Great article JimK.  I agree wholeheartedly.

Oh and here’s a delightful little tidbit: Arafats health deteriorating.  Imagine our election results are stressing him out any?

Nice, Jim. Outstanding work! I doubt they’ll listen, but you can’t say they weren’t warned.

If yours is the future of the GOP do us independants a favor and lose the smug. I’ve seen the general political will of this country cycle from right to left and back again. I have never seen the country benefit from the polarization encouraged by such a tone.

I like your vision of an improved GOP & I like the call for respect. But to get, give.

Jim,
Let me start by stating up front, I cannot even begin to approach the level of eloquence and accuracy of your insights in your open letter to the “Angry Left.” However, if you would allow me the indulgence of adding my own addendum to your analysis I would be truly honored.
First, to the “Angry and Disenfranchised Left” let me start by stating that I am truly empathetic to your feelings on this Wednesday after the defeat of Kerry.  You have been so angry and bitter for so long that last night was simply the crushing blow that evokes feelings of rage, insecurity and absolute despondence.  As such, I do not envy and will not gloat in last night’s victory for Bush and likeminded Conservatives nationwide.  In fact, I will go a step further, I do not hate the left.  If anything, I have a deep sorrow for you and your overwhelming vitriolic feelings.  For many of you on the fringe left, your lives have degenerated to such a desperate point that a victory or, in this case, a loss dictates your overall happiness, which validates Jim’s underlying point.  You have lost site of reality.  Life is not about winning at all cost and the “winner-take all” mentality that prevails in your segment of the Democratic Party have high jacked and used your rage for their selfish motives (and do not think Moore has an overwhelming sense of obligation to expose the truth.  If he is nothing else, he is a shrewd and wealthy businessman).  The left, and I will qualify that more specifically as the “Lunatic Left, have no other measure to their lives than the all out assault on Conservative values. 
Like Jim, I am a new age Republican who also believes in limited government, lower taxes and wants to steer our country away from the Eurocentric nannism that is slowly eroding our values, our ingenuity and our national pride.  I believe in free enterprise, rewarding decent and self-motivated behavior and eliminating the “what can you do for me now” mentality that is infecting our nation.  Furthermore, I believe in the practical nature of Pro-Choice society with realistic boundaries (no partial birth abortions and parental notification for teens seeking an abortion) even though I am morally opposed to it on a personal level.  I also believe in balancing the need for environmental protection with the need to sustain a rapidly expanding economy and society.  I believe in the need to recognize Civil Unions as a compromise, which will enable Social Conservatives the ability to retain their core beliefs that marriage exclusive to a man and women.
What you have forgotten or simply fail to recognize, is that is not you who has had to do the bulk of the adjusting in our society.  It has, in fact, been Conservatives that have had to disproportionately adjust to you ways of thinking.  You have successfully bullied your views onto us with little or no regard for our values and when you could not legislate you simple used judicial tyranny to force your views on us.  Well, ladies and gentleman last night we pushed back.
To all you angry Libs, be as angry, spiteful and venomous as you feel you need to be, but recognize, as Jim stated, you are only further alienating yourselves and not progressing your fundamental beliefs in any meaningful manner.
I too am the face of the new Republican Party as well. I am a well educated (two master’s degrees), a firefighter who is also busy raising a family while maintaining intimate involvement in my community and church.  You had better learn to accept this or your lives will continue to be a series of crushing defeats and utter disappointments.

Respectfully,
Steve Standridge
Denver, CO
Eddys225 at yahoo.com

I have been watching your election on British tv. I can’t beleive the reasons some people gave for backing that puppet.. ‘erm..i bet George Bush knows what a chilli dog tastes like!’ So what? We are laughing at you now. Your country is fucked up.
what do you think when they show dead Iraqi people on the news? Does it mean anything to you..is it their own fault? Are American lives more important?

You make the mistake of assuming all liberals are Republican haters.  I voted for Kerry, but if you’d only nominated John McCain, you’d’ve had my vote.  If Dick Cheney’s old work buddies hadn’t been awarded a no-bid contract to work on Iraq, you might well have had my vote.  If we had found any WMDs, or you’d admit that you were wrong about them being there, you might’ve had my vote.  I couldn’t care less about anyone’s service record; I didn’t vote on that issue.  While you may be pro-states right, pro-individual freedom, the man you elected is not.  He will potentially appoint 2 Supreme Court justices, and they will last longer than 4 years. 

Also, I think you’re missing a very important point about Mr. Moore’s movie.  At the very end, he is doing a voiceover in which he states the following:

They...give up their lives so that we can be free. It is...their gift to us. And all they ask...is that we never send them into harm’s way unless
it is absolutely necessary. Will they ever trust us again?

I believe that Michael Moore truly respects the armed forces, but he does not respect the people who sent them to Iraq.

I’d like to also echo the previous poster’s comment.  You say that we must play your game.  Your smug attitude is downright offensive, and I’d point out that you didn’t win the popular vote by a 50% margin, or a 30% margin, or even a 10% margin.  You have to give to recieve.

Carl thinks we are laughing at you ‘fucked up’ Americans here in England.He has failed to notice that most of the dead in Iraq have been slaughtered by other Arabs dedicated to a world in which the ritual killing of men women and children becomes routine and tapes of their atrocities sell as entertainment in the market.The hideous Michael Moore has spewed his venomous lies to be gratefully lapped up by Carl and others like him whose obtuse oafish anti intellectualism typifies the Left in this country.Your site has sustained me to the finish line and for that many thanks.

Hi, don’t you feel that words like ‘rejected’ and ‘marginalised’ are a bit strong given that the actual difference was around 3%?  By all means, congratulations are due to the Republican party on running an effective and efficient campaign, but had the Democrats got their tactics even slightly better, the very same candidate who was ‘rejected’ could have romped to victory.  I look forward to a strong Democratic candidate in 2008, backed by a Party that will have taken lessons from this year.

I belong to a second group, in addition to the ‘new Republican Party’, which has actively rejected the lunatic left (and lunatic right, for that matter) - the traditional Democratic Party. Much has been written in the last 3 years about how Islam has been taken hostage by a radical element.  The same has unfortunately happened to the Democratic Party.  Most members of that party would agree with Jim and others about Michael Moore.  (I rejoiced in the defeat of Tom Daschle because of his absurd embracing of Moore as somehow articulating a point view with any validity whatsoever.) The unity that both Bush and Kerry are calling for is actually quite possible, because ‘new’ Republicans and ‘traditional’ Democrats have a lot in common.  Neither group has much in common with the Democratic Party of John Kerry, John Edwards, Diane Feinstein, Tom Daschle, Michael Moore, etc.  I agree with Jim, that both groups have rejected the lunatic left, and I hope that both groups will recognize the vast common ground they share.

I have been watching your election on British tv. I can’t beleive the reasons some people gave for backing that puppet.. ‘erm..i bet George Bush knows what a chilli dog tastes like!’ So what? We are laughing at you now. Your country is fucked up.
what do you think when they show dead Iraqi people on the news? Does it mean anything to you..is it their own fault? Are American lives more important?

