NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_07_31/cover.html

Why have the Democrats proven so inept at electorally exploiting the growing evidence of the current Republican Party’s incompetence at governing? The Democrats certainly have a chance of doing well in the November elections, but why is this merely a possibility?

Reason 1: Wont stand for America First.
Still, some past Democratic failures were so egregious that—even though the media hardly mention them anymore (because the press shared the Democrats’ ill-chosen prejudices)—they continue to dog the electorate’s perception of the Democrats. Although we are constantly assured today that America was unified throughout the Cold War in opposition to the Soviet Union, the public at least vaguely recalls that during the Reagan years much of the Democratic Party wanted to beg the Soviets for mercy, almost up to the day the evil empire collapsed.

Reason 2: Wont stand for law abiding citizens first.
The Democrats’ other mark of Cain is the horrific 1964-1996 crime wave unleashed by the Great Society. After almost a quarter of a million excess murders and the reduction of great American cities like Detroit to wastelands, it was finally quelled by the old conservative nostrums of cutting welfare and locking crooks up and throwing away the key.

They combine into reason 3:We're bad, they're good - so vote for us?
These were not fluke mistakes. Instead, they explain the unpopularity of the Democrats. Their common denominator was the Democrats’ tendency to sympathize more with foreign enemies and domestic delinquents than with their own country and their fellow citizens.

Reason 4: Baiting the majority.
The Democrats’ fundamental weakness is that even after four decades of their strenuously celebrating the moral supremacy of every organized minority, our political system remains, more or less, one of majority rule. It’s hard to win a majority if you don’t personally want to be part of the majority because your ego centers around visualizing yourself as better than the average American. If you don’t like the American majority, either in principle or in person, the majority won’t like you.

Reason 5: Always pee off the guys who actually VOTE
The GOP, in contrast, presents itself as the party of normal American voters, whose demographic transformation lags decades behind the raw population totals. Because the median voter is in his late forties, non-Hispanic whites cast 79 percent of the votes in 2004, according to the Census Bureau, even though they comprise only 68 percent of the total population and just 57 percent of those under age five.
Crucially, the Democrats garner the votes of merely one out of three of America’s wedded white guys—the demographic segment that, to a fair if impolitic approximation, not only runs the country but also keeps the country running. Because Democrats have increasingly alienated the group that, more than any other, gets things done in America, it’s become implausible for Democrats to portray themselves as the natural governing party.

Reason 6: A Party without a machinery.
This relegates the Democrats to trying to lash together unwieldy coalitions of minorities united mainly in their alienation from majority attitudes. This is possible, but it’s harder than the GOP’s task of mobilizing a fairly cohesive body of supporters. The Democrats resemble the ramshackle multi-tribe army of the Persian Empire and the Republicans the cohesive Greek phalanxes of Alexander.

Reason 7: Takers, not givers.
Why? Because far more than Democrats, the typical Republican is a team player, the kind of fellow who won’t let you forget that he played a little ball in school and, when the annual sales convention rolls around, is proud, deeply proud that he’s helped make this the best damn sales force in the industry! [Applause.] Equally masculine AFL-CIO rank-and-filers long helped the Democrats excel at the blocking and tackling of organizing winning campaigns, but they’re getting old and losing a step at the ground game. Most of the Democrats’ other white constituencies—feminists, gays, movie stars, New Agers, hipsters, and intellectuals—are too self-absorbed to build effective organizations.

Reason 8: Hey - most of us dislike our fellow constituents with passion!
Worse, many elements within the Democratic Party can’t actually stand each other. The white “lifestyle” liberals welcome minorities as allies because they believe being on the same side as African-Americans against the white majority validates their feelings of self-worth. Yet to be frank—not that they would ever say it in so many words—they also regard blacks and Hispanics as scandalously reactionary on such crucial issues (to them) as gay marriage.

Meanwhile, the racial minorities are heavily Democratic both for newfangled identity reasons and for old-fashioned ethnic clout purposes that St. Tammany himself would have understood, but they are also more culturally conservative and view their white allies as smug, out-of-touch, and patronizing.

Reason 9: United by hate, and distrusted by Patriots.
The Democrats can seldom appeal to one of their blocs without offending another, so the main message they can all agree upon is how much they hate George W. Bush. The problem with that strategy is that, yes, admittedly, the president is a national disgrace, but that also reflects badly on the nation that twice elected him, so a large fraction of patriotic Americans don’t want to hear it.

Reason 10: Procreation equals Destiny - yet we don't support Traditional Families First. ( Or, why Democratic Constituents are a declining demographic. )
And white Democrats are starting to die out slowly due to low fertility. In blue states, white people are less likely to marry and have children than in red states, where there’s more affordable family formation. Bush carried 25 of the top 26 states in white total fertility (number of babies per white woman), while Kerry was victorious in the bottom 16.


In summary: “Democrats Vow Not To Give Up Hopelessness.”

Flamebait? Flamebait, and reported as such. Let the mods decide if they want this sort of thread to continue or not.

I thought that the main reason was

They act and think like the Republicans, but the difference is that you can laugh at George W. Bush

Greetings.

Flamebait? Flamebait, and reported as such. Let the mods decide if they want this sort of thread to continue or not.


BS. The straighforward reasons behind a decade of electoral disasters.

If you happen to be a democrat, I'd present you as reason 11: won't listen to electorally unpleasant truths.

Yep.

BS. The straighforward reasons behind a decade of electoral disasters.

If you happen to be a democrat, I'd present you as reason 11: won't listen to electorally unpleasant truths.
Dude, get your facts straight: I do not even live in the US

Another reason? Gun control. One reason Algore lost in 00. And of course, democrats kill their kids and reduce themselves to animals, most republicans are atleast decent enough not to.

Another reason? Gun control. One reason Algore lost in 00. And of course, democrats kill their kids and reduce themselves to animals, most republicans are atleast decent enough not to.
My parents killed me? Funny...I thought I was alive all this time

*runs off sobbing to parents asking why they never told me*

Another reason? Gun control. One reason Algore lost in 00. And of course, democrats kill their kids and reduce themselves to animals, most republicans are atleast decent enough not to.

Well, actually there's no correlation between political affiliation and the abortion rate. Texas, for example, has a higher abortion rate than New Jersey and Florida has the third highest rate in the country.

My parents killed me? Funny...I thought I was alive all this time

*runs off sobbing to parents asking why they never told me*

Your parents: RUN! ZOMBIE! AIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

[/scene]

Well, actually there's no correlation between political affiliation and the abortion rate. Texas, for example, has a higher abortion rate than New Jersey and Florida has the third highest rate in the country.


But there is a high correlation between family formation and political affiliation.

And before I forget: Of course, Republicans can be hostile too, but their resentments tend to be directed outward toward foreigners, such as the French, who don’t get to vote, and upward toward America’s “cultural elites,” who are, by definition, limited in electoral strength.

But there is a high correlation between family formation abnd political affiliation.

Well, the state with the lowest divorce rate in the country is Massachusetts and almost all of the highest divorce rates are in red states. Teenage pregnancy rates and the percentage of those pregnancies that end in abortion are also higher in the red states. A lot of this is economic in nature; the poorest state in the US is a red state and the average income in those states is far less.

Well, the state with the lowest divorce rate in the country is Massachusetts and almost all of the highest divorce rates are in red states. Teenage pregnancy rates and the percentage of those pregnancies that end in abortion are also higher in the red states. A lot of this is economic in nature; the poorest state in the US is a red state and the average income in those states is far less.


I'd call Teen Pregnancies good electoral news.

How much children per 1000 adults in a Red State, and how many in a Blue State? - and how does that differential translate into voting potential?
Bush carried 25 of the top 26 states in white total fertility (number of babies per white woman), while Kerry was victorious in the bottom 16. In Utah, where Bush won 71 percent of the vote, white women average 2.45 babies. In the ultra-liberal District of Columbia, however, white women average only 1.11 babies and in Kerry’s Massachusetts 1.60. This disparity is no doubt even greater within states, with Utah Republicans averaging even more babies than their state’s average and Massachusetts Democrats even fewer.

Poor Red States: here is the Ultimate Irony - the Democrats are unable to carry the States with the highest potential for disenchantment with The Powers That Be.

