NationStates Jolt Archive

...it's time for all of us in the U.S., to put aside the differences, and work together to vanquish the forces of international terrorism, bring even more order to Iraq and Afghanistan, disarm Iran and North Korea, and settle once and for all the matters in the Holy Land.

I hereby extend to my fellow Americans on the Left, a hearty handshake, in honor of the class displayed by John Kerry on November 3rd. He could have easily sunk the nation into another battle of the recounts, but instead he chose the path that preserves the integrity of the electoral process. Elections are supposed to be won and lost at the polling place, not in a courtroom. My theory is, he witnessed the Al Gore experience of 2000, and decided he couldn't put the country through that again.

Maybe I have been wrong about John Kerry in some aspects...maybe the Democratic Party did nominate the better person among the field that started out in January. After all, it's hard to visualize some of the others in that group bowing out so graciously.

All in all, the United States of America is stronger today, thanks to people who put the country's best interests above their own.

Let's roll!

...it's time for all of us in the U.S., to put aside the differences, and work together to vanquish the forces of international terrorism, bring even more order to Iraq and Afghanistan, disarm Iran and North Korea, and settle once and for all the matters in the Holy Land.

For a lot of us, me included, parts of the US *are* the "Holy Land". My people settled and built religious monuments in NE Texas long before the Europeans came here.

If you want to wage war against the "towel heads", sorry, but they have my sympathy and I will gladly take up arms to defend them from White empirialist ideaologies until the moment I take my last breath ... and I am an American Citizen.

I appericate your kind words and I accept your handshake. I am dissapointed that Kerry did loose, I was confident that he would win, but you win some you loose some. I guess all we can do is lick our wounds and hope for 2008. It was a good race, it was a close one. Both sides work very hard on this election and While I congratulate Bush on his win, I will not blindly follow him, and when he does something wrong I will not support him.

Let's roll!

Let's not. Does this sound to anyone else more like "Let's all work together and stop disagreeing with my party, " than, "Let's bring America back together?" No, the Republicans will, and ought to, meet with the fierce opposition that our form of government allows. I do hope that some of the people on the left who were running on pure vitriole before will cool it, but no opposition should be put aside for some false unity. Now, more than ever, the Republicans should be kept in check. What you propose is the same rolling over that we all know the Democrats did after 9/11. Sorry if I don't find it sincere.

Let's not. Does this sound to anyone else more like "Let's all work together and stop disagreeing with my party, " than, "Let's bring America back together?" No, the Republicans will, and ought to, meet with the fierce opposition that our form of government allows. I do hope that some of the people on the left who were running on pure vitriole before will cool it, but no opposition should be put aside for some false unity. Now, more than ever, the Republicans should be kept in check. What you propose is the same rolling over that we all know the Democrats did after 9/11. Sorry if I don't find it sincere.I actually have a slightly different suggestion. The country is in the shape it's in because we took chances and worked with the Republicans when we should have known better. But the fact is that they've pretty much had free reign for the last four years, and we're currently in a tunnel staring a locomotive in the face as a result, no matter what the faith-based community in the middle and southern parts of the country believe. So I say we let them continue--it's not like we have many options after all--but don't join them in anything at all. If we join them, we share responsibility when it all goes to hell. So Democrats in Congress should vote no but not filibuster (except when it comes to reactionaries on the Supreme Court). Make every vote a party line vote and when it all goes to hell, say "see what happens when they've got all the power?"

...it's time for all of us in the U.S., to put aside the differences, and work together to vanquish the forces of international terrorism, bring even more order to Iraq and Afghanistan, disarm Iran and North Korea, and settle once and for all the matters in the Holy Land.

I hereby extend to my fellow Americans on the Left, a hearty handshake, in honor of the class displayed by John Kerry on November 3rd. He could have easily sunk the nation into another battle of the recounts, but instead he chose the path that preserves the integrity of the electoral process. Elections are supposed to be won and lost at the polling place, not in a courtroom. My theory is, he witnessed the Al Gore experience of 2000, and decided he couldn't put the country through that again.

Maybe I have been wrong about John Kerry in some aspects...maybe the Democratic Party did nominate the better person among the field that started out in January. After all, it's hard to visualize some of the others in that group bowing out so graciously.

All in all, the United States of America is stronger today, thanks to people who put the country's best interests above their own.

Let's roll!

What is the nicest way to put this?