Carl people like you are one of the main reasons I will not vote for a democrat. Every time I hear how much Europeans hate Bush I thank the lord.  The last man you hated this much was Ronald Reagan and we can thank him for defeating the Evil Empire. I have high hopes your current level of hate indicates Bush will change the world for the better too.

Don’t worry.  We won’t expect you to thank us or show us gratitude for showing how weak and lame your idiotic beliefs are when we again are the ones to expend blood and capital to fix the problems you Europeans create.

Alex, Reagan didn’t end the Cold War.  Gorbachev had seen the need to stop the madness by the mid 80’s.  Reagan pressed on with his spending plans, weapon defense and all that, blind to the real situation.  All it needed was a reality check and he would have realised that it could have been ended in a flash.  Frankly, Reagan prolonged the Cold War for four more years than necessary.  You see, the Soviet Union was such a corrupt, ineffective and unsuitable regime that it would have fallen regardless of arbitrary like who the US president was.  It would have even fallen had they won the Cold War, or if there was no Cold War at all.

Sorry, that should read.  You see, the Soviet Union was such a corrupt, ineffective and unsuitable regime that it would have fallen regardless of arbitrary influences like who the US president was.

Paul

Jim what a great statement.  I would like to add to this a comment a local mom gave on the radio here (Phoenix area).  She has a son in Iraq just newly deployed.  When word reached him of Bush’s victory, he said his unit along with the Iraqi’s celebrated together.  Bet we don’t see THAT on the evening news!!!  If the left would like to really see how badly they did lose, check out a map that shows each state by county.  Just see how many are red and how many are blue even those states that were taken by Kerry.  The left will REALLY see how badly they lost.  Jim you are (as my Mom would say) the cat’s meow.

One more comment, did anyone hear the comment by Putin?  He said that re-electing Pres. Bush shows that America is not afraid of terrorists.  WOW!!!

Don’t worry.  We won’t expect you to thank us or show us gratitude for showing how weak and lame your idiotic beliefs are when we again are the ones to expend blood and capital to fix the problems you Europeans create.
Sadly… that is what our government is having to do right now.. for Bush

Paul, all due respect, but you are so wrong it hurts.  Reagan was almost single handedly, through sheer force of will, responsible for why the USSR had to “stop the madness.”

Pick up “Reagan’s War” and give it a read.  Very enlightening and puts a lot of things in historical perspective.

Colliam: You are on to something...something I want to explore in a big way in the coming years.  Stick around...I’m going to need your feedback when this idea keeps popping up!

ironmaiden: That’s cool!  Something that made me happy to see was watching the returns all night, MSNBC and Fox kept playing these little clips of deployed Marines talking about how they believed in Bush and were voting for him, how almost all the Marines felt that way, etc.  I felt a lot better not only seeing it, since I already believed it was true, but that other poeple got to hear it from their mouths directly.  And it wasn’t <i>just</i< on Fox News. so no one can claim bias and whatnot.

And I’d purr, but it would just come off weird.  :)

You seem to think that Bush winning the election makes you Republicans less stupid.  It doesn’t.  It just means that there are more of you.  You people just elected a former cocaine user and a dry drunk to the most powerful position in the world.  Way to go!  You know, there will come a time when the Republican party will fade out of existence, just like the Whig party did.  Its time for mankind to evolve; yet the Republican party wishes to forge the future in the shape of the past.

Great letter. Perhaps you would like to look at another media producer who uses his forum to spew bile and political half-truths about a seated politician.

His name is Rush Limbaugh.

This pill-popping racist (adjectives added to balance “filthy excuse for a human being") commentator uses the same tools as Moore to press his political agenda. He hints at wild accusations and guesses what people he disagrees with are thinking. And he broadcasts this message a few hours a day, 6 days a week.

Look, I just want to point out that the left isn’t unique in having outspoken blowhards. I find both of these men outrageous AND entertaining.

If you are really supportive of a woman’s right to choose and anyone’s right to get married, I think you need to question your party affiliation. Waiting for the current batch of Republicans to “die off” in order to affect change doesn’t really make sense. Especially when there is a party that shares your views already in existence.

The problem is that “you” are not “The Republican Party” with the gay marriage support. 11 states passed state constitutional amendments to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Most conservatives are against abortion. I was in my gen psych class today in class and the professor was showing us pictures of unborn children. They can see the difference between light and dark at a month. You might look at that when you think about “a woman’s right to choose.” That’s like saying “an inconvenienced person’s right to murder someone.” The choice begins with dropping the pants. And it is unacceptable to murder an innocent person even if a crime is what brought it about. We have adoption in this country. I don’t understand why this is such a hard concept. Otherwise you made some excellent points.

First off, I have to say i agree with alot of what you said, but one thing in paticular i find crosses the line is such a vular way it makes me feel ill.

photo of Bush made up of the first 1000 soldiers that died in Iraq and Afghanistan… that at minimum, 75% of the people pictured in this photo hate Moore.

They are dead. Do not say you know how they feel. they are dead they feel nothing. maybe their familes feel something or they felt something while alive, and maybe the fact Moore is draging them into view is pathetic and sad, but doing it yourself after saying how bad it is, is, in itself, even more vile and disheartening.

i refuse to comment directly on this entry, so sorry jim, this is off topic, but i feel the need to address it.

see how many are red and how many are blue even those states that were taken by Kerry.  The left will REALLY see how badly they lost

if the NUMBER of red states was so indicative of how BADLY kerry lost, then why did it come down to *one* state?  indeed, there is only a 3% margin in the popular vote.

there is a reason why the midwest states have fewer electoral votes.

for example, according to CNN, kerry won NY by 58% to 40%. 

bush won wyoming 69% to 29%

population of NY: 18,976,457
population of WY: 493,782

this is why it LOOKS extremely disproportionate, but that’s just land mass, not *people*

yes, bush definitely won.  i knew this when i woke up wed. morning.  as soon as i heard about the difference in the popular vote, i said kerry needs to concede gracefully and with dignity ASAP.  but people really need to stop kidding themselves by thinking republicans are a VAST majority.  a majority, yes, undoubtedly.  i cannot deny that, the numbers do not lie (though technically, we’re only talking about the people who voted, but if you didn’t vote, scew you and your opinion anyway ;) but remember, 48% of the country voted democrat.  hardly a runaway victory.

more telling of how CLOSE this election truly was would be a look at the electoral vote history.

from the electoral college website (going back only 20 years, but you should check this out):

1984:  reagan-525 Mondale-13
1988:  bush-426 dukakis-111
1992:  clinton-370 bush-168
1996:  clinton-379 dole-159
2000:  bush-271 gore-266
2004:  bush-274 kerry-252

giving bush both new mexico and iowa:
bush-286 kerry-252

looks like a pretty close election, with bush, however, the clear winner.

If you are really supportive of a woman’s right to choose and anyone’s right to get married, I think you need to question your party affiliation. Waiting for the current batch of Republicans to “die off” in order to affect change doesn’t really make sense. Especially when there is a party that shares your views already in existence.