I'll narrow this to one demonstrateably false claim instead of addressing a whole slew of rediculous claims in this article. Crime did not increase through the Great Society. In fact, in times of Democratic control the homicide rate has declined while in times of Republican control it has increased. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/hmrt.htm The possible exception to this is Carter, but its difficult to tell, in any event Carter didn't oversee any major change one way or another. Homicide rates faced huge declines from the beginning of the New Deal up to 1970 when the era of conservative dominance began, it has increased steadily since then with significant declines during the Clinton years. This is a complete BS argument essentially reducing the complex picture of electoral politics to the false argument that Democrats hate America and have an unbeleivable record of failing in everything they do. There is no evidence to back up any of this, they are all just blind (and false) assertions.

If we were to have an honest discussion of electoral politics I would contend that Republicans have done an excellent job of crafting language to fit their philosophical viewpoint while Democrats have not, but that demographic changes occurring within the country and the globalized nature of our modern world are going to generate major shifts towards Democrats in the coming decades for the reason that these will cause a major paradigm shift in the electorate similar to the paradigm shifts that occurred in 1932 to give rise to an era of Democratic dominance and 1980 to give rise to an era of conservative dominance. These things come in phases, to reduce the discussion to the level of simplicity that your article reduces it to is an insult to thinking people and reasonable discussion. The indicators right now point to a major tidal wave in 2006, it won't be a historically large tidal wave however because of increased partison voting, increased electoral momentum, and gerrymandered districts. I still predict the Democrats will gain enough votes to win back the House and perhaps the Senate.

Your parents: RUN! ZOMBIE! AIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

[/scene]
*cut to scene of zombie Sarkhaan exacting revenge upon downtown Manhattan*
*cut to black just before dropping building on camera*
*roll credits*
[/first movie of newest epic hollywood blockbuster trilogy]

Can we bet on that?

I flatly predict another drubbing for the Dems in end 2006.

SNIP This is a complete BS argument essentially reducing the complex picture of electoral politics to the false argument that Democrats hate America and have an unbeleivable record of failing in everything they do. There is no evidence to back up any of this, they are all just blind (and false) assertions.

snip



I'm not arguing about objective realities, but about perceptions.

The people THINK that the Dems are not 100% pro-flagwaiving.

Unless the Dems change that by riding on Old Glory at every opportunity,
that subjective reality is the only thing that matters.

I'd call Teen Pregnancies good electoral news.
How much children per 1000 adults in a Red State, and how many in a Blue State? - and how does that differential translate into voting potential?

The birthrate of California is a little higher than most of the red states with the exception of Utah, Nevada, and Texas who occupy the top spots. Other than that, there's no real difference between the states; they're all around 13-15 per 1000 with a few like North Dakota, Maine, and West Virginia lower than 13.

However, the number of teenage pregnancies that end in abortion is higher in red states than in the blue and of the top ten states with the highest unmarried pregnancy rate 9 of them are claimed by red states.

Poor Red States: here is the Ultimate Irony - the Democrats are unable to carry the States with the highest potential for disenchantment with The Powers That Be.

It's a mystery, but one that makes sense given that the Democrats lost the South to the Republicans in the 1960's and 1970's.

The birthrate of California is a little higher than most of the red states with the exception of Utah, Nevada, and Texas who occupy the top spots. Other than that, there's no real difference between the states; they're all around 13-15 per 1000 with a few like North Dakota, Maine, and West Virginia lower than 13.

However, the number of teenage pregnancies that end in abortion is higher in red states than in the blue and of the top ten states with the highest unmarried pregnancy rate 9 of them are claimed by red states.



It's a mystery, but one that makes sense given that the Democrats lost the South to the Republicans in the 1960's and 1970's.

What mystifies me is how you fail to see that what you're saying is all quite irrelevant even if it WERE true. Al and Peg Bundy keep voting Republican.
Your argument revolves around ( and I paraphrase it ) : but what about abortion? IRRELEVANT! Fact remains that some States breed more married couples than others - and those States are as red as red can be. For those married couples somehow end up voting one way, and not the other way.

Flamebait? Flamebait, and reported as such. Let the mods decide if they want this sort of thread to continue or not.

Carbandia, I agree completely. This topic must be closed, and erased if that is possible. This type of intolerance cannot be permitted to be expressed.

Mods, please delete this topic.

Yes, the democrats haven't held the presidency in 6(to be 8 before the next election) years because they hate america.

Glad to see you are bringing something new to the table, and such intelligent works too.

Lets reveal your "reasons" for what they really are claiming:

1. Democrats are communists and/or communist lovers.

2. Welfare causes crime

3. Democrats hate america

4. More people voted for G.W.B, at least in 2004. Hence, america hates the democrats, and so the democrats hate america.

5. Older white guys are the most important voters. The democrats don't pander to them, so they must suck.

6. Minorities? Shoot'em!

7. Republicans do good things. Democrats don't. Gay people are too self absorbed to do things effectively.

7b. Democrats are takers, not givers. Especially in taxes, right?

8. Even the people who vote democrat don't like democrats!

9. G.W.B has one of the lowest approval ratings in recent times, and people don't want to hear about how they fucked up so bad. Democrats need to stop reminding them it was a bad idea!

10. White democrats don't have enough babies; probably due to gay sex and abortion.


Wow, what a solid list. Nothing even really about their positions, etc.

None of this matters anyway. The US Supreme Court ruled that the party in power can redistrict willy nilly, so when the Dems retake congressional power in November, let the gerrymandering begin!

Of course, the Republicans will whine and complain about it, but these are the rules their ruling power created. *shrug*

Yes, the democrats haven't held the presidency in 6(to be 8 before the next election) years because they hate america.

SNIP


Wow, what a solid list. Nothing even really about their positions, etc.


For the X-millionth time: objective realities are irrelevant - it is the PERCEPTION that matters.

These 'prejudices' are award-winning BECAUSE they chime so well with the prejudices of the majority.

For the X-millionth time: oebjective realities are irrelvant - it is the PERCEPTION that matters.

These 'prejudices' are award-winning BECAUSE they chime so well with the prejudices of the majority.

Well... That's what the Republicans have been saying from the start, on issues where they continue to ignore objective realities.

There is also a higher rate of youths changing from the political affiliations of their parents, if I remember correctly.

First off, anyone who thinks "democrats are stupid" or "republicans are idiots" is prejudiced. However, let's analyze these 10 ideas (looks like flamebait to me, but what the heck).

You sound like you listen to Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh all the time. I could be wrong, though. Your first point, "America first" is not necessarily what this country needs. The reason that communism probably fares so poorly in this country is because of the extreme ideologies of those in the past dead set against it, treating it like a deadly enemy that will end America's future. It is just an idea and in modern times is being replaced in hatred by the idea of freedom fighters being terrorists. I am not trying to present this as black and white, but I'll try to. And I'm not trying to argue why the Democrats aren't getting votes, but why the Republicans shouldn't be getting any.

"Reason 1: Wont stand for America First."
Republicans put financially corporations ahead of their constituents once they put out their conservative laws.
Most recent sources: Net neutrality. http://www.savetheinternet.com/ Also, outsourcing + tax breaks. I prefer to buy American over poorly paid Chinese and Indian labor.

"Reason 2: Wont stand for law abiding citizens first."
Quote:
I am not saying that the Democrats are right in all aspects. However, actually executing criminals, considered barbaric by many, wastes more tax dollars and is also considered unethical by many countries. It is also acceptable in many other countries, but I would like to think that where something does not provide any benefit to society we would no longer desire it.

"They combine into reason 3:We're bad, they're good - so vote for us?"
"Their common denominator was the Democrats’ tendency to sympathize more with foreign enemies and domestic delinquents than with their own country and their fellow citizens." Let us not forget the conspiracies in the past of giving arms to countries illegally. I wonder who gave our current middle-eastern enemies their arms. Actually, I never bothered to research it. Maybe you could do that for me. Also, didn't Nixon open up trade with China? Oh, how NAFTA and the WTO are so very "America first."

"Reason 4: Baiting the majority."
The Republicans bait the majority with what I consider stupid conservative issues, such as birth control and gun laws. While I disagree with the Democrats and their stance on gun laws, I do not see any reason for there to be conservative birth control laws. Choice is liberty. Also, they nearly won last election and the election before that in bid for President, if you don't remember.

"Reason 5: Always pee off the guys who actually VOTE"
I am not disagreeing that Democrats need to appeal more to the middle class, if that's what you're saying with that quotation.

"Reason 6: A Party without a machinery."
Quote:
A party without a machinery sounds pretty boring to me. I've only been to parties with machines. Nonetheless, this is one of the problems with our current government. Because of the winner-takes-all elections, minority groups are not well represented if their views are highly differing from the majority and the secondary majority under that. Because of this, the Democrats attempt to take the stance of an all-accompasing party. And the Republicans do the same.

