Ahh Danny boy Rather. Putting the BS in CBS.
Oh, give me a break, Berkeley. I know it is traditional to engage in any political discussion around here with a “well look at the other side! look what they’ve done!”, but there is no comparison between the frothing at the mouth Bush provokes on the left and the ever smaller blind adoration he provokes on what’s left of the right that’s desperate enough to support him outright. From the day he got into office the entire left coast imploded, multiplying exponentially after 9/11. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so crippling to the occasional reasoned opposition found among them.[/quote]
Oh, okay, “North Carolina”, the left has more hate than the group attempting to put disenfranchisement into the constitution.
Also, jackass, I was in Brooklyn on 9/11. Where the fuck were you?
Oh, give me a break, Berkeley. I know it is traditional to engage in any political discussion around here with a “well look at the other side! look what they’ve done!”, but there is no comparison between the frothing at the mouth Bush provokes on the left and the ever smaller blind adoration he provokes on what’s left of the right that’s desperate enough to support him outright. From the day he got into office the entire left coast imploded, multiplying exponentially after 9/11. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so crippling to the occasional reasoned opposition found among them.[/quote]
How many famous liberals have called for Bush’s assassination? Just asking, seeing how there was an awful lot of them on the right in the 1990s.
Oh, okay, “North Carolina”[/quote]
Uh, Berkeley is a CITY, Berkeley. North Carolina is a STATE.
Obviously, you’re dumb. Can I call you “Berkeley”? Hee hee. :wink:
As entertaining as it must be to see enemies and attacks everywhere, I fail to see where this particular smear comes into play. I wasn’t defending or promoting Bush, or attacking his opponents, as much as simply stating that you’d have to be insane or, alternately, in Berkeley to think that there was any equivalency between the apoplexy Bush has caused on the left and virtually any equivalent counterexample. You would obviously be a case in point, and thus probably unable to do anything more than rage about Bush/Hitler comparisons at this point. But feel free to perceive an attack and melt down accordingly.
Also, jackass, I was in Brooklyn on 9/11. Where the fuck were you?
Philadelphia. I fail to see your point. Is this some kind of “who was closer to 9/11 dick measuring contest”, arbitrarily brought about by general leftist insecurity?
But if that’s the case, I believe where you were is less important than what you did about it. I’m guessing you…were as upset as everybody else and then went on about your life, blathering in righteous indignation on internet forums.
Well, I am not sure about all of that but the left has made comments regarding Bush that include comparing him to Hitler, saying he concocted a war for political gain, calling him a liar, advancing theories he knew about 9/11 ahead of time, calling him a murderer, calling him a war criminal, calling him a coward for not serving in Vietnam, and saying he betrayed this country and the list goes on and on and on.
And do you know what the most interesting thing about many of those things I just stated? The fact that several of those statements were in fact made by some of your parties leaders, senators, former presidential candidates, and predential primary candidates. This whole thing was I will admit started by the right when they went after Clinton the way they did, however I have never seen such vitriol and extreme hatred spewed by actual congressmen and party leaders as I have heard against our current president. It is actually unprecedented that SO MANY people in your parties positions of power have slimed a sitting president in the open with such shamelessness the way they have done with Bush. They have in fact “raised the bar.”
Except when it was Clinton. I’d be curious how exactly you’d consider an impeachment hearing less of a smear than partisan mudslinging.
Of course when the right slammed Clinton, the economy was great, there were no wars, etc. Now that there are serious problems in the country and the world, you’re surprised people are targeting the president more, particularly one fond of saying things like, “Bring it on?”
Except when it was Clinton. I’d be curious how exactly you’d consider an impeachment hearing less of a smear than partisan mudslinging.
Of course when the right slammed Clinton, the economy was great, there were no wars, etc. Now that there are serious problems in the country and the world, you’re surprised people are targeting the president more, particularly one fond of saying things like, “Bring it on?”[/quote]
Oh, were they calling Clinton a traitor and trying to advance theories that Clinton knew about atrocities ahead of time (ie. Howard Dean)? What were they saying other than he lied under oath (which he did) and that was the reason why an impeachment process should go forward. Thats a little different than painting a man a murderer, a traitor, and conconcting a war for political gain. In terms of sheer viciousness, like I said, the left has raised the bar.
Are you trying to say that your side are the good guys in this regard? That the use of smears and innuendo is only being used by the Dems?
Can you quote from Rush to confirm this?
He was a draft dodging traitor who killed Vince Foster, lobbed bombs to draw attention away from other issues, who has an illegitimate black son… oh c’mon, do I really need to continue? Try this site.
Thats a little different than painting a man a murderer, a traitor, and conconcting a war for political gain. In terms of sheer viciousness, like I said, the left has raised the bar.
Actually, that’s exactly what the right said about Clinton.
[quote=“Peter_Frazier”]
Are you trying to say that your side are the good guys in this regard? That the use of smears and innuendo is only being used by the Dems?
Can you quote from Rush to confirm this?[/quote]
No, read what I said again. I clearly stated that all of this stuff was started by the right under the Clinton administration and while plenty of crap is spewed from the right regarding Kerry there has NEVER been the vitriol spewed by actual high ranking senators, congressman, and so forth against a sitting president as we have seen against Bush. Like I said twice already they have raised the bar and the hatred spewed in the open by actual politicians and party leaders has been practically unprecedented, at least not since the civil war. They really hate Bush with a passion and many think he is some kind of incarnation of the devil or something. The democrats have gone batshit, practically foaming at the mouth with vitriol.