Those two issues aren’t exactly the defining factors of the conservative movement.  There are much greater fundamental issues at the heart of the Republican and Democrat parties.

I think he means a map like this.

Although I can’t find one for 2004 yet, 2000 clearly shows why we need an electoral college.  Candidates would only need to campaign (and therefor provide for people) on the coast, and up the Mississippi river.

No, not just lost...were rejected.

51% to 48%… I hardly regards this as a rejection or a major victory. What this means to me is that roughly half of Americans disagree with the other half, only that there are slightly more of one than the other.

I am the Republican Party.  … I am the future of the Republican Party.  And if you think keeping me on your side is worth anything, you might want to re-think the idea of calling me a bigot or a Nazi or spewing hatred at me.

JimK… I know it sucks to have people calling you names when you are expressing your opinions, but I take your comments with a pinch of salt. I recall clearly several occasions where I and others have posted our opinions, without directing any insults against you or any others and you responded with foul language (which I have pointed out several times & asked you to tone down). on one occasion, banned someone from your forum for expressing their (perhaps strong) distrust of the military as an establishment.

I just thought I would remind you of that, because as you clearly say yourself:

If the topic did not fit your need, you forced it, or just ignored it altogether and ranted away ... You never stopped for a minute to consider the fact that you might be wrong.

Also, you made clear in your blog that you feel the reason the election swing slightly in Bush’s favour is Michael Moore and that we made him a political issue. Perhaps, but it was my impression that the right wing had the most to do with politicizing MM. i believe it was the right wings intention to give people the impression that if they voted for Kerry, they were sponsoring Moore. www.moorewatch.com is an example of that.

Take republican, John Shadegg, for example, which said of Clinton, when Clinton designated some forest to be a national monument, that “I would draw a parallel to Hitler, he eroded the will of the German people to resist evil.” thats scaremongering, but I doubt most Republicans would say they share the same (extreme and ridiculous) opinion and obviously people shouldnt make the association for every Rep.

F911 was a documentary by someone who wanted to make a difference to the political scene. Not to sound condescending, but its my impression that you are doing all this blogging and activism for similar reasons: to up your profile and perhaps a feeling of importance.

What you need is me as your ally.  Your inside man.  Someone who will fight you on a lot of issues, but will also fight for you on others.  Why?

...

Because I am the Republican Party.  And right now, we control the game.  If you want to play, you need to re-think this idea that throwing tantrums will get you on the field.

...

Talk to me.  Treat me with respect.  And you just might find yourself with the most powerful ally you can imagine: someone who shares a vision of a more free, more perfect America.

You can reinterpret that quote to mean the following

“When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already… What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”

Do you know who said this?

Anyways, I digress… 4 more years… 4 more years of the same junk that us into all this mess. Better just suck it up and remember that Bush cannot be re-elected, unless that law somehow mysteriously gets changed. It’s especially a bitter disappointment to someone who isn’t religious, isn’t rich, doesn’t believe that the way to fix the economy is to leave people behind in the dust trails and expect them to catch up, doesn’t support the war in Iraq and doesn’t believe that terrorism is a threat that can be solved by slamming a sledgehammer at it.

One of the things you remarked was the lack of Bush critism. I agree… there wasn’t enough!!! Kerry should have focused on Bush’s history, because theres a lot to be found. There was plenty of Bush critisism before Michael Moore. There was “Fortunate Son” by James Hatfield - Link -… in fact, there’s a whole list ranging from drug abuse, alcoholism, poor business sense, abuse of social proviledges, dodging the draft, insider trading, censorship (this is a big one), blackmailing, flip-floping on issues (hilarious that he should use this to critisize Kerry… GW ince said that he would not want to involve the US military in nation building, and look now) and cheating his way into the presidency. And then there was his reception at his inauguration… how can you say no one had anything to critisize him with before MM?

fangbeer:

oh, my bad.  i’ve heard the same argument made about the state by state map and just read it that way.

however, my electoral college points are still valid, and my state population argument i’m sure would carry over to a county by county comparison as well.  new york county, i.e. manhattan, has a population of something like 1.5 million, versus the entire state of wyoming. 

point still being, even just looking at the popular vote, it wasn’t a royal asskicking, just a republican victory.

Do you realize how arrogant and conceited you come off in your letter, Jim?  You act as though Democrats are wrong and republicans right.  I am of the mind that ALL politicians make mistakes, and that black and white thinking is not only ignorant, but dangerous.  GW won by a very slim margin yesterday, making it difficult to believe that Kerry was out and out “rejected.” Also, gloating over such a close margin is not only unfounded but also juvenile.  Yes, any Democrats who are “whining” about the loss are being juvenile too, but...look in the mirror, Jim. 

Yes, you are right when you say that Democrats have said untrue things and slung mud, etc...but you speak as though Republicans don’t mudsling or make statements that are untrue or misleading.  Last I heard, it wasn’t JESUS that was running for president, and so you can expect that BUSH and other GOP members have lied and made misleading statements.  They might not be big enough to admit that they did, but that doesn’t mean its not true. 

You act as though the war in Iraq is solely about protecting America from terrorists and that anyone that doesn’t support it is not supporting the armed forces.  I’m curious as to what someone like you makes of Haliburton and all of the big oil ties to the Bush administration.  These things worry me and because of them, I find it hard to believe that this war was only about taking Saddam out of power.  Especially after the WMD reasons Bush supplied which weren’t based on factual information.  I support our armed forces, but I do have a problem with the reasons why they were deployed. 

As for Michael Moore, I do not agree with everything that he says and does.  But you don’t honestly believe that everything that he says is a lie, do you?  He has made some very good points at times, and reports some facts that wouldn’t ordinarily make it to the public otherwise.  Based on your blatant hatred for him, I suppose you do believe that he is 100% about lying to the American people, as I also suppose, based on your black/white thinking, that you belive that 100% of what GW says is the truth.

I would give you some advice: 1)Question those in authority, 2)Don’t take everything at face value, and 3) don’t spend all your time telling everyone how they’re wrong and you are right.  Following this advice will make anyone a better person, regardless of their political affiliation.  As you are now....I would never want someone like you as my ally.  People like you are good at building walls, and that’s about it.

it wasn’t a royal asskicking, just a republican victory.

I think part of the sentiment stems from Jim’s perception of his environment.  I’m pretty sure it mirrors my own perception that for the most part, in the places we choose to express ourselves, we tend to be in the minority.  We’re both from a pretty hardcore blue state.  I’m sure he’s far more active online than I, but I gather that we both spin in blog circles that tend to hear from a large amount of people who disagree with us.  We both follow MSM which was of the opinion that we were about to experience an ass kicking of our own. 

For me at least this election was a validation that I’m not the right wing racist redneck facist that the majority of our online discussions asserted that I was.  I’m the majority of America. That’s a pretty good feeling. For me at least, that’s an asskicking considering the amount of abuse I took before that revelation was made clear.

you know, something interesting just occured to me, when looking at the following map that was posted (this map here)… as someone above pointed out (although with a slightly misguided perspective), it would appear that GWB has won with a landslide, and yet that is not the case, as Gore got 127 million votes and Bush got 143 million.