"Reason 7: Takers, not givers."
Just because you roll up your sleeves does not mean you get dirty. A lot of what Republicans do is a façade just to win public support. I'm not saying the Democrats are any different - but the Republicans are no better.

"Reason 8: Hey - most of us dislike our fellow constituents with passion!"
To generalize everyone like this is silly, although I'm not saying some of these points are not true.

Reason 9: United by hate, and distrusted by Patriots.
It has been argued that dissention is the greatest act of a patriot. I am proud to be an American, but at the same time I am nauseously revolted by our current administration and that they could even get into office with such demented world views. If people elected him twice and are "ashamed" of the idea, they need to get over being ashamed and need to learn how to actually vote for a good candidate. One of the reasons good ol' Georgie might have been elected was because he seemed like such a "good ol' boy," even though he was one of the more rotten apples out of the tree.

Reason 10: Procreation equals Destiny - yet we don't support Traditional Families First. ( Or, why Democratic Constituents are a declining demographic. )
The more educated you become, the greater the chances, statistically, of you becoming a "liberal," from what I remember.

I am an independent, by the way. I do not like the ideas of open borders or gun control. However, I could never side myself with the majority of conservative values because they are unnecessary in modern times. While they might make people more "moral," I really do not see how morality equals a stable society.

For the X-millionth time: objective realities are irrelevant - it is the PERCEPTION that matters.

These 'prejudices' are award-winning BECAUSE they chime so well with the prejudices of the majority.

You don't seem to know nearly that many single-issue voters, do you? Yes, perceptions are whats important, but only to the point of percieving what the canidate or party will vote on, on key issues.

Most people are set on who they vote for. Republicans are for guns, so person A votes democrat. Democrats are for abortions, so person B votes Repub.

Wow, what a solid list. Nothing even really about their positions, etc.

Chellis, thank you for refuting all those mean-spirited attacks.

However, the one thing a free society cannot tolerate is intolerance. Carbandia is right to request suppression of the OP. People have a right not to be threatened in their personal, political beliefs in a free society.

Chellis, thank you for refuting all those mean-spirited attacks.

However, the one thing a free society cannot tolerate is intolerance. Carbandia is right to request suppression of the OP. People have a right not to be threatened in their personal, political beliefs in a free society.

We get it, you're sarcastic.

The glaring hole in this inane BS of an argument is that the crime rate is on the rise. Homicide rates are on the rise.

You want to talk perceptions? Polling data is crap for the most part if you understand research methods you'd know this. The only other thing you'd have to go on for "perceptions" are you and your other conservative buddies.

The image of the GOP as the "war-party" really only came about with Carter's failure in Tehran and Reagan coming in afterwards with a very strong message on rebuilding the military. Yes, our mighty conquering hero, the "Great American," decided to run from Beirut in 1983 with his tail between his legs, but that's OK, he stomped the @#%! out of two tiny Central American nations.

Ever since then, yes, the GOP has had a monopoly on the military, and has used that to also monopolize the "Patriot" image. Hell, the "Great American" (wait, wasn't he one of those evil "Cultural Elites"?) even managed to politicize the military itself with the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act.

All the trappings of fascism.

And the general electorate is notoriously uninformed and/or apathetic. The GOP does have a more cohesive base, thus they're easier to manipulate with a lot of excessive flag-waving and a message tailored to hit as many strongly-biased single-issue voters as possible (the religious fundamentalist set, the corporations, and the redneck hillbillies who think having an AK-47 is a God-given right - quite a combo isn't it?)

Why the Democrats might just win? Because of the INSANE foreign policy of the current administration, and America's desire for a change. Just try getting the average American off their couches to go fight in foreign adventures to secure corporate profit and you'll see. The GOP's relied on single-issue voters, well, we'll see if what's going on these days hasn't broken the back of that principle.

My parents killed me? Funny...I thought I was alive all this time

*runs off sobbing to parents asking why they never told me*
*pats back*

It's ok Casper!

Flamebait? Flamebait, and reported as such. Let the mods decide if they want this sort of thread to continue or not.
Not flamebait at all. Pehaps Democrats would do well to actually listen for once! :(

Another reason? Gun control. One reason Algore lost in 00. And of course, democrats kill their kids and reduce themselves to animals, most republicans are atleast decent enough not to.


That, sir, is flamebaiting. Warned.

For the X-millionth time: objective realities are irrelevant - it is the PERCEPTION that matters.

These 'prejudices' are award-winning BECAUSE they chime so well with the prejudices of the majority.
And that's something to be proud of?
That the party you so fervently believe in doesn't have policies that are any good per se, just that they're excellent at creating and pandering to bigotry and prejudice.
And you're happy with this state of affairs because that's what gets them elected. Look knows you wouldn't want a proper discussion about policy and what's right for the economy and the future. Just as much mud-slinging and hate-filled retoric as can be possible without fully going over the top and alienating the masses.

And yet you continue to wonder why the rest of the World looks on and shakes it head at the folly and ridiculousness of American politics.

Not flamebait at all. Pehaps Democrats would do well to actually listen for once! :(
listen to what?
A rabid GOP supporter ranting on that the only way the Dems can get into power is to be as narrow-minded, bigoted and intolerant as the Republicans already there?

"By being exactly like the Republicans, we can beat the Republicans!"
Some wisdom for the ages there...

listen to what?
A rabid GOP supporter ranting on that the only way the Dems can get into power is to be as narrow-minded, bigoted and intolerant as the Republicans already there?

"By being exactly like the Republicans, we can beat the Republicans!"
Some wisdom for the ages there...

Yeah, in the UK to end political domination by the thatcherite Conservative party, Labour became thatcherite. Makes sense...

There is also a higher rate of youths changing from the political affiliations of their parents, if I remember correctly.

You are a youth Palladian. How old are you? Are your parents Republican?

Yeah, in the UK to end political domination by the thatcherite Conservative party, Labour became thatcherite. Makes sense...

Labour needs to return to its socialist roots, or what happens if I lose my job?

In my childhood, my mother always took care of my boo-boos when I fell, who will in the "real world" if our democratic government doesn't?

You are a youth Palladian. How old are you? Are your parents Republican?

Oh God...


How do you know how old he is?

Seriously, compare this new conservative movement with the political movements in Italy and Germany before World War II. I think you'll get the picture of whose model some in the GOP are trying to emulate today.

Hell, it was an open secret before World War II that the major industrialists supported Mussolini and Hitler because they admired the fascist ideas on corporatism and imperialist expansionism (war). See Major General Smedley Butler, USMC, who in 1933 was approached by representatives of the Morgan Bank to lead a 500,000-man march on D.C. to over-throw FDR. The Morgan Bank were pro-fascist and wanted to destroy FDR for the New Deal and install a fascist regime. Fascism does well for big business.

Not flamebait at all. Pehaps Democrats would do well to actually listen for once! :(


This coming from the most closed-minded person here?

Yeah, in the UK to end political domination by the thatcherite Conservative party, Labour became thatcherite. Makes sense...
That's very true:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/images/enPartiesTime.gif
We can see fromt his graph that 'New Labour' is way more right-wing than the '72 Tories and pretty ideologically-close to Thatcher's Tories.
Amazing to think that 20+ years of right-wing politics can make a slightly less right-wing party appear so different and appealing.

What one gets used to becomes the norm, I guess.

listen to what?
A rabid GOP supporter ranting on that the only way the Dems can get into power is to be as narrow-minded, bigoted and intolerant as the Republicans already there?

"By being exactly like the Republicans, we can beat the Republicans!"
Some wisdom for the ages there...
You said that, not me.

Try: "We can beat the Republicans by demonstrating that we can do a better job of stopping financial waste, responding to national emergencies, and plotting a course to disengage from Iraq. PLUS we can find a way to insure that everyone in America has full citizenship ... no second-class citizens!"

Hmmm? :)

You said that, not me.

Try: "We can beat the Republicans by demonstrating that we can do a better job of stopping financial waste, responding to national emergencies, and plotting a course to disengage from Iraq. PLUS we can find a way to insure that everyone in America has full citizenship ... no second-class citizens!"

Hmmm? :)
In a perfect world, that's what they'd need to do.
However the OP article pretty much states that the Dems shouldn't state coherrent policy in order to get elected, just pander to the rednecks and bigots the way GOP does.

Sad to think that American politics have sunk to this level.

Because the Liberaterians are slowly sucking the life out of the Democrats and soon will take the world stage as... I mean... the economy. *Shifty eyes*

That, sir, is flamebaiting. Warned.