We thank you for:
Your kindness
Your good gesture
Your sense of unity

We say NO THANKS for:
Your want for us to submit to Bush

I actually have a slightly different suggestion. The country is in the shape it's in because we took chances and worked with the Republicans when we should have known better. But the fact is that they've pretty much had free reign for the last four years, and we're currently in a tunnel staring a locomotive in the face as a result, no matter what the faith-based community in the middle and southern parts of the country believe. So I say we let them continue--it's not like we have many options after all--but don't join them in anything at all. If we join them, we share responsibility when it all goes to hell. So Democrats in Congress should vote no but not filibuster (except when it comes to reactionaries on the Supreme Court). Make every vote a party line vote and when it all goes to hell, say "see what happens when they've got all the power?"

This is one good thing I see coming from this election...now Bush gets to harvest all that he sowed. I agree that we are where we are now because the Democrats caved to the Republicans for much of Bush's first term. Hmm... you idea of essentially letting Neoconservativism run itself into the ground is compelling...I just worry about how far down the movement will drag America with it.

Maybe that's what's needed, but can we dig it out again afterwards?

This is one good thing I see coming from this election...now Bush gets to harvest all that he sowed. I agree that we are where we are now because the Democrats caved to the Republicans for much of Bush's first term. Hmm... you idea of essentially letting Neoconservativism run itself into the ground is compelling...I just worry about how far down the movement will drag America with it.

Maybe that's what's needed, but can we dig it out again afterwards?

Unless it all turns out right in the end, in which case it'll be hard to oppose them later on.

...it's time for all of us in the U.S., to put aside the differences, and work together to vanquish the forces of international terrorism, bring even more order to Iraq and Afghanistan, disarm Iran and North Korea, and settle once and for all the matters in the Holy Land.You just adopted a large part of John Kerry's platform, something you have been insulting for months. Right wing pundits have a word for that.

Oh trust me Anbar--the prospect terrifies me, but we really don't have many other options, now do we? The Republicans will have at least a 20 vote majority in the House, and probably 5 votes in the Senate unless something crazy happens in the Alaska recount. What can we do other than filibuster a horrendous Supreme Court nominee? Not much, to be quite frank about it.

So we take our stands against the powers that be, and we should be loud about it. Make our positions known, and let our reasons for those positions be known, and make sure that American knows that we are giving them fair warning about the crisis to come.

You make a strong point, Incertonia. I've been trying not to face the full possibilities of the power that the Neoconservatives have grasped at this point, but I suppose I'll have to eventually. Now may as well be that time, and what you propose does seem to be a viable strategy. Possibly, the only one left...scary.

I actually have a slightly different suggestion. The country is in the shape it's in because we took chances and worked with the Republicans when we should have known better. But the fact is that they've pretty much had free reign for the last four years, and we're currently in a tunnel staring a locomotive in the face as a result, no matter what the faith-based community in the middle and southern parts of the country believe. So I say we let them continue--it's not like we have many options after all--but don't join them in anything at all. If we join them, we share responsibility when it all goes to hell. So Democrats in Congress should vote no but not filibuster (except when it comes to reactionaries on the Supreme Court). Make every vote a party line vote and when it all goes to hell, say "see what happens when they've got all the power?"

Speaking as a moderate Republican, I can say that I wouldn't want to see this strategy take hold. I'm content with Bush's judgements on the issues, but the minority's watchdog role is still critical. I personally don't want to see the country go as far right as it could potentially go if Bush decided to flex some muscle.. after all, with 56 votes in the Senate, counting Cheney, Bush has enormous power right now. Bill Frist could toss Arlen Specter out like an old shoe any time he wants, so the fact remains that the left side of the aisle has to be completely unified to ensure that Bush appoints 2 more Rehnquists, rather than 2 more Scalias.. to be sure, Scalia brings a valuable textualist/originalist perspective, but one Scalia is enough for me! ;)

You make a strong point, Incertonia. I've been trying not to face the full possibilities of the power that the Neoconservatives have grasped at this point, but I suppose I'll have to eventually. Now may as well be that time, and what you propose does seem to be a viable strategy. Possibly, the only one left...scary.
It's the Zen place I've gone to in order to cope--I am become one with the world and flow and move with it. That is all I can do, at least until some dumbass media person or Iowan tells me who's "electable" in 2007. Then I can hit them with a baseball bat. Hard. Then I will return to my Zen place.:D