So this suggests to me that areas that voted for Gore (and possibly Kerry) tended to be from more densely populated areas and those that voted for bush tended to be from less densely populated areas. is this making any sense to you yet? is it getting across? i mean, it is either that… but, if you really tried, you could put some spin on it and say that GWB supporters are in the majority, but tended to vote less than Gore/Kerry voters… anything is possible, but would probably look bad as well.

As for the xenophobia again europe… i just find it hilarious that the reasons my fellow americans use to justify their contempt of europe are the same reasons the middle east and other places in the world justify their contempt of america. we truly are an ignorant country. and there’s nothing else that you can say about it. you cannot defeat rascism, ignorance and bigotry, so im not going to bother, because then id have to stoop to the same level… especially if youve never made the effort to visit europe and experience it for what it is or been there at all (as many americans have not)

I would give you some advice:

As you are now....I would never want someone like you as my ally.  People like you are good at building walls, and that’s about it.

Arrogant or not, the point that was displayed in this election is that you need him, but he doesn’t need you.  If anyone needs to make concessions in order to achieve a compromise it is you, not him.  I find it quite ironic that many people have chosen to ask Jim to reform before they will come to the table as allies.  So let me give you some advice:  If you want to come sit at the table you’re going to have to give something of value first, because however much we want you at the table, we don’t need you there.

Jim,

I stumbled upon your site in the early haze of morning.  Since then, I have read through your “...open letter...” several times.  After doing so, I find myself impressed by your sagacious melding of insight (and intelligence) with heart.  Bravo!  In a perfect world, The USA Today would grab your piece and dedicate an entire page to its display.  No, I am not some “Right Wing” nut.  I would describe myself as a socially moderate, fiscally conservative member of the electorate who aligns himself with the Republican Party.  I am not one of the evangelicals that the media seems to credit for this Bush victory.  Nor am I a war monger who has no feeling for those in Iraq.  I am an intelligent, well-informed, thoughtful American. News Flash:  There are many more of us out here than the “left” ever imagined--obviously. 

To carl the brit:  I find myself stirred more by a chuckle than by ire when I read your evaluation of our country as “fucked up.” This is especially humorous to me when I think of a place that takes millions from its taxpayer to fund a wholly anachronous Royal Family.  I’ll stand firmly, and proudly, on this side of the water, mate.

To those who think of Bush as dishonest, unintelligent, a puppet.....I recommend picking up a copy of Ron Kessler’s “ A Matter of Character.” Kessler, a former writer for the Washington Post, walked into the White House after having been admittedly a Gore supporter only to leave as a fan of George Bush.

Fangbeer, why do I need Jim?  The point of my quoted comment was that I do not WANT to sit at a table with someone who engages in all or nothing thinking and thinks his affiliation can do no wrong. People like that are poisonous and cause big problems. Just because he is a republican and the republicans are in control does not make Jim someone that I need. I am not asking Jim to reform, I’m just saying that he should practice his politics, whatever they may be, in a more constructive manner.  By beng open minded and respectful, he can get more accomplished and people will want him as an ally.  There are many republicans who practice politics this way, and I would love to be a part of their team. 

I question those in command, whether republican or democrat and try to open doors to discussion that will lead to win-win situations.  If you are saying that I should concede these practices in order to be a part of a republican controlled government....geez, that’s scary.

it would appear that GWB has won with a landslide

I think you’re missing the point of the post. 

I did not link that map to show the number of people who voted for Bush.  I linked it to show the number of counties that voted for Bush.  We have a branch of legislature that represents the popular vote.  It’s called the House of Representatives.  According to the premise of the seperation of powers, the President should not be a representative of the popular vote.  He should be a balance of both the House and the Senate.  That’s what the electorate provides for.  It’s not just a check and balance for the American voter, it’s to provide parity between the house and the Senate. 

Now why did I link the number of counties?  Because each one of those counties is a special interest.  Regardless of the number of people in those counties, those special interests should be provided for by the President of the United States.  The red county special interests of California, may be vastly different than the red county special interests of Nebraska, but a president who wants to win those counties needs to be able provide for those seperate interests if he wants to stay in power. 

The shocking thing that I see from that map is that someone who solicits blue counties has much fewer promises that he has to make.  There are much fewer special interests to provide for, and a switch to the popular vote would only enhance that problem.

By beng open minded and respectful, he can get more accomplished and people will want him as an ally.

“He” currently owns both the legislative, the executive, and in the near future the judicial branch of American Government.  Jim very well may get more accomplished by changing as you require, but you will get zero accomplished without his approval.  You may not need him mmjp, but without him you will only get what he decides to give you.

Of course, perhaps the metaphor has caused confusion.  I say ‘he’ in place of Republicans and “You” in place of democrats.  In doing so I may have made an assumption about you mmjp that may be inaccurate, but it was only to illustrate the current political landscape.

Fangbeer said “because however much we want you at the table, we don’t need you there.”
I’d just like to point out that you DO need us at the table.  With out us you are missing almost half of the American population, with out us this country is run by only half of its citazins.  This is they type of situation where revolutions happen.  So, its not that you don’t need us, you do, just as much as we need you.

With out us you are missing almost half of the American population,

Almost only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes.  Welcome to democracy.

Fangbeer - My comments were directed to Jim as an individual person and not to the republican party.  I do not view Jim as a spokesman for the GoP (and I don’t think they would either) and so was just addressing his personal comments.  But I take your point about republicans having control of the government. You see it as a victory that one party is in control of all branches of government, and that everyone who wants a say must now start kissing up… I see this as a big problem.  Monopolies are never a good thing.  Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t say that it was good if the democrats were in total control of the govenrment either.  When 50% of the country is not able to have their agenda met, thats a largely unhappy country. And if the republicans want a happy country, then they will have to make some concessions.  I don’t know that the happiness of the American democrats is at the top of the GoP “to do” list though, so I’m not holding my breath. But I guess thats the difference between you (and Jim) and me.  If the democrats were in control, I think you would be upset, but as long as it’s your political party in control, everything’s peachy.  Can’t you see that either way is a bad situation for the population as a WHOLE?  I guess with the “republicans are right/democrats wrong” mentality, this wouldn’t appear to be a bad situation.  I am hoping that the republicans in control are responsible leaders and listen to ALL of the american people before making their decisions.  It’s sad that what I just wrote is a completley idealistic comment that will never play out in reality.  Very sad.

An interesting point comes to mind.  Most political anylists agree that Bush won the election because Americans
feel that he can protect them better than Kerry and the Democratic party.  Why is everyone so scared?  Because
the incumbant government put the country on Orange Alert for months and posted armed forces and weaponry all
over various potential targets.  These alerts were based on US intelligence… the same intelligence that said
there were WMD in Iraq.  Saying that these precautions worked and Bush protected us is like my amulet that keeps
polar bears away… there are no polar bears in Colorado so it must be working right?