Designated Marksman's reaction shows that this topic far too unstable to be allowed to continue. Katganistan, I have researched Common Ancestor in such a way that true science mandates ending this topic.

Educators in the public school system have been working for several decades, largely successful in Europe but still in progress in America, to begin to erradicate bigotry and hate in the population specifically by fighting against the parental prejudices and other "moral" hangups, particularly based around Christianity.

We need educational experts in order to create a better world through cooperation instead of competition. We need to liberate people by liberating them from their parents religion and "morality." Right-wingers in the Congress are trying to destroy this progress by eliminating the public schools and trying to force schools to only focus on Reading, Writing and Math.

I am concerned that the OP is trying to do the same. Educators work for 12+ years educating children away from their parent's biases and preferences. In many cases, educators have to actively fight against parents. Luckily, this was cemented by a 9th Circuit ruling in favor of experts over parents. Anyhow, one little right-wing manifesto like used by the OP can destroy all this work with supposed "common sense."

If we want society to progress, we need free speech, but not that speech that crosses the line is where speech is used in an attempt to undermine the public education system and promote intolerance.

If we want society to progress, we need free speech, but not that speech that crosses the line is where speech is used in an attempt to undermine the public education system and promote intolerance.
This statement has convinced me. You are a right-winger in a poorly made left-wing costume. Show your true colors why not?

This coming from the most closed-minded person here?
You, Sir, have obviously been picking and choosing which of my posts to read. I suggest you be a bit more tolerant and broadminded.

If we want society to progress, we need free speech, but not that speech that crosses the line is where speech is used in an attempt to undermine the public education system and promote intolerance.
Free speech which crosses any imaginary "line" is the best sort.

If we want society to progress, we need free speech, but not that speech that crosses the line is where speech is used in an attempt to undermine the public education system and promote intolerance.

Of course! Let's censor those opinions which undermine our noble quest!

:rolleyes:

This statement has convinced me. You are a right-winger in a poorly made left-wing costume. Show your true colors why not?

Sheep Magician, I am a progrsssive Democrat. However, I feel that many Dems hate me for my honesty. Haven't we in the netroots realized that being Republican-lite is a failure? Americans want progress, and most are willing to let public schools do work that is hard for them to do.

If you are nervous with the scientific research that supports our beliefs, then why even be a Democrat? You and I both know that returning to a day where churches and religion-oriented schools provide the bulk of education will result in so much regression, especially resulting in a moral tyranny or possibly fascism.

Even if 95% of the population was against abortion, the Founders provided a right in the constuition that the 5% needs it for ANY REASON, they have a right to get one. If we let morality become re-introduced into education, the people who post on this forum will disappear. The truth that emantes from so many of the young people is largely based from the public education system. Without young people supporting our candidates, everything we've fought for is in jeapordy within a decade or two.

Anyhow, to enhance progress I'm endorsing Jon Tester in Montana, Ned Lamont in Connecticut, and Jim Webb in Virginia.

Anyhow, everything we hold dear

and per the OP...

I've always said if the Democrats eased back on the hate, which is what turns most people off, and actually came up with a plan of attack to win which didn't include "Bush is a meanie", they'd be dangerous.

Let's face it, however, it won't happen. The danger being that if we do re-elect democrats in majority, we'll have two years of nothing but investigations and a lame-duck government.

and per the OP...

I've always said if the Democrats eased back on the hate, which is what turns most people off, and actually came up with a plan of attack to win which didn't include "Bush is a meanie", they'd be dangerous.

Let's face it, however, it won't happen. The danger being that if we do re-elect democrats in majority, we'll have two years of nothing but investigations and a lame-duck government.

Sound like Clinton's last years...

*snip the propaganda*
Wow. Nice shilling there.

Those weren't 10 reasons, though. They were the same "Democrats hate America" bullshit reason re-spelled in nine other ways.

BS. The straighforward reasons behind a decade of electoral disasters.

If you happen to be a democrat, I'd present you as reason 11: won't listen to electorally unpleasant truths.
"A decade of electoral disasters"? Ignoring the complete horseshit that statement implies...

Whose canned talking points did you get THAT from? In fact, I'd like to know where you stole your OP from without quoting it beyond the link.

Another reason? Gun control. One reason Algore lost in 00. And of course, democrats kill their kids and reduce themselves to animals, most republicans are atleast decent enough not to.
And Democrats are full of hate? This is a really hateful and completely delirious statement. You guys are supposed to be AGAINST drugs, remember?

Going back to the OP, these sound more like reasons that more traditional Republicans wouldn't vote for Democrats. Positions from the Reagan era, problems that may or may not have been solved by conservative policy, sympathy with foreigners equating with sympathy to foreign enemies, claiming Democrats as elitist and opposed to the majority of Americans, equating support of the President with patriotism? Each of these reasons has a fairly biased viewpoint behind it, one that I can only see a fairly conservative voter taking in the first place, not exactly someone the Democrats want to attract in the first place.

By the way, did anyone else almost laugh to death when they read number ten:

Reason 10: Procreation equals Destiny - yet we don't support Traditional Families First. ( Or, why Democratic Constituents are a declining demographic. )

And white Democrats are starting to die out slowly due to low fertility. In blue states, white people are less likely to marry and have children than in red states, where there’s more affordable family formation. Bush carried 25 of the top 26 states in white total fertility (number of babies per white woman), while Kerry was victorious in the bottom 16.

As if declining white Democrat birthrate is a problem any average voter cares about.

Designated Marksman's reaction shows that this topic far too unstable to be allowed to continue. Katganistan, I have researched Common Ancestor in such a way that true science mandates ending this topic.

Educators in the public school system have been working for several decades, largely successful in Europe but still in progress in America, to begin to erradicate bigotry and hate in the population specifically by fighting against the parental prejudices and other "moral" hangups, particularly based around Christianity.

We need educational experts in order to create a better world through cooperation instead of competition. We need to liberate people by liberating them from their parents religion and "morality." Right-wingers in the Congress are trying to destroy this progress by eliminating the public schools and trying to force schools to only focus on Reading, Writing and Math.

I am concerned that the OP is trying to do the same. Educators work for 12+ years educating children away from their parent's biases and preferences. In many cases, educators have to actively fight against parents. Luckily, this was cemented by a 9th Circuit ruling in favor of experts over parents. Anyhow, one little right-wing manifesto like used by the OP can destroy all this work with supposed "common sense."

If we want society to progress, we need free speech, but not that speech that crosses the line is where speech is used in an attempt to undermine the public education system and promote intolerance.

Dude, don't you ever get tired of trolling like this? It's rather boring. UN Abassador was far better at it.

If we want society to progress, we need free speech, but not that speech that crosses the line is where speech is used in an attempt to undermine the public education system and promote intolerance.

This sounds dangerously like "anything that threatens the government". Do children not have a right to challenge the way they are being educated? Can they even grow up to be anything more than robots if they dont?

Among other things you have said- you seem to be promoting social "programming" on a global scale. To inbed from infancy values that you agree with while eliminating those that you dont. The fact that one of these "values" is not to question what is happening to them, is reason enough to invalidate your notion of what the world should be, to anyone.

Sheep Magician, I am a progrsssive Democrat. However, I feel that many Dems hate me for my honesty. Haven't we in the netroots realized that being Republican-lite is a failure? Americans want progress, and most are willing to let public schools do work that is hard for them to do.

If you are nervous with the scientific research that supports our beliefs, then why even be a Democrat? You and I both know that returning to a day where churches and religion-oriented schools provide the bulk of education will result in so much regression, especially resulting in a moral tyranny or possibly fascism.
You keep using we... I'm a Libertarian not a democrat. Like a liberal, but with this cute little "Neo" at the beginning that means I support freedom instead of gun control and elimination of religion.

I'm not arguing about objective realities, but about perceptions.

The people THINK that the Dems are not 100% pro-flagwaiving.

Unless the Dems change that by riding on Old Glory at every opportunity,
that subjective reality is the only thing that matters.
Yeah, because flag-humping is the only characteristic a politician needs. Y'know, right after 9/11, I considered purchasing an American flag for my car, but two things stopped me:

1. Those who already had them tended to tar all foreigners with the same brush and sincerely believe that the US is the Savior of the World. Arrogance of that magnitude is not something I choose to emulate.

2. All the flags available to me for auto display had MADE IN CHINA on them. I found that too distasteful to purchase.

You're trading on blanket patriotism and raw, unenlightened emotion, and that's fine -- it'll work for a while. But when the poorer of the staunch Republican voters realize that the guy waving the flag with the elephant on his lapel has absolutely NOTHING in common with him AND adivses and supports policies desinged specifically to take advantage of him (especially small business owners who inexplicably back Republicans while getting sodomized at every political opportunity by them) -- the tide will turn. It always has, it always will.