Speaking as a moderate Republican, I can say that I wouldn't want to see this strategy take hold. I'm content with Bush's judgements on the issues, but the minority's watchdog role is still critical. I personally don't want to see the country go as far right as it could potentially go if Bush decided to flex some muscle.. after all, with 56 votes in the Senate, counting Cheney, Bush has enormous power right now. Bill Frist could toss Arlen Specter out like an old shoe any time he wants, so the fact remains that the left side of the aisle has to be completely unified to ensure that Bush appoints 2 more Rehnquists, rather than 2 more Scalias.. to be sure, Scalia brings a valuable textualist/originalist perspective, but one Scalia is enough for me! ;)
To be quite blunt, that's your problem, not mine. Your party is the one who elected psychos like Coburn this time around. You'll have to reign in your own crazies. Being reasonable is what got the Democrats in the fix they're currently in.

To be quite blunt, that's your problem, not mine. Your party is the one who elected psychos like Coburn this time around. You'll have to reign in your own crazies. Being reasonable is what got the Democrats in the fix they're currently in.

I realize this, and Coburn is one vote, not the voice of the Senate, so it's not as if he has redefined the tone of the Bush admin... However, I get the destinct feeling that if the left goes into lockdown-mode, and won't co-operate on even the least revolutionary compromises, the GOP will do precisely what the Democrats did in this election: shift to the fringe and go for broke. I think a Democratic side of the senate that plays ball and maybe bites some bullets will move us along and on a less extreme course than one that holds out, forcing the GOP to sneak nominees in with deception.. :(

Speaking as a moderate Republican, I can say that I wouldn't want to see this strategy take hold. I'm content with Bush's judgements on the issues, but the minority's watchdog role is still critical. I personally don't want to see the country go as far right as it could potentially go if Bush decided to flex some muscle.. after all, with 56 votes in the Senate, counting Cheney, Bush has enormous power right now. Bill Frist could toss Arlen Specter out like an old shoe any time he wants, so the fact remains that the left side of the aisle has to be completely unified to ensure that Bush appoints 2 more Rehnquists, rather than 2 more Scalias.. to be sure, Scalia brings a valuable textualist/originalist perspective, but one Scalia is enough for me! ;)

Wise words, indeed, but too late?

Personally, I'm becoming more and more convinced that we ought to give Bush's base what they deserve - a full term of Bush. You single-issue voters out there? You party-liners? Yeah, serves you right. You're willing to unwaveringly vote for the man, but you rely on the opposition (whom you've demonized for years prior) to keep him in line, fearing what he may do?

It's the Zen place I've gone to in order to cope--I am become one with the world and flow and move with it. That is all I can do, at least until some dumbass media person or Iowan tells me who's "electable" in 2007. Then I can hit them with a baseball bat. Hard. Then I will return to my Zen place.:D

I've been slipping into that Zen place, myself...in just a short time, I've come to recognize that there is no worrying about what Bush may do, since there is little stopping him now. The only solution left is to live and wait, and when he makes his next move, see to it that I'm not going to be hit by it. I'd tried to push such musings away (I try to crush that optimism whenever possible), but hey, that's reality today.

Yeah, I've already heard some people talking about 2008. I, too, felt like hitting them with something blunt.

Speaking as a moderate Republican, I can say that I wouldn't want to see this strategy take hold. I'm content with Bush's judgements on the issues, but the minority's watchdog role is still critical. I personally don't want to see the country go as far right as it could potentially go if Bush decided to flex some muscle.. after all, with 56 votes in the Senate, counting Cheney, Bush has enormous power right now. Bill Frist could toss Arlen Specter out like an old shoe any time he wants, so the fact remains that the left side of the aisle has to be completely unified to ensure that Bush appoints 2 more Rehnquists, rather than 2 more Scalias.. to be sure, Scalia brings a valuable textualist/originalist perspective, but one Scalia is enough for me! ;)

Quite true but a great unification tool is the hostility factor. I really don't see compromise on very many issues. More of a case of work with us as long as you do as we say.

So I think there are problems ahead. Especially with the replacment for Rehnquist. Most likely it's going to be that Hispanic fellow who is an arch-conservative and that means fillabuster time. Which raises the hostility factor....

You make a strong point, Incertonia. I've been trying not to face the full possibilities of the power that the Neoconservatives have grasped at this point, but I suppose I'll have to eventually. Now may as well be that time, and what you propose does seem to be a viable strategy. Possibly, the only one left...scary.

Bush is smart enough to know that Iraq has been a disaster - the neoconservative promise of a quick victory and an easy peace has been dispelled forever. They'll be no more invasions, if only because the US military is stretched to breaking point as it is.