I don’t mind listening to oposing points of view, and this view (although arrogant as others have said) is very
well writen.  I like many others in the world think that Moore is a little extreme at times, but he brings some
interesting things to the table and is good food for thought.  He is NOT the reason I voted for Kerry this year.
Without getting into what kind of people vote Republican and what kind of people vote Democrat, and without even
talking about social issues or sketchy inuendo and conspiracy theories about nepetism and such, there were a
number of reasons not to re-elect Bush.  Either he lied or was horribly wrong about WMD in Iraq.  He made a
connection between Iraq and Al Quaida (a claim that I’ve heard many Bush supporters deny he ever did, but anyone
with a decent memory knows he did).  Lost jobs, floundering economy, skyrocketing health care.  Put so called
“morals” aside and realize that as a population, Bush has systematically screwed MOST of the American population.
Knowing this I find it difficult to understand why someone would vote for him.

The author brings up a really important point about the “Angry Left” and this is that a lot of the way they
express their opinions is derogetory and I agree this is not appropriate.  Many people can’t come to terms with
the same things I’m having difficulty with and it is manifesting itself as anger.  I too am angry but try to
avoid such extremes, and for those that don’t have the same self-control, I appologize.  We need constructive
diologue in order to resolve such serious issues.  But there’s something I think we Americans need to learn…
we aren’t always right and need dissent to keep everything balanced.  The UN didn’t go to Iraq because they were
a bunch of wimps, they didn’t go because they didn’t think it was warranted.  They DID, however, support the
efforts in Afghanistan.  A good majority of the world community didn’t think this was the right thing to do…
why do you suppose that is?  We Americans seem to take pride in the fact the we do what we want regardless of
what anyone else thinks.  Individuality and passion are good, but the world community didn’t disagree with the
war because they were against America, but because they thought is was a bad idea.  To say “you’re either with us
or against us” and then complain that we have to foot the whole bill is not only arrogant, but is complaining
about the concequences of our own actions!  On a more locallized level it seems that people feel that if they
don’t support the current president then they are un-American and lack patriotism.  Patriotism is a great thing
that we should all take pride in, but blind patriotism is extremely dangerous and polarizing.  If addmitting that
we were wrong in going to war sends the wrong message to the troops and to the terrorists, so be it.  It we were
wrong we should fix it before more US soldiers and Iraqi’s die.

Hopefully in the next election, people will vote on issues, not as a reaction to fear.

See the original post for more clarification of my position.

I love it! The American left is so blind in their hatred that you laid it all out for them, and they STILL refuse to believe it. Why am I not suprised?

<yawn>

I feel compelled to respond “Cupido’s” recent civil, albeit subtle virulent, critique.  There were numerous incoherent arguments he attempts to make that it will be difficult to address and dissect in one sitting, but I will do my best all the same…
First, I reject outright your premise Bush was elected on a singular issue – terrorism.  Yes, it was an overriding factor, and a dominating one that certainly energized the Republican base. But, it was one of many issues central to the Republican platform. Your reasoning illustrates a tremendous single-mindedness infecting today’s Democratic Party, and more specifically, the far left.  Your party has for so long survived by satisfying disparate, and at times conflicting, interest groups, that it is hard for many on the left to comprehend that Republicans do indeed vote for their candidates on a multitude of issues. Democrats, by contrast, are far more driven by singular issues – ie the environment, Union protectionism, Tort reform resistance, Abortion rights, etc.  Need one example, think back to the Clinton impeachment where there was a near deafening silence from the NOW crowd who had previously, and has subsequently, demanded for a high profile politician’s, General’s or CEO’s resignations when it fit their agenda.  However, this same level of accountability was conspicuously lacking for Clinton.  Clearly, they were more interested in preserving the White House with a Pro-Abortion President than one who arguably participated in rape.  The Republican party, by comparison, has been far more affective appealing to a broader base and marginalizing the fringe elements within its ranks – if you need evidence of this, ask yourself why the likes of Pat Robertson and Pat Buchanan, former stalwarts of the party, have been minimalized?  Compare that to the elevated status of Moore, Strisand, Soros, etc. in this last election.
Second, there is ample evidence to support the premise that, not only did Bush not lie about WMD’s, he had a moral and legal obligation to act on intelligence, faulty as it may have been, given the acts of 9-11 which heralded and a new reality of terrorism coming to our home shores.  I absolutely love the hypocrisy of the left when they attempted to crucify the president for “rushing to war,” (another fallacy and illusion perpetrated by the left) yet they were so intent on trying to suggest that he failed to act given the August 2001 briefing intimating Osama had plans to hijack planes and run them into US buildings.  The duplicity of these two divergent points of view is so staggering it is beyond discourse and certainly pales in comparison to Bush’s alleged digressions.  Furthermore, in spite of what the likes of conspiracy nuts at Move-on.org or Undergrounddemocrate would have you believe, there was evidence to suggest Saddam had, at the very least, loose ties to Al-Qaeda.  And, your inference that Iraq and Al-Qaeda are unrelated aspects of the war is absurd.  If you fail to grasp that this a war on terrorism and not just against Al-Qaeda, then you have an appalling fundamental lack of understanding of the broad depth and true nature of this conflict. And, the conversation needn’t go further. Your implicit analogy is as faulty as suggesting FDR’s unilateral Declaration of War on Germany was illegitimate, because there was no direct link to Germany when the Japanese bombed Pear Harbor.
Additionally, the argument that the UN did not act, because they simply did not agree belies the facts…as Paul Volker is discovering, there was a disproportionately high number of UN Security members that had a financial interest in ensuring Saddam remained in power.  I find it fascinating that the US, here and abroad, has received an inordinate amount of scrutiny with respect to our motives, yet the UN and it’s enabling allies’ motives were NEVER called into question.  The left needs to take a long hard look at their steadfast belief in the UN.  It is certainly as corrupt, more so in my humble opinion, as the US. And, I will not, along with my Hawkish allies, apologize for morally taking a stand on the issue of ensuring freedom and stability in the world.  To be quite frank, it is difficult to take “world opinion” as absolute when more than half the world’s population lives in repressive regimes and are amply represented in the UN or will not sacrifice in any meaningful way to preserve that freedom but denounce those who will.  The Europeans, the ones the left is so fond of wanting to emulate, could not even be motivated to intervene on their continent against a holocaust of Muslims…please explain to me how the world’s opinion should sway us from doing what is right despite their disingenuous objections?