See? It's easy to make unsubstantiated generalizations seem like news or even reality, ain't it Boggy?

This sounds dangerously like "anything that threatens the government". Do children not have a right to challenge the way they are being educated? Can they even grow up to be anything more than robots if they dont?

Among other things you have said- you seem to be promoting social "programming" on a global scale. To inbed from infancy values that you agree with while eliminating those that you dont. The fact that one of these "values" is not to question what is happening to them, is reason enough to invalidate your notion of what the world should be, to anyone.
He's a puppet, he can't hold these views. He'd be debating them far better if he did. Ny Nordland is more subtle with his oppinions!

Carbandia, I agree completely. This topic must be closed, and erased if that is possible. This type of intolerance cannot be permitted to be expressed.

Mods, please delete this topic.
Oh, get stuffed.

You're no better than BogMarsh, you're just on the other side. For a nation calling itself Conscience and Truth, you seem frightfully afraid of a little Republican propaganda. Don't go whining to the mods, pick up your wit as a weapon and fight back. If you can.

Oh, get stuffed.

You're no better than BogMarsh, you're just on the other side. For a nation calling itself Conscience and Truth, you seem frightfully afraid of a little Republican propaganda. Don't go whining to the mods, pick up your wit as a weapon and fight back. If you can.

His rather insipid satirization of a leftist is his weapon, a rather dull one, IMO

For the X-millionth time: objective realities are irrelevant - it is the PERCEPTION that matters.

These 'prejudices' are award-winning BECAUSE they chime so well with the prejudices of the majority.
Yes, that's right, and it's the reliance on creating their own reality based on what will "play" that is sinking the Republicans. So please, by all means, keep avoiding reality and relying on perception, I beg you.

His rather insipid satirization of a leftist is his weapon, a rather dull one, IMO
That's RIGHT! I keep forgetting that C&T is a NeoCon troll attempting reverse-psychology by trumping up Liberal points of view into absurdist rantings. Thank you for that reminder.

It's a base kind of sneakiness, but stupid all the same.

Yes, that's right, and it's the reliance on creating their own reality based on what will "play" that is sinking the Republicans. So please, by all means, keep avoiding reality and relying on perception, I beg you.
It won't be long now before it all falls apart.

Chellis, thank you for refuting all those mean-spirited attacks.

However, the one thing a free society cannot tolerate is intolerance. Carbandia is right to request suppression of the OP. People have a right not to be threatened in their personal, political beliefs in a free society.
Nobody threatened anyone. You're a Right-wing nutjob trying to pass yourself off as a foaming liberal in order to skew the debate. I shall continue posting "get stuffed" to you so long as you continue to post.


Get stuffed.

I'm not arguing about objective realities, but about perceptions.
How exactly are you, living in Northern England, expert on perceptions of the Democrats in the USA?

For the X-millionth time: objective realities are irrelevant - it is the PERCEPTION that matters.
Then you only really need one reason: The Republicans are better at propaganda. That's what it's all about.

This sounds dangerously like "anything that threatens the government". Do children not have a right to challenge the way they are being educated? Can they even grow up to be anything more than robots if they dont?

Among other things you have said- you seem to be promoting social "programming" on a global scale. To inbed from infancy values that you agree with while eliminating those that you dont. The fact that one of these "values" is not to question what is happening to them, is reason enough to invalidate your notion of what the world should be, to anyone.

My fellow Democrats have been trying to paint me as a fake Democrat, but I have an excellent article from Tolerance.org, a prominent resource for public educators:

http://www.tolerance.org/teach/activities/activity.jsp?ar=661

The Democrats have only won more than 50% of the vote in one Presidential election since 1964. The Republicans have done it 5 times.

10 Reasons why:

1) Democrats will raise your taxes every time they get in the Congress/ white house
2) only 24% of Americans support abortion in any circumstance
3) Democrats are anti- death penalty, not a majority opinion
4) They never have a clear defense plan ( should we pull out of Iraq or not?)
5) They support unpopular organizations like the ACLU that want to take God off of money and out of the pledge ( 90% say no to those)
6) some support gay marriage ( unpopular)
7) they will not support the troops by assuming they are innocent until proven guilty
8) Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry type candidates are too lame to be taken as anything but a joke
9) 50% of Americans believe there were WMD's in Iraq, Democrats have no authority on defense
10) even now...in these times....40% of Americans support Bush.

I really see no chance of Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Edwards, or Biden ( HAH) taking the white house in 2008. The concept of Speaker Pelosi will no doubt keep the house in Republican control for a long long time.

And that's something to be proud of?
That the party you so fervently believe in doesn't have policies that are any good per se, just that they're excellent at creating and pandering to bigotry and prejudice.
And you're happy with this state of affairs because that's what gets them elected. Look knows you wouldn't want a proper discussion about policy and what's right for the economy and the future. Just as much mud-slinging and hate-filled retoric as can be possible without fully going over the top and alienating the masses.

And yet you continue to wonder why the rest of the World looks on and shakes it head at the folly and ridiculousness of American politics.
It's interesting to me that the whole "played a little ball in school" tripe from the OP factors in here. Americans like winners, and to a great degree, don't much care how they won.

That's RIGHT! I keep forgetting that C&T is a NeoCon troll attempting reverse-psychology by trumping up Liberal points of view into absurdist rantings. Thank you for that reminder.

It's a base kind of sneakiness, but stupid all the same.

The only sneaky part is him trying to masquerade as a "Liberal." The whole absurdist exaggeration has been a staple tool of the Right. You can see it every time they suggest someone who believes Muslims aren't Jihadist Borg is a "Dhimmi" (Translation: Jihadist Cocksucker who would gladly strap on a bomb and blow up Americans for them and thinks Sharia Law is the way to go) or whenever they decry war protestors as terrorist-loving traitors.

Labour needs to return to its socialist roots, or what happens if I lose my job?

In my childhood, my mother always took care of my boo-boos when I fell, who will in the "real world" if our democratic government doesn't?
Keep it up, you're sounding like a broken record. You're a poorly-executed Republican shill of a "double agent".

Get stuffed.

It's interesting to me that the whole "played a little ball in school" tripe from the OP factors in here. Americans like winners, and to a great degree, don't much care how they won.

A good example is how many people will tell you that Bush won in 2000 because of the Supreme Court decision. The truth is, even if the court had sided with Gore 9-0 Bush still would have won because the electoral college members from Florida were being chosen from the Republican legislature who had already decided to cast their votes for BUSH.:D

Designated Marksman's reaction shows that this topic far too unstable to be allowed to continue. Katganistan, I have researched Common Ancestor in such a way that true science mandates ending this topic.

Educators in the public school system have been working for several decades, largely successful in Europe but still in progress in America, to begin to erradicate bigotry and hate in the population specifically by fighting against the parental prejudices and other "moral" hangups, particularly based around Christianity.

We need educational experts in order to create a better world through cooperation instead of competition. We need to liberate people by liberating them from their parents religion and "morality." Right-wingers in the Congress are trying to destroy this progress by eliminating the public schools and trying to force schools to only focus on Reading, Writing and Math.

I am concerned that the OP is trying to do the same. Educators work for 12+ years educating children away from their parent's biases and preferences. In many cases, educators have to actively fight against parents. Luckily, this was cemented by a 9th Circuit ruling in favor of experts over parents. Anyhow, one little right-wing manifesto like used by the OP can destroy all this work with supposed "common sense."

If we want society to progress, we need free speech, but not that speech that crosses the line is where speech is used in an attempt to undermine the public education system and promote intolerance.
Your transparency is embarassing. You're a Bushevik and everyone here knows it.

Get stuffed.

My fellow Democrats have been trying to paint me as a fake Democrat, but I have an excellent article from Tolerance.org, a prominent resource for public educators:

http://www.tolerance.org/teach/activities/activity.jsp?ar=661
That was a cool article.

Keep it up, you're sounding like a broken record. You're a poorly-executed Republican shill of a "double agent".

Get stuffed.

Intangelon, in your heart, I know you agree with me. I have an article for you from The Nation, a weekly, mainstream Democratic publication:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060417/aronson

Keep it up, you're sounding like a broken record. You're a poorly-executed Republican shill of a "double agent".

Get stuffed.