I worry more about neocon control over the ecomomy. The trade deficits are getting bigger and bigger as we lose more industrial and manufacturing jobs to China and Mexico. Not that Kerry would have made a difference on that score. The Dems sold out to unfettered free-trade with Clinton and Nafta in 1994, and if Kerry had been elected nothing would have changed.

Well, after reading all the responses, I have reached a conclusion.

The Left is still the Angry Left, and now it's also the Humiliated Left. Admit it, folks, you lost, and this time there was no doubt about it. Now, I had decided that it was time to put the politicking aside...but I see it would be a wasted effort anyway.

That is sad, because all you Libs are accomplishing by all that wailing and gnashing of teeth is, you're digging an even deeper hole for your side. America doesn't need negativism at this point.

Memo to all you Libs: the election is over, the people have spoken, and your message of negativity and obstruction has been rejected. Your side had a chance to present a positive message ("if elected, this is what we will do..."), instead, your side chose to present a negative message ("vote for me because I am not the other guy...") When will your side learn that the United States was founded by people who were optimistic, not pessimistic?

Keep that up, and in 2006, instead of being down by 5 in the Senate and 20 in the House, it most likely will be 10 and 25.

However, I must admit, I am impressed by the way Catholic Germany has handled it. I salute You.

Our message of negativity? Who were the Swift Boat Vets again? Who took every possible opportunity to impugn the patriotism of anyone who dared disagree with the administration? Which party was it that traded on anti-gay sentiment to drive people to the polls to vote for their candidate? Pardon me if I fail to see the positivity in the Republican platform, considering that it's largely based on fear and division along social and economic lines.

Bush is smart enough to know that Iraq has been a disaster - the neoconservative promise of a quick victory and an easy peace has been dispelled forever. They'll be no more invasions, if only because the US military is stretched to breaking point as it is.

I worry more about neocon control over the ecomomy. The trade deficits are getting bigger and bigger as we lose more industrial and manufacturing jobs to China and Mexico. Not that Kerry would have made a difference on that score. The Dems sold out to unfettered free-trade with Clinton and Nafta in 1994, and if Kerry had been elected nothing would have changed.
Kindly remind me who promised Iraq would be quick and the peace would be easy. Seems like I remember the soldiers were advancing faster than their supply lines, which indicates they didn't think they would go as fast as they did. I also seem to remember a quote about the peace being harder to win than the war.

Our message of negativity? Who were the Swift Boat Vets again? Who took every possible opportunity to impugn the patriotism of anyone who dared disagree with the administration? Which party was it that traded on anti-gay sentiment to drive people to the polls to vote for their candidate? Pardon me if I fail to see the positivity in the Republican platform, considering that it's largely based on fear and division along social and economic lines.
Yeah, the swifties were the ONLY ones to run negative ads. I remember only 3 different ads from them, as opposed to at least 20 from groups like moveon and the media fund. I hope they can fix the system so all these 527's have to follow some sort of truth in advertising law, instead of spewing party line rhetoric from both sides of the aisle, and bothe sides of their ass.

Well, after reading all the responses, I have reached a conclusion.

The Left is still the Angry Left, and now it's also the Humiliated Left. Admit it, folks, you lost, and this time there was no doubt about it. Now, I had decided that it was time to put the politicking aside...but I see it would be a wasted effort anyway.

That is sad, because all you Libs are accomplishing by all that wailing and gnashing of teeth is, you're digging an even deeper hole for your side. America doesn't need negativism at this point.

Memo to all you Libs: the election is over, the people have spoken, and your message of negativity and obstruction has been rejected. Your side had a chance to present a positive message ("if elected, this is what we will do..."), instead, your side chose to present a negative message ("vote for me because I am not the other guy...") When will your side learn that the United States was founded by people who were optimistic, not pessimistic?

Keep that up, and in 2006, instead of being down by 5 in the Senate and 20 in the House, it most likely will be 10 and 25.

However, I must admit, I am impressed by the way Catholic Germany has handled it. I salute You.

If I wanted to read crap like this, I'd go pick up The Enemy Within or Slander. Pack up the rhetoric, Panny, the election is over. You're not going to convince anyone that, since Bush won, it's time to turn Republican.

Does anyone else find the opening post condescending?