Now, to address the issue of Bush systematically screwing “MOST of the American population…” let’s think about this for a moment from a logical perspective and not an emotional irrational one…if, by the very nature of the democratic process – i.e. elections, the representative character of our government, etc. than it is more accurate to say that our policies are not dictated by decree, rather they are derived out of compromise.  With that being said, by the very makeup of our system, isn’t more precise to state that, in fact, people are not being “screwed,’ rather they are simply not getting everything they wanted and desired in the absolute?  It is a process of allocating limited resources to a very diverse group of needs and our system compromises continuously to ensure no one party has all the resources, lest we will become as dysfunctional as the Euros.
As for your comment about “blind patriotism,” I would concur and I would never intimate that Americans should stifle their God given right to free speech, but please DO NOT LECTURE ME!!!  You have every right to express yourself, but I resent the implicit notion that in some way supporting Bush makes me stupid, irrelevant, arrogant or, simply wrong.  You have succeeded, incidentally, in conveying, albeit in a smug and subtle manner, your contempt for me, and others like me, and my beliefs through your postings…a statement as innocuous as “Knowing this I find it difficult to understand why someone would vote for him” implies a moral and intellectual superiority that, I can assure you, does not exist.  You and I may have divergent views, and I will respect that, but I’ll be damned if I will let you disparage me in a deceptive manner by calling into question my belief system or morals.
Thank-you
Steve Standridge
Eddys225 at yahoo.com

PS – OBTW, this statement, “Hopefully in the next election, people will vote on issues, not as a reaction to fear” is about the most telling comment indicating your contempt for me…what the hell do you think we Republicans voted on?  Please spare me your sanctimonious drivel.  Your transparent Pollyannaish platitudes only extend so far.

Great words, Jim. I think you summed it up VERY well!

Jim,
Not sure if this will post correctly.  I can’t get to the second page of comments.  So here’s some random comments.

Beyond rejecting the lunatic left, we also need to look in the mirror and acknowledge the lunatic right.  I agree, there is vast commonality between citizens.  If you evaluate people’s opinion on nearly every issue the results usually resemble a bell curve where the fringe on either side represents a small minority, and the majority is reflected in the middle.

As far as electoral maps, I’d like to offer up the following.  It is color coded by county and uses shades of purple. 

www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/

As to the quote posted by ‘The Gods Must Be Crazy’ - with respect, I’m pretty certain that we Republicans aren’t going to start building concentration camps and practicing genocide ala Hitler.  Not sure what your point was in bringing that up.  Perhaps only to remind everyone that the real danger comes when one party maintains overwhelming control.  That’s not exactly what the election results are showing us.

Sestandridge - I absolutely love the hypocrisy of the left when they attempted to crucify the president for “rushing to war,” (another fallacy and illusion perpetrated by the left) yet they were so intent on trying to suggest that he failed to act given the August 2001 briefing intimating Osama had plans to hijack planes and run them into US buildings. The duplicity of these two divergent points of view is so staggering it is beyond discourse and certainly pales in comparison to Bush’s alleged digressions.

Er, there’s a difference between acting on intelligence that suggests that you should be more aware of terrorist plans and up your “homeland security” and attacking and invading another nation. The main difference being “imposing your government on another country” is a bad policy that most of the world disagrees with. In my opinon, this prevents terrorism as sinking a cork with hammer. It doesn’t sink… and you’ve just caused lots of waves and gotten everything wet.

.  It is certainly as corrupt, more so in my humble opinion, as the US.

Im glad someone admits that the US is corrupt. As for the UN, yes… thank you for your opinion, but there really isnt much to back up that the UN is just as corrupt or more corrupt, and further more, it would be in anyones interest to say that the UN is corrupt if they plan to ignore it. Thats what they call propoganda.

Speaking of which, if you read the following (try to atleast read the first link), after having read that, can you not say that it instills doubt in your mind about the perceptions you have of Bush?

Propoganda technique #1 - Fear

Propoganda technique #2 - Glittering Generalities

Propoganda technique #3 - Name calling

Propoganda technique #4 - Plain Folks

An Analysis of Different Propoganda Techniques

Maybe there is something we all missed? Not to say that Kerry did not use propoganda techniques, and this is why I laugh, because it’s just like in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, when he describes a planet in which they always elect corrupt leaders because they assume that all leaders are going to be corrupt, probably just as much as each other. So in the end, the reasons you end up choosing which ever candidate are totally irrelevant and obsene… in fact, quite often ficticious. Sad sad sad… that we still cant see through all the bull. This is what erodes democracy as an ideal principle. It’s not really a democracy… its the same old regime, just in new clothes. Hey, you don’t see America invading Singapore, because they live under a suppresive regime, where their president is elected for life!

The Europeans, the ones the left is so fond of wanting to emulate, could not even be motivated to intervene on their continent against a holocaust of Muslims…

Can you be more specific? I’m not quite sure which european holocaust you are referring to, which is undistorted by the news media and Hollywood… Certainly you dont mean the war in which NATO intervened in?

JimK - And my memory for things like who has attacked and berated and browbeat me is long, my friend.  Very, very long. Especially for people who attack me for things in which I do not believe without even a moment’s hesitation to hear my point of view.

... I don’t think you will get many people to listen to you by threatening with revenge one day, once you have the means. A more mature way of dealing with people who don’t even bother listening to your point of view is by ignoring them, and not by some playground rules. If people are acting ignorant and aggresive, just keep your cool. People will respect you more that way, because it shows that you have confidence in your own beliefs/opinions…

Dear “Gods Must Be Crazy,”
Unfortunately, I can only react to a small segment of your response due to not being able to get to Page Two.
First, let’s set the record straight, what exactly would you have expected the President to do in response to the Aug. PDP?  He, as Commander and Chief, gets thousands of reports of this kind in a short time span, most of which contain generalized information.  Again, it is imperative you put this in context; this was pre-9-11.  Second, even had more specific information been available, there would have been the very real and problematic issue of just how and when to act.  The Left has created such a counterproductive climate and culture in this country that any actions singling out, oh say, Arab Nationals would have been met with swift and wrathful measures by the ACLU.  This, now follow the dots here, would have caused al-Queda to suppress their plans until a more opportune time. 
The larger point being, the Left crucified him under the auspice of the 9-11 Commission for not acting on generalized information, while after 9-11 he acted on arguably stronger intelligence that was not disputed, but was in fact, confirmed by German, French and British Intelligence agencies.  In addition, by the UN’s own admission, there were, and still are, large unaccounted for stockpiles of bio and chemical WMD’s. 
Again, I get back to my underlying argument, the Left has lost the intellectual argument here, because they fail to grasp the broader “nuances,” to use the haughty French looking former Presidential Candidate’s qualifier, of this war.  The world being an imperfect place is rife with imperfect information, and the President having an obligation to act did so, and rightfully given the context of the 9-11 attacks and what information he had available. 
Additionally, your point that the President acted to “impose” the US style of government is just ludicrous.  Would you make that same argument with respect to installing pro-US governments in Germany and Japan in ‘46?  I dare say if you resent that aspect of US foreign policy, then you have a much higher threshold of hate for democratic governments in general!  And, again, the discussion can proceed no further.  The world’s unyielding faith in the UN is quite frightening considering less than a third of the governments represented there are governed by representative governments.  It does not take a genius to see that the UN has become a refuge for despots and dictators!

Respectfully,

S. Standridge

Sorry about that not being able to get to the second page of comments.  There’s a flaw in the script that automatically makes email addresses linkable and it tends to screw things up all over the site.

My opinion on the original post:

“You see, the old guard of the Republican Party is quite literally dying, and we, the younger members, are moving up.”