Ever think that maybe some people have been disheartened by the loony left wing of the Democrats? IN 2000 Joe Lieberman was the Democrat's choice for Vice President. Now they will not let him run for the Senate. He did not change. The Democrats fell even more to the left.

Flamebait? Flamebait, and reported as such. Let the mods decide if they want this sort of thread to continue or not.
I should report you for falsely reporting a member, this man speaks nothing but the truth, and he did it in a constructive manner. Better then half the crap I see here.

You scared cause we see the democrats for what they are? A selfish, narscistic, bunchof dolts with no ambition to help America? Too bad.. I'm Mexican and it offends me how I have to stomache as democrat's call themself the hispanic vote. There's nothing hispanic about thier white power theocracy.. A Mexican is far too passionate and traditional to ever have an abortion or do drugs, they'd be disowned for something like that. And democrats pride themselves in this "right to choose". Apparently democrats don't care about who is hurt in the process of thier choice, just that they HAVE a choice, meanwhile they want to talk about morals to the warmongering republicans then turn around and shrug thier shoulders "morality is relative". They're hypcroties, they're liers, they're fascists, and America is slowly starting to see that. It took them how long? Twenty years?

The democrats are only getting worse, they went from closest rascist assholes to openly insane meglomaniacs with a death wish.. It's only a matter of time before thier next canidate for president is some clone of Adolph Hitler.. I'd rather my country not sink to that point, democrats want to destroy America simply so they can say "see?! We told you!" They're a bunchof narscistic pricks who just want to be right. But everything about them is wrong. If you're not partof the solution, you're partof the problem.

A good example is how many people will tell you that Bush won in 2000 because of the Supreme Court decision. The truth is, even if the court had sided with Gore 9-0 Bush still would have won because the electoral college members from Florida were being chosen from the Republican legislature who had already decided to cast their votes for BUSH.:D
Thanks for pointing out how our voting system is broken.

Sheep Magician, I am a progrsssive Democrat. However, I feel that many Dems hate me for my honesty. Haven't we in the netroots realized that being Republican-lite is a failure? Americans want progress, and most are willing to let public schools do work that is hard for them to do.

If you are nervous with the scientific research that supports our beliefs, then why even be a Democrat? You and I both know that returning to a day where churches and religion-oriented schools provide the bulk of education will result in so much regression, especially resulting in a moral tyranny or possibly fascism.

Even if 95% of the population was against abortion, the Founders provided a right in the constuition that the 5% needs it for ANY REASON, they have a right to get one. If we let morality become re-introduced into education, the people who post on this forum will disappear. The truth that emantes from so many of the young people is largely based from the public education system. Without young people supporting our candidates, everything we've fought for is in jeapordy within a decade or two.

Anyhow, to enhance progress I'm endorsing Jon Tester in Montana, Ned Lamont in Connecticut, and Jim Webb in Virginia.

Anyhow, everything we hold dear
Nope, Shemagans had it. You're a Red-Stater wearing Blue, and you're not fooling anyone.

Get stuffed.

That was a cool article.

Why can't teachers just teach the subject that they are supposed to? I intend to teach history shortly and there is no way that I am teaching a bunch of tolerance. I will not be giving out "works and plays well with others" grades to high school students.

Why can't teachers just teach the subject that they are supposed to? I intend to teach history shortly and there is no way that I am teaching a bunch of tolerance. I will not be giving out "works and plays well with others" grades to high school students.
You're TEACHING children? Fuck...

Thanks for pointing out how our voting system is broken.

What I described is how the system is supposed to work.

This sounds dangerously like "anything that threatens the government". Do children not have a right to challenge the way they are being educated? Can they even grow up to be anything more than robots if they dont?

Among other things you have said- you seem to be promoting social "programming" on a global scale. To inbed from infancy values that you agree with while eliminating those that you dont. The fact that one of these "values" is not to question what is happening to them, is reason enough to invalidate your notion of what the world should be, to anyone.
Monty, C&T is a rabid Republican who takes liberal/progressive ideologies and stretches them into reductions to absurdity in order to "prove" that liberals are "loony." He's a thinly-veiled Bushevik and needs to get stuffed.

You're TEACHING children? Fuck...

:D Well don't worry there is nothing I hate as much as teachers who force their views on kids. I live in NY and had to deal with that crap for years. Leftist brainwashing. I will not brainwash kids from the right. It is wrong. No need to worry, I will not do would I have seen so many times and take advantage of a captive audience.

10 Reasons why:

1) Democrats will raise your taxes every time they get in the Congress/ white house
3) Democrats are anti- death penalty, not a majority opinion
9) 50% of Americans believe there were WMD's in Iraq, Democrats have no authority on defense
10) even now...in these times....40% of Americans support Bush.

1. Usually because the previous Republican administration spent more money than the government had. See Reagan and Bush.

3. Most Democrats support the death penalty. Liberals oppose the death penalty. Liberals =/= Democrats.

9. 50% of Americans believe something that is objectively, not true. Are you proud that your preferred party gets elected based on lies?

10. Wow, 40%? Yes, the Republicans have a near monopoly on public support?

What I described is how the system is supposed to work.
"the electoral college members from Florida were being chosen from the Republican legislature who had already decided to cast their votes for BUSH."

The voting system is supposed to work by deliberately throwing out votes and bringing people into the electoral college who will vote one way no matter how the people they are supposedly representing feel? That sounds broken to me.

Monty, C&T is a rabid Republican who takes liberal/progressive ideologies and stretches them into reductions to absurdity in order to "prove" that liberals are "loony." He's a thinly-veiled Bushevik and needs to get stuffed.

ah...he is demonstrating absurdity by being absurd. A brilliant tactic ....although those who use it do often get "stuffed"..

My fellow Democrats have been trying to paint me as a fake Democrat, but I have an excellent article from Tolerance.org, a prominent resource for public educators:

http://www.tolerance.org/teach/activities/activity.jsp?ar=661
And now you're posting links from far-left sites to "validate" your fake opinions. If you really held the views you're wallpapering in here, you'd be one hell of a lot better at expressing and defending them.


Get stuffed.

:D Well don't worry there is nothing I hate as much as teachers who force their views on kids. I live in NY and had to deal with that crap for years. Leftist brainwashing. I will not brainwash kids from the right. It is wrong. No need to worry, I will not do would I have seen so many times and take advantage of a captive audience.
What exactly is wrong with the article which teaches children about the way people have to live and the value of money?

That was a cool article.

Desparate Mesasures, why are my fellow Democrats attacking me for the idea that public education is key to promoting progressive values in the next generation?

Most parents would prefer experts decide what their children are taught. If education wasn't the responsibility of government, parents wouldn't have the time to pick from between hundreds, possibly even thousands, of potential schools if the choice was left to them. How would parents know if the school teaches true science as taught in the public schools, or if they are being taught the pseudo-science that many Christians teach?

Here's the article again: http://www.tolerance.org/teach/activities/activity.jsp?ar=661

Desparate Mesasures, why are my fellow Democrats attacking me for the idea that public education is key to promoting progressive values in the next generation?

Most parents would prefer experts decide what their children are taught. If education wasn't the responsibility of government, parents wouldn't have the time to pick from between hundreds, possibly even thousands, of potential schools if the choice was left to them. How would parents know if the school teaches true science as taught in the public schools, or if they are being taught the pseudo-science that many Christians teach?

Here's the article again: http://www.tolerance.org/teach/activities/activity.jsp?ar=661
I didn't say you were cool, I said the article was.

1. Usually because the previous Republican administration spent more money than the government had. See Reagan and Bush.

Ah but no Democrat President since Grover Cleveland has had a net surplus of money while in office

3. Most Democrats support the death penalty. Liberals oppose the death penalty. Liberals =/= Democrats.
no Democrat candidate for President has supported the death penalty since 1964.

9. 50% of Americans believe something that is objectively, not true. Are you proud that your preferred party gets elected based on lies?
we found illegal WMD's just last month, you may remember. Also, only 30% of Americans believe that there was no link between Bid laden and Hussein's organizations.

10. Wow, 40%? Yes, the Republicans have a near monopoly on public support?

ah, but we are 3 years into Iraq, with high gas prices and hurricane Katrina behind us, yet 4/10 are standing by the Pres. This worries Dems. even if they will not admit it.

"the electoral college members from Florida were being chosen from the Republican legislature who had already decided to cast their votes for BUSH."

The voting system is supposed to work by deliberately throwing out votes and bringing people into the electoral college who will vote one way no matter how the people they are supposedly representing feel? That sounds broken to me.

I could go on and on about how the courts illegaly continued counting votes after the Constitutional deadline but I will not. You are taking us off course. I am sorry I brought up 2000.