Yeah, the swifties were the ONLY ones to run negative ads. I remember only 3 different ads from them, as opposed to at least 20 from groups like moveon and the media fund. I hope they can fix the system so all these 527's have to follow some sort of truth in advertising law, instead of spewing party line rhetoric from both sides of the aisle, and bothe sides of their ass.

I think Incertonia's point was to point out Panny's usual abundance of blind hypocrisy, not to defend the Dems or the left in general as saints. Most of us are well aware this was a messy election all around, and most of us are, indeed, tired of it.

Does anyone else find the opening post condescending?

Just a little.

If I wanted to read crap like this, I'd go pick up The Enemy Within or Slander. Pack up the rhetoric, Panny, the election is over. You're not going to convince anyone that, since Bush won, it's time to turn Republican.
Actualy, Michael Savage is not advocating coming together, but ramming a conservative agenda down the liberals' collective throats while the Republicans have the chance. Not that I'm a fan of his, mind you. I find his show to be like a plumber's butt crack, you don't want to look (listen), but you just can't help but to do it anyway. It's mildly entertaining, which is more that I can hope for from the FM side of the radio these days. And don't even get me started on TV.

Actualy, Michael Savage is not advocating coming together, but ramming a conservative agenda down the liberals' collective throats while the Republicans have the chance. Not that I'm a fan of his, mind you. I find his show to be like a plumber's butt crack, you don't want to look (listen), but you just can't help but to do it anyway. It's mildly entertaining, which is more that I can hope for from the FM side of the radio these days. And don't even get me started on TV.

I was referring to PAnny's second post, calling Liberals this-and-that because we didn't buy the "Since you lost, you should all do what we say" line he was pushing. I heard Michael Savage's position today on my way home. Yeah, seems like you listen to him for the same reason I do.

527s are the Democrats mainstream form of reaching the people. Since many of the major media outlets are under the control of Republicans / Conservatives, it's not as easy for the Democrats to reach the people media wise. I know people are going to start going on about how this and that station is all actually liberally leaning, like CNN and whatnot - but I do remember CNN refusing to air a variety of anti-Bush advertisements, most significant that comes to mind is those ran by the Log Cabin Republicans during the time of the RNC.

If I wanted to read crap like this, I'd go pick up The Enemy Within or Slander. Pack up the rhetoric, Panny, the election is over. You're not going to convince anyone that, since Bush won, it's time to turn Republican.
As usual, you miss the point in your blind hatred of anyone in the conservative side. I am not calling on anyone to become a Republican...I am calling on all to act as Americans, that is, put aside the pettiness (a point that is obviously lost on you and quite a few of the other libs,) and let's all work together to heal the country. After all, most of the divisiveness since November 2000 has come from the Left, how about y'all give it a rest now, and for once do something positive for all?

I know, fat chance, but I had to give it a shot.

As usual, you miss the point in your blind hatred of anyone in the conservative side. I am not calling on anyone to become a Republican...I am calling on all to act as Americans, that is, put aside the pettiness (a point that is obviously lost on you and quite a few of the other libs,) and let's all work together to heal the country. After all, most of the divisiveness since November 2000 has come from the Left, how about y'all give it a rest now, and for once do something positive for all?

I know, fat chance, but I had to give it a shot.

About as fat a chance as you figuring out there there's more than just a right and left side. I'm a liberal Libertarian - you can put that in your pipe and smoke it. What you are calling for is for the Dems to bend over so you and yours can have your way with the country...I just simplified it. It's your usual partisan crap, a patronizing plea made in the assumption that somehow those opposed to your viewpoint only do so to spite you, not that they have any intellectual or ethical position. It's ridiculously transparent.

No, Panny, I don't hate the right - I have one foot in it. What I hate is partisan idiots like yourself who only further divide the nation with your drivel, left or right. Your claim that it's only the left just shows what a blind fool you are.

After all, most of the divisiveness since November 2000 has come from the Left, how about y'all give it a rest now, and for once do something positive for all?

Maybe you could start by not blaming the left for all the divisiveness, and by not insinuating that the left has not done anything positive before?

Negative ads, you say? Both parties have participated in the negative campagining. The right is just a bit more sucessful in painting the word "liberl" as something evil. Now its time for people to see that Republicans is as un-Christian as it can get.

Anyway, 51% is hardly a mandate.

"After all, most of the divisiveness since November 2000 has come from the Left, how about y'all give it a rest now, and for once do something positive for all?"

Umm, no. We just refuse to succumb to your homogenous ways.

And "Liberal Media" is a myth....you seriosuly expect me to believe you?