Party's own fault.
No, the biggest criticism of the Democratic party has nothing to do with the reasons Bush and Co wants you to hate them, namely theyre weak on terror, they appease Saddam, theyre a bunch of "liberal elites" of whatever the hell the Republicans have managed to think up this morning. No, the problem with the horribly inept Democratic party is twofold:
1- Their complete and utter lack of balls
2- Their complete and utter detirioration of their principles and target electorates.
1. Where was the Democratic party when the Patriot Act was voted on? Where was the Democratic Party when preparations against Iraq began? Under the pretense of national unity and solidarity following 9/11, the Party failed in every way imaginable to not only distinguish between themselves and the Republicans. This is where the election was lost, following 9/11. They also, instead of leading public anger, began overwhelmed by it themselves, hence their blind support for War on Iraq. This is the problem, if youre Bush lite from the beginning how could u possible attempt to replace the man?
2- Workers and Organized Labour began leaving the Democratic party starting with the Reagan years, but this election the movement of the labour base was more specific and greater. The Democrats have taken their minority votes for granted, its sidelined its civil liberties electorate, its alienated minorities with ridicolous social positions etc
In conclusion, Bush was destined to win this from the beginning, and the Democrats conceded this election to him long ago. Theyre putting all their eggs in the 2008 basket. Kerry in any other campaign would not have even been looked at twice, but this year he was the Democratic candidate.
Techs natural response to all this nonsense is of course the whole damn things corrupted, its all bullshit. But for the Americans whose mentality is not that complex, not that open, etc think about what I said about the Democratic party. Why - in a campaign where essentially u should be doing whatever u can to win- was the candidate opposing Bush John Fuckin Kerry? Could the Democratic party done all theyve can to replace Bush? What happened to their balls and principles and electorate? What happened to the media following 9/11? Think about these things, and then see if you can say with a straight face that saying this is all bullshit is really conspiracy talk, or disgruntled freedom hating Islamic talk? Or whatever else terms and distinctions are used in your country to deflect criticism and hide the truth.
Heres to four more years, not of Bush or of Republicans, but heres to four more years of a corrupt, greedy and bloodthirsty American political system. We aint the only victims, hopefully after this election, some of you Yankees will realize this.
Personally i think you're missing the real deal, homie. I mean you are pointing the finger against Democrats and Kerry, saying Democrats did a terrible job, and Kerry wasnt the right man. But, even if i agree with you on this thing, i think it's a whole different point of view. I think this one, more than ever, was a "PRO President" or "AGAINST President" (Bush) election. People had the chance to give props to Bush (by re-electing him) or to CHANGE him. So no matter who was the opponent (Kerry or whatever), no matter the job of Democrats, if you didnt want Bush to continue his job, you had a chance to CHANGE him. Not only to vote Kerry, but to CHANGE Bush. Well, people TRUSTED and VOTED for Bush. So no matter how wack they were Kerry and the Democrats, people still kept the faith in Bush, and you cant defeat it.
Good post, case closed.
-
That is a fantastic post, but it doesn't excuse you from not supporting Kerry in the election.
Nobody can argue that the Democrats don't have balls, because they didn't when they allowed the Republicans push all their shit through congress using fear of terrorism as their excuse.
But you still should have backed Kerry to get rid of Bush. You have to pick the (much) lesser of two evils.
-
That is a fantastic post, but it doesn't excuse you from not supporting Kerry in the election.
Nobody can argue that the Democrats don't have balls, because they didn't when they allowed the Republicans push all their shit through congress using fear of terrorism as their excuse.
But you still should have backed Kerry to get rid of Bush. You have to pick the (much) lesser of two evils.
Both Kerry and Bush, the college fraternity colleggues and distant relatives that they are, wouldnt hesitate one bit to crush a Muslim. So fuck em both, Im just gonna hope that Bush turns America to hell over the next 4 years.
-
Personally i think you're missing the real deal, homie. I mean you are pointing the finger against Democrats and Kerry, saying Democrats did a terrible job, and Kerry wasnt the right man. But, even if i agree with you on this thing, i think it's a whole different point of view. I think this one, more than ever, was a "PRO President" or "AGAINST President" (Bush) election. People had the chance to give props to Bush (by re-electing him) or to CHANGE him. So no matter who was the opponent (Kerry or whatever), no matter the job of Democrats, if you didnt want Bush to continue his job, you had a chance to CHANGE him. Not only to vote Kerry, but to CHANGE Bush. Well, people TRUSTED and VOTED for Bush. So no matter how wack they were Kerry and the Democrats, people still kept the faith in Bush, and you cant defeat it.
Unfortunately, youre missing the real deal.
Do you believe that a clear majority of Americans would honestly vote for a person like Bush without being influenced to a certain degree. Of course this is a pro-president or anti-president choice, but if there was no viable opposition from the beginning, who in their right mind in this current circumstances would be anti president?
Americans were pro Bush because they werent given a proper reason to be anti Bush.