I agree with whoever it was that said that this thread should be closed. I came to this thread expecting some honest debate, but, quite frankly, I see fewer points being made about people as the politics they favor, and more about people as... Well... People. I was quite upset when the first person said that this was flamebait, it seemed over reactionary. But... I now see what they were saying.

What exactly is wrong with the article which teaches children about the way people have to live and the value of money?

I do not think that it is the role of teachers to place their own values on the captive audience of our young people.

You scared cause we see the democrats for what they are? A selfish, narscistic, bunchof dolts with no ambition to help America?
Helping the poor is selfish? Improving the lot of most Americans is unhelpful to America?

There's nothing hispanic about thier white power theocracy.
You're thinking about Republicans there.

Apparently democrats don't care about who is hurt in the process of thier choice, just that they HAVE a choice
Same with Republican guns, wars, etc.

they want to talk about morals to the warmongering republicans then turn around and shrug thier shoulders "morality is relative".
Some with Republicans. Like it or not, wars and arms dealing are not family values. Most Democrats are not relativists either.

It's only a matter of time before thier next canidate for president is some clone of Adolph Hitler
Incorrect. The Republicans are the more nationalistic party. They're more likely to start opening concentration camps for Muslims. (Not that I think this will happen, but the Reps are damned more likely to do it than the Dems)

I could go on and on about how the courts illegaly continued counting votes after the Constitutional deadline but I will not. You are taking us off course. I am sorry I brought up 2000.
Me too. You wouldn't listen to reason, anyway.

(snip)

1) Democrats will raise your taxes every time they get in the Congress/ white house

I'll admit that that is right.

2) only 24% of Americans support abortion in any circumstance

Firstly, 62% of statistics are made up. Please provide the source.
Second, that phrasing is misleading.

3) Democrats are anti- death penalty, not a majority opinion

And 63% of statistics are made up(read as please provide source).

4) They never have a clear defense plan ( should we pull out of Iraq or not?)

It's not like the republicans have a united front on this either, you know.

5) They support unpopular organizations like the ACLU that want to take God off of money and out of the pledge ( 90% say no to those)

And the republicans support the NRA, which is widely percieved as a bunch of gun nuts.

6) some support gay marriage ( unpopular)

They also supported black civil rights back in 1960 or so.

7) they will not support the troops by assuming they are innocent until proven guilty

Expand this please

8) Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry type candidates are too lame to be taken as anything but a joke

Considering Kerry got just slightly less then half the vote in 2004, obviously not.

9) 50% of Americans believe there were WMD's in Iraq, Democrats have no authority on defense

Didn't you already do this one?

10) even now...in these times....40% of Americans support Bush.

I think it's gone down to 30% since the last time you saw it.

I really see no chance of Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Edwards, or Biden ( HAH) taking the white house in 2008. The concept of Speaker Pelosi will no doubt keep the house in Republican control for a long long time.
All this is your personal opinion and so can be safely ignored.

I do not think that it is the role of teachers to place their own values on the captive audience of our young people.
Which values were being taught that would not be helpful later in life? What is wrong with taking the minimum wage and seeing what tools would be required in order to live off that amount?

Ah but no Democrat President since Grover Cleveland has had a net surplus of money while in office
Clinton did.

no Democrat candidate for President has supported the death penalty since 1964.
Is it even an electoral issue?

we found illegal WMD's just last month, you may remember. Also, only 30% of Americans believe that there was no link between Bid laden and Hussein's organizations.
Then 70% of Americans believe another lie.

Care to give me a link to a story about these WMDs? I think I would remember such a big story if it were true.

ah, but we are 3 years into Iraq, with high gas prices and hurricane Katrina behind us, yet 4/10 are standing by the Pres. This worries Dems. even if they will not admit it.
That means 6/10 Americans don't support him.

And now you're posting links from far-left sites to "validate" your fake opinions. If you really held the views you're wallpapering in here, you'd be one hell of a lot better at expressing and defending them.


Get stuffed.

Tolerance.org is non-partisan and mainstream and is definitely used in public schools in the cirriculum.

This is why we need to fight No Child Left Behind because it forces teachers to take time away from teaching tolerance and put it into exclusively teaching the "basics." (i.e. Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic)

Tolerance, and comprehensive sex education for that matter, are both key components of K-12 education, and should not be cut.

And, even if the government guaranteed free education at any private school for all parents, this is dangerous because it allows parents to try to shape the cirriculum. The 9th Circuit, the most Democratic Circuit, has ruled this to be unconstitutional.

I'll admit that that is right.

Firstly, 62% of statistics are made up. Please provide the source.
Second, that phrasing is misleading.
www.pollingreport.com

And 63% of statistics are made up(read as please provide source).
www.pollingreport.com

It's not like the republicans have a united front on this either, you know.
we don't?

And the republicans support the NRA, which is widely percieved as a bunch of gun nuts.
ah, but there was no huge backlash when the assault weapons ban expired in 04', in fact some say it helped. Could you imagine if the ACLU won its fight to ban God from the pledge. OH, hell would break loose.

They also supported black civil rights back in 1960 or so.
More Republicans voted for the civil rights bill of 1964 than Democrats. Today, only the Dems. support quotas for minorities, a racist institution.

All this is your personal opinion and so can be safely ignored.

Yep, and it has been ignored, by Mcgovern ( won 1 state and 38% of the vote), carter ( 6 states and 41% of the vote), Mondale ( 1 state and 41% of the vote), Dukakis ( 46% of the vote and 10 states), Gore ( 48% of the vote and 20 states), and kerry ( 49% and 19 states). Losers all.

Only Clinton learned to win with moderate positions. Up, look, he got impeached. Tough stuff.

Tolerance.org is non-partisan and mainstream and is definitely used in public schools in the cirriculum.

This is why we need to fight No Child Left Behind because it forces teachers to take time away from teaching tolerance and put it into exclusively teaching the "basics." (i.e. Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic)

Tolerance, and comprehensive sex education for that matter, are both key components of K-12 education, and should not be cut.

And, even if the government guaranteed free education at any private school for all parents, this is dangerous because it allows parents to try to shape the cirriculum. The 9th Circuit, the most Democratic Circuit, has ruled this to be unconstitutional.
No Child Left Behind is a miserable failure. But not for the reasons you specified.

The Democrats have only won more than 50% of the vote in one Presidential election since 1964. The Republicans have done it 5 times.

10 Reasons why:

1) Democrats will raise your taxes every time they get in the Congress/ white house
2) only 24% of Americans support abortion in any circumstance
3) Democrats are anti- death penalty, not a majority opinion
4) They never have a clear defense plan ( should we pull out of Iraq or not?)
5) They support unpopular organizations like the ACLU that want to take God off of money and out of the pledge ( 90% say no to those)
6) some support gay marriage ( unpopular)
7) they will not support the troops by assuming they are innocent until proven guilty
8) Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry type candidates are too lame to be taken as anything but a joke
9) 50% of Americans believe there were WMD's in Iraq, Democrats have no authority on defense
10) even now...in these times....40% of Americans support Bush.

I really see no chance of Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Edwards, or Biden ( HAH) taking the white house in 2008. The concept of Speaker Pelosi will no doubt keep the house in Republican control for a long long time.
1) Can you say "massive deficit"? I didn't think so.
2) Far more that 24% OK abortion in circumstances far more broad than the recently passed South Dakota law.
3) Anti death penalty is not a minority position. I'd like to know exactly which poll numbers you're selecting to come to that conclusion.
4) And Republicans do? Republicans completely shredded the notion of Nation Building and Mission Creep when Clinton was in office and it happened in Somalia. Now, suddenly, it's okay to nation build -- preemptively? Please.
5) The ACLU defends ANYONE who has a First Amendment problem. THe cases in which they've defended religious freedon get nowhere NEAR the press that opposing viewpoint seems to generate. And please, show me where the ACLU has ever supported a suit to pull "god" off the money. The Pledge was fine until 1954.
6) Gay marriage is "unpopular" only when it's called by that name. When asked if gay couples should receive the same benefits as married couples, it becomes closer to 50-55% in favor.
7) Oh, God, another "troop support" claim. The soldiers have been arrested and confessed to the crimes they're charged with! And if they were "following orders", as claimed in some cases like Abu Gharaib, then that's an even larger problem. They're not ALL heroes, even you must acknowledge that.
8) Mondale? Jesus couldn't have beaten Reagan in 1984. Then again, Jesus tried to run in 1988 (through Pat Robertson) and failed, so maybe the Christ doesn't have what it takes to be a politician. Dukakis was a weird-ass one-off, and Kerry was spun by the Repugnican Smear Machine whose claims, when brought out, were trumpeted, and whose claims, when debunked, were closeted. Truth is, we'll never know what kind of President Kerry might have been, though I'm certain NeoCon pundits' websites are crawling with such "information".
9) Guess what? "50% of Americans" -- wherever you got THAT skewed stat -- were wrong. Even Rick Santorum's claim of 25-year-old mustard gas shells found in one place and so old as to be ineffective, was laughed off the front page. THERE WERE NO WMD. Get over it.
10) "Even now, in these times"?!? Holy Halliburton, that sounded like a defeatest admission of failure! "In these times"! What times would "these" be? The ones CAUSED by Bush and his cronies? "These times" are his own fault, and it's not 40%, it's 34%. One in three. Even Clinton never sunk that low. Seriously, if you haven't got 10 items, don't try and invent #10, cause you sank yourself hardcore with that one.