I personally do not see how the “old guard of the Republican Party” is “literally dying.” Bush’s values are that of every other Republican that has been in office, and, quite possibly more radical. Think about it, he wants Roe v Wade overturned so badly, I’m sure by the end of his term, it will once again be illegal for a woman to have an abortion and many women will die at the hands of back alley med school dropouts. Bush is completely against gay marriage so much so that the Constitution will be amended. Gay marriage isn’t going to harm anyone and it being defined as a union between a man and a woman, really dates way back. We as a people have advanced; now more than ever, gays are feeling more comfortable with themselves and able to come out to the world, though unfortunately, there’s still a LONG way to go. In today’s society, I truly believe marriage needs to be viewed as a union between two people who LOVE each other. Maybe then, marriage will be viewed differently and the value of marriage will be respected and the divorce rate drop. In addition, Bush’s hunger for power and money fit perfectly with today’s view of Republicans. I’m not saying this is right, but currently, he has done nothing to prove that view wrong. 

“I believe it is possible to embrace both traditional and progressive values…”

I agree totally, but I do not believe Bush feels this way. Maybe progressive in terms of technology, but his values aren’t progressive. And, I do not feel I am “untraditional” in believing marriage is between two people who love each other and not strictly between a man and a woman.

“I am the Republican Party. Or more appropriately, I am the future of the Republican Party.”

I, from the bottom of my heart hope you are the future of the Republican Party. Sadly, we are not in the future and we have a President who is a typical ‘old Republican’

“And if you think keeping me on your side is worth anything, you might want to re-think the idea of calling me a bigot or a Nazi or spewing hatred at me.”

An unfair generalization. I personally have never told anyone they were a bigot, Nazi, or made any other comments of hatred toward those who voted/vote Republican. I express my views about George Bush, and if anyone takes that personally, I apologize, but just as with religion, I will never tell a person they’re stupid for believing in God or push my non-belief on them. Everyone has the right to their opinion and though I may not agree with them, I will NEVER verbally abuse them for it. I can’t deny there are people who exist that do resort to calling people names and insulting them, but it happens on both sides, not just the “left.”

“The steady stream of hate, lies and vitriol from the American left has hardened the American right in ways you can’t begin to imagine. You tempered us. You forged us in the fire of your hate, and you made us stronger than we ever could have without your steady litany of bile and complaint.”

I’m sorry, but I totally disagree. I feel the lies and greed of the current and past Republican party/ies has instilled a great disrespect in those who are considered “left” or “independent” and they have fueled the hate.

“Before Moore burst forth with his theories of 9/11 conspiracies, “seven minutes,” blood for oil, Taliban pipelines etc., very little actual criticism was levied at Bush beyond the misguided notion that something errant happened in Florida.”

Again, I disagree. Bush’s record was there, his failures and mistakes, there. It was never hidden, and I truly believe the majority of people know that. I am not defending Moore, but he only put the facts together in one big lump and marketed it. The information was already out there, he didn’t make up lies about the administration; he didn’t expose things that weren’t true. I bet Republicans wouldn’t complain if there was a movie that exposed all of Kerry’s faults or failures.

Continued in next post…

“9/11 would still have happened and we might have had a chance at keeping some of that unity we all felt…”

I do not totally agree that 9/11 would have still happened. I feel Bush Sr. was also fuel for the attack and Bush Jr.’s induction pushed it over the edge. I also feel Moore didn’t diminish the unity Americans once felt, we diminished it. Once things settled down, people got back to their normal way of life, doing their everyday things and 9/11 was pushed to the backs of our minds. Sure it was there, but there was no longer an immediate threat and we continued going on as before.

“But then you started taking those messages into the political arena as though they had validity. And most of America looked at you like you just grew a third eye right in front of them. And still you persisted, getting more and more hateful, telling more lies, spinning out-of-context elements and juxtaposing any and every situation in order to try to hammer home your talking points. No matter what the discussion, you brought it back to one of Moore’s talking points. If the topic did not fit your need, you forced it, or just ignored it altogether and ranted away.”

Those messages were in the “political arena” already. And, as for telling lies, please, tell me in all honesty Bush isn’t a liar or hasn’t lied. And, I have never tried to “hammer home” a “talking point.” As I stated before, I speak my mind about Bush and I apologize if it offends anyone. Yes, I have countered statements people have made about Bush, but correct me if I’m wrong, that’s called debating. And I have never debated anyone in a demeaning way, but I have simply offered my opinion and given the facts I know. I also have never brought it back to Moore’s points because I am aware he is not trusted by a lot of people, which gives me more credibility. I do not dispose of topics that don’t “fit my need.” If someone has one up on me on a point, so be it, I do not force it, ignore it or continue to “rant away.” I speak what is valid and listen to those whose opinions differ.

“You never stopped for a minute to consider the fact that you might be wrong.”

I do not trust any politicians, for all I know Kerry could have gotten into office and broken his words as well, but I do not feel this country would be in worse shape for it. Yes, I could be wrong in feeling Kerry could have begun to turn around the deficit, I could be wrong in feeling he had a plan to get our troops home as quickly as possible, but I KNOW Bush has been wrong and made the wrong decisions for 3 and 1/2 years now. A lot of people have considered this situation a “lesser of two evils.”

“You took this new radicalism so far that your candidate for President, a man who is guided by polls, took a look around and said ‘Oh, I get it. There is energy around this new radical hate of the President. I will base my message not only around my questionable service, but around this new radical hatred, even if most of it is baseless or contradicts what I said just six or twelve months ago.’”

Speaking of questionable service, please, do you really want to go there? Bush’s questionable service is almost endless and for radical hatred, throughout the debates and outside of the debates, the Bush campaign’s focus was to instill fear in American’s if Kerry got into office and hold onto falsities and I can’t even begin to count the contradictions of the Bush administration. Recently I watched some of the 2000 debate between Gore and Bush and wow, as it turns out the things Bush said he would improve or do or not do turned out to be lies! Such as tax cuts for the rich, such as improving Social Security. Hasn’t happened.

Continued in next post…

“I see that he doesn’t care, and to be honest, I bet you don’t either. And that’s another reason why you lost. You ignored the voices of those who would die to protect you. Let me say that again in a different way. There are a few million men and women who have volunteered to give their very lives to protect you. Can you even grasp the enormity of that concept? After 9/11, knowing there was going to be a military response, hundreds of thousands of people volunteered to join the military to defend you. TO protect you. To take whatever action they could to try to prevent your death in another terrorist attack. They are willing to die for you, and you ignored them. You treated them like mindless pawns. You used them and then tried to elect a man that has betrayed them time and time again.”

Don’t even go there. That’s a lot of nerve claiming we “ignored the voices of those who died to protect” us and that we don’t care. Just because there are many of us who feel going into Iraq when Bin Laden should be the focus isn’t the right decision, DOES NOT mean we don’t care about our troops! I am grateful for our troops and their bravery and am truly saddened by those who have lost their lives or people who have lost loved ones. I just wish they were fighting against the terrorist who is responsible for claiming the lives of the people who were lost in the Twin Towers, the airplanes, the Pentagon. But the focus wasn’t Bin Laden, the focus was Saddam and even today, Bin Laden is still alive and kickin’ and I’m sure planning the next attack. Then what? With so many of our troops in Iraq, what defense are we going to have? With our over-extended military, how are we going to get more troops to defend us at home? Um, a draft maybe? And, sorry, but Bush is the one who has treated our troops as mindless pawns! He briefly rushed into Afghanistan then left it in the hands the people who attacked us in the FIRST PLACE! He then rushed our troops into Iraq for SADDAM! What happened to Bin Laden? Oh yeah, Bush said he didn’t know where he was and that Bin Laden wasn’t a concern of his, and you can QUOTE ME on that! If anything, it is obvious Bush doesn’t care about our troops! So many men and women have died, both Military and in the 9/11 attacks and Bin Laden is still out there! He is STILL a threat, 3 years later!