Right.
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/03/31/bill.press/
Their leader is Watermelon Dan Burton, who of course got his nickname by inviting reporters to his back yard and shooting a watermelon to prove (how?) that Vince Foster did not commit suicide, a wacko theory he still believes, despite at least four investigative conclusions to the contrary.
Then there’s that whole “putting unmitigated bullshit accusations in the Senate cloakroom during the impeachment trial about stuff like Juanita Broadrick, without giving Clinton any way to respond” thing.
Are you for real?
That’s why the Democrats got Zell Miller for the keynote speech at their convention.
Oh, wait.
I have never heard of watermelon Dan. He sounds like a kooky guy. There are certainly enough true loons on the left as well. I certainly can’t think of when he had a major position as a Republican senator during the Clinton administration or when he was a former vice president or when he was a republican primary candidate during the Clinton years. Perhaps you can point that out to me? I am just curious because for some reason you brought up this loon and his band of wackos as “proof” of a comparison with some of the democratic leading members of the senate, a former vice president, and a democratic primary candidate. As far as putting accusations into some senate “cloakroom” you are comparing that to what these high ranking democrats have said in press conferences, on the floor of the senate, and in the open about Bush? Please provide me with some comparative statements by high ranking Republican members of the Senate and the House, a quote or two from a former Republican Vice president, as well as a few Republican primary candidates during the Clinton presidency made to the press and so forth and then we will see if I am “for real.”
You do realize that there are power brokers other than Senators and Vice-Presidents, right? Why should those power brokers dirty their hands with ridiculous accusations against a mediocre President when most of their rank-and-file followers are already batshit insane and making these claims for them? You might want to tune into Conservative talk radio sometime… those aren’t some wacko fringe element in the current Conservative movement… they’re a frighteningly common stream of thought.
That’s why the Democrats got Zell Miller for the keynote speech at their convention.
Oh, wait.[/quote]
First of all I would like to point out that he is a member of YOUR party, not mine who is frankly disgusted with what he has seen the democrats do in their hatred fervor of the president. This vitriol spewed by the left and thiner willingness to politicize anything and everything to bring down the president is in fact why Zell Miller spoke at the convention. He didn’t leave the party, the party left him.
True he was angry, but where was the vitriol specifically? Did he accuse Kerry of being a war criminal (actually Kerry admitted that he was one on the Dick Cavot show)? What exactly did he accuse Kerry of? He questioned Kerrys judgment and Kerry’s abysmal senate record as well as Kerrys confusing flip-flopping as often as he changes underwear. These things are perfectly acceptable and hardly what I would call vitriolic. Here is the transcript:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/convention2004/zellmiller2004rnc.htm
Please point out to me the vitriol I am talking about that has been spewed by the left these past 4 years in his speech- that Bush is a traitor, concocted a war for political gain, knew about 9/11 ahead of time, and on and on. I can’t seem to find it in that speech. Its almost all an attack on a politicians judgment which is necessary in a democracy if we are to decide who best to lead us.
You want malicious? Look no further than the smear campaign run against John McCain when he ran against Bush for the Republican presidential ticket.
Who the Republicans chose to deliver the keynote. The Democrats had long written him off as a loon and certainly didn’t invite him to their party.
And let’s see, Tom Delay is in YOUR party, and Trent Lott is in YOUR party, hence all Republicans are racists loons. Isn’t that how it works?
He didn’t leave the party, the party left him.
Of course a year earlier, this is what he said about Kerry a couple of years ago: “My job tonight is an easy one: to present to you one of this nation’s authentic heroes, one of this party’s best-known and greatest leaders – and a good friend.”
You might consider that, rather than honor the party that put him in the position he is in today, Zell Miller decided to go out in a blaze of Zell Miller-focused glory.
True he was angry, but where was the vitriol specifically?
Did you see the speech?
Kerrys confusing flip-flopping as often as he changes underwear.
Keep those talking points coming. It’s good to see indepdendent thinking on your part.
Please point out to me the vitriol I am talking about that has been spewed by the left these past 4 years in his speech- that Bush is a traitor, concocted a war for political gain, knew about 9/11 ahead of time, and on and on. I can’t seem to find it in that speech. Its almost all an attack on a politicians judgment which is necessary in a democracy if we are to decide who best to lead us.
Using your own logic, all of those attacks on Bush are necessary in a democracy because they are helping us decide who’s best to lead us. Or are you saying it’s only okay to call someone a traitor if he’s not “your guy?”
And really, if you think it’s the mainstream left spewing some of those conspiracy theories, I can find a few nutjobs on the right who I guess I can then say you support, and your party supports, and George W. Bush supports.
I love this silly new tactic of accusing Democrats of being virulently angry – sure, most of us dearly want that war criminal out of office just as we’d want to see any crook brought to justice, but I have yet to see ANY Democrat act like the thugs of the Free Republic and LGF forums, who offer up inarticulate fantasies involing their gun collections and pussy liberals at the drop of a hat.
The point is about you making idiotic assumptions that other people’s lives fit into your preconceived little boxes.
But if that’s the case, I believe where you were is less important than what you did about it. I’m guessing you…were as upset as everybody else and then went on about your life, blathering in righteous indignation on internet forums.
Stop guessing. Pay attention to something besides your own over-inflated ego.