Which values were being taught that would not be helpful later in life? What is wrong with taking the minimum wage and seeing what tools would be required in order to live off that amount?
Nothing! in fact I think it is a great idea to teach that. maybe so many would not drop out in that case. But I know that all of the radilibs in public schools like the one that I went to would move that into a discussion about how various massive welfare projects are needed ( with your parents money) to help those poor souls. Good grief.

A good example is how many people will tell you that Bush won in 2000 because of the Supreme Court decision. The truth is, even if the court had sided with Gore 9-0 Bush still would have won because the electoral college members from Florida were being chosen from the Republican legislature who had already decided to cast their votes for BUSH.:D
Not if the Secretary of State had done her job, but Ms. Harris had no reason to do that, did she?

Intangelon, in your heart, I know you agree with me. I have an article for you from The Nation, a weekly, mainstream Democratic publication:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060417/aronson
Sir, you've already proven that you know very little.

We've seen through your flimsy disguise. You're done.

Get stuffed.

Nothing! in fact I think it is a great idea to teach that. maybe so many would not drop out in that case. But I know that all of the radilibs in public schools like the one that I went to would move that into a discussion about how various massive welfare projects are needed ( with your parents money) to help those poor souls. Good grief.
That wasn't mentioned at all in the article and I don't believe throwing money around is a suitable way to alleviate poverty.

Nothing! in fact I think it is a great idea to teach that. maybe so many would not drop out in that case. But I know that all of the radilibs in public schools like the one that I went to would move that into a discussion about how various massive welfare projects are needed ( with your parents money) to help those poor souls. Good grief.

Even right-wing extremist Barry knows that we need tolerance-based education in public schools.

GO JON TESTER!!

Nothing! in fact I think it is a great idea to teach that. maybe so many would not drop out in that case. But I know that all of the radilibs in public schools like the one that I went to would move that into a discussion about how various massive welfare projects are needed ( with your parents money) to help those poor souls. Good grief.

Where and when did you graduate?

Sir, you've already proven that you know very little.

We've seen through your flimsy disguise. You're done.

Get stuffed.

Intangelon, why do you hate me so? It doesn't seem to reflect your North Dakota values.

Ever think that maybe some people have been disheartened by the loony left wing of the Democrats? IN 2000 Joe Lieberman was the Democrat's choice for Vice President. Now they will not let him run for the Senate. He did not change. The Democrats fell even more to the left.
I dont even know what "loony left wing" you're talking about. I've not seen a Democrat of that furry stripe even come close to winning a national election. What's to be disheartened by?

He's never really been a Democrat, but whatever. He was chosen to balance the ticket. Remember Quayle? What was his purpose? To make Bush I look a little less stodgy and ancient.

I should report you for falsely reporting a member, this man speaks nothing but the truth, and he did it in a constructive manner. Better then half the crap I see here.

You scared cause we see the democrats for what they are? A selfish, narscistic, bunchof dolts with no ambition to help America? Too bad.. I'm Mexican and it offends me how I have to stomache as democrat's call themself the hispanic vote. There's nothing hispanic about thier white power theocracy.. A Mexican is far too passionate and traditional to ever have an abortion or do drugs, they'd be disowned for something like that. And democrats pride themselves in this "right to choose". Apparently democrats don't care about who is hurt in the process of thier choice, just that they HAVE a choice, meanwhile they want to talk about morals to the warmongering republicans then turn around and shrug thier shoulders "morality is relative". They're hypcroties, they're liers, they're fascists, and America is slowly starting to see that. It took them how long? Twenty years?

The democrats are only getting worse, they went from closest rascist assholes to openly insane meglomaniacs with a death wish.. It's only a matter of time before thier next canidate for president is some clone of Adolph Hitler.. I'd rather my country not sink to that point, democrats want to destroy America simply so they can say "see?! We told you!" They're a bunchof narscistic pricks who just want to be right. But everything about them is wrong. If you're not partof the solution, you're partof the problem.
You've lost your mind.

Seriously, put your therapist on danger money. Now.

I dont even know what "loony left wing" you're talking about. I've not seen a Democrat of that furry stripe even come close to winning a national election. What's to be disheartened by?

He's never really been a Democrat, but whatever. He was chosen to balance the ticket. Remember Quayle? What was his purpose? To make Bush I look a little less stodgy and ancient.
Republicans will never stop paying for Quayle. My God, what happened there?

:D Well don't worry there is nothing I hate as much as teachers who force their views on kids. I live in NY and had to deal with that crap for years. Leftist brainwashing. I will not brainwash kids from the right. It is wrong. No need to worry, I will not do would I have seen so many times and take advantage of a captive audience.
Let me guess...you think Columbus could do no wrong and that the North was somehow morally superior in the Civil War? [/kidding]

I don't support revisionist history (I had a rabid Republican for my US History class in high school), but neither do I think we as teachers should turn a blind eye to new sources of information or new perspectives on old issues. A good teacher navigates around revisionism and politics to present as many views of as manny aspects of history as possible.

I wish you luck, it is anything but smooth sailing.

Let me guess...you think Columbus could do no wrong and that the North was somehow morally superior in the Civil War? [/kidding]

I don't support revisionist history (I had a rabid Republican for my US History class in high school), but neither do I think we as teachers should turn a blind eye to new sources of information or new perspectives on old issues. A good teacher navigates around revisionism and politics to present as many views of as manny aspects of history as possible.

I wish you luck, it is anything but smooth sailing.

Intangelon, you are the Republican. All of a sudden you are supporting racist, "traditional" education.

Were you aware that the Iroquois Native Americans had a federal Republic very similar to America for two centuries before white people came here? Then Jefferson, Madison, etc. stole the idea from them and re-established it with a white patriarchy in its place.

Most Americans want the correct history taught, and would prefer to hear about our true Founders, the Iroquois Tribal Elders.

Who are you to tell him what he is and isn't? If he registerd democrat, tough titties how you feel about him, he's a God-damn democrat.

Just cause he's a registerd party member doesn't mean he can't have his own thoughts and feelings on the subject, now, is the democratic party appropiate for him? Not really, but that's his choice if he chooses to asscosiate with a bunchof loony toons. Frankly if more democrats were like him this country wouldn't be up the shit creek it is..

Desparate Mesasures, why are my fellow Democrats attacking me for the idea that public education is key to promoting progressive values in the next generation?

Most parents would prefer experts decide what their children are taught. If education wasn't the responsibility of government, parents wouldn't have the time to pick from between hundreds, possibly even thousands, of potential schools if the choice was left to them. How would parents know if the school teaches true science as taught in the public schools, or if they are being taught the pseudo-science that many Christians teach?

Here's the article again: http://www.tolerance.org/teach/activities/activity.jsp?ar=661
You're no more a Democrat than you are a yak. I know you're not a yak because yaks are notoriously bad typists.

Why do we think you're full of shit? The bolded line is a good example. If you truly believe that, then you're really not cogent. I've met more parents of students than you've had breakfasts, Sonny Jim, and if there's one thing any good parent is up on, it's school choice. Not only that, but they question "experts" at every turn and are generally leery of anyone acting in loco parentis and want to know as much about them as possible.

The fact that you're trying to use fake NEA stances to pass yourself off as a far-left authoritarian is ludicrous and laughable.

Get stuffed.

I let this thread go on in the hopes it would move away from name-calling and baiting and into coherent civil discussion. After eight pages, I think it is clear that it isn't getting away from that.

For those of you discussing actual issues (e.g., educational biases, the electoral college, etc) rather than trying to shout each other down about Republicans and Democrats, I recommend creating a more specific thread.