“Regardless of your position on Iraq, whether it was warranted or not, they have a position, and that position is overwhelmingly in support of Bush, the idea of the war, the execution of the war and the goal to stay until the work is finished. And you ignored them. Worse, you ridiculed them. You called them “kids” and “children.””

I respect the troops who are willing to stay in Iraq and complete the goal; I do from the bottom of my heart! As I said before, I just wish they were fighting the terrorist responsible for 9/11! I have no idea where you get off saying we ridiculed our troops! Never once have I heard ANYONE ridicule our men and women! And the term “kids” I believe applies to those who have died before they had the chance to see their 21st birthday! Before they were able to have children, get married, buy a house, live the “American dream.”

“And that brings it back to the hate and bile that poured forth from the left, the hate and bile that is still pouring out today, perhaps at an even greater rate.”

And from the “right.” Hate is everywhere; don’t just pawn it off on the “left.” I hear hate pouring out from the “right” as well. It isn’t one sided as you seem to believe.

“Talk to me. Treat me with respect. And you just might find yourself with the most powerful ally you can imagine: someone who shares a vision of a more free, more perfect America.”

Please, I hope you take your own advice and do the same for those who oppose your opinion.

And lastly, I’m not against Republicans, I’m against Bush and his ideals.

*I use the term I for all of those who agree with my opinion, whether you be “left,” “right,” or “independent.”

i could take you more seirously if you used correct grammar. or you could just get your head out of your ass.
most of us leftwingers are upset about the loss, sure. but we aren’t going around sobbing about it because that would be immature and a waste of time that could be sent accomplishing greater things like getting passports to leave this place. i think that you republicans could tone it down a bit, quit rubbing it in our faces. you won! we got it! we understand. now leave us be, to our misery or whatever it is that we feel. the wound is deep and no amount of salt you rub in it will make things any better. so go grab your gun and kill some deer, bash the head in of some homosexual and burn down abortion clinics. because that’s what God wants you to do. Him and his nation of war-obsessed tyrants that couldn’t form a good argument without smoke blowing out their ears.

In your face, lahoo-zaher.

Still doing the happy dance. And why?

Because of the vitriolic rhetoric being spewed by you fuckfaces on the left, exemplified by Teddy “Swimmer” Kennedy, Howard “the Duck” Dean, and Nancy “Wicked Witch of the Far West” Pelosi.

You made your beds, and you don’t get to complain if they’re a little lumpy for your tastes.

crispnite;
My god, could you whimper more?  Here’s a novel thought, if you don’t want your poor little feelings hurt then don’t torture yourself by going to a right-of-center blog sites, or, better yet, don’t open yourself up to ridicule by responding with such a sniveling retort. 
You compound the problem by using what I refer to as a “drive-by snipe” by stating, “so go grab your gun and kill some deer, bash the head in of some homosexual and burn down abortion clinics. because that’s what God wants you to do. Him and his nation of war-obsessed tyrants that couldn’t form a good argument without smoke blowing out their ears.” That’s the way to heal, be mature, move-on and maintain an open dialogue with people who hold different views and values….incidentally, aren’t you Lefties the party of open-mindedness and acceptance?  Try some self-examination before going on your moronic tirade!

Sincerely,

S.Standridge

Oh, by-the-by – if you’re going to criticize people for poor grammar skills, make certain you know how to punctuate properly and try hitting spell check periodically…it works!  That kind of self-absorbed critique makes you look small and inconsequential!

JimK,

While I do believe this to be a wonderfully written piece, as a liberal Democrat who did indeed vote for Kerry, I obviously disagree with some points. While it is undeniable that there are those in the Left party who take an innapropriate and immature approach to the election there are most certainly members of the Right who participate in the same ridiculous mudslinging and hate spewing that has become all too familiar in modern politics. To try and pin the blame on the whole of the political left is both immature and entirely counter-productive. This is a problem for the entire electoral process that does nothing but undermine the legitimacy of any election, and must be eliminated as a practice from BOTH parties. On that note, I personally look forward to more thought-provoking pieces that can hopefully inspire respectful, intelligent debates.

Shane Morrison

I like Michael Moore and I don’t like Michael Moore. Many times he sticks his nose where he shouldn’t… I’m just saying, just sometimes, Michael does a good job.

I like Michael Moore and I don’t like Michael Moore.

Thanks for clearing that up for us. Clearly, there are many who will be sleeping better at night having learned your position on this issue. If ever you should feel the need to make yourself similarly clear on other issues, please don’t hesitate to unburden that heavy load.

However, in the meantime, you might want to check in with your village before they think you’ve abandoned them and place an ‘Idiot Wanted’ ad…

I’m sorry Drumwaster. I am sure you are sleeping better now…
Anyway, you are what you are and I won’t say what because you know it.
YOU just can’t look at the big picture. You are just a bunch of mixed people, ignorant and patriotic. You are so blinded by your own flag that you cannot see what is really happening in/with your own country and who controls it (not to mention why).
I cannot stress it enough, ignorant. I know, you love your country, you want it to be the best in the world but enough is enough. Your favorite hobby is waging wars. Everyone knows it, everyone accepts it, and you know why? Oh, wait, you’re an American, you should know why…
You (the US) have done some bad things. Don’t worry, it won’t be forgotten and when the wheel will spin you will suffer the consequences. There is no other way.
You like to look at the numbers… “bush won wyoming 69% to 29%”. They manipulate you. They manipulate Bush. And you have the impression you’re in a free country. Ignorant.
Oh, I nearly forgot. I checked with my village. Sleep tight Drumwaster.

One more thing before I return to my village. Update your IP list in your blog. It’s not even remotely accurate.

When the kraut start talking about the atrocities others’ countries have cause you can do nothing but laugh.  Don’t you have some jews to go gas, or how about go make monkey noises at the black players in your soccer matches.  That’s the high society of europe.

WTF?  What’s with the foreign interest lately of this two-and-a-half year old post?  The last three before our new friend galin were spammers, now this?

Idiots, i swear to God.

ignorant…

NO U!

Oh, I nearly forgot. I checked with my village.

That ‘whoosh’ you hear is the insult passing just over your head and below your belly button.

Maybe you should have that rectofossal ambiguity checked out. (Fossa being Latin for “hole in the ground”.)

Don’t you just hate politics? I do… Talk talk and talk again, I am not against talking but when I see examples like this one listed above I am just sick of it. Why can’t we see something constructive? These things are beyond my understanding.