From here.
Edited By GORDON on 1146790444
State of the Union, 2006
-
thibodeaux
- Posts: 8056
- Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm
The quote in the post was from "My Cousin Vinnie."
I am sooooo sick and tired of the party lines bullshit and can someone explain to me how this is thought to be a winning tactic by the Dems? They lost by a lot in the last election. How exactly do they think they will win the next one if they don't do something to appeal to the MAJORITY that disagrees with their politics?
Although, I'll admit that I'm kind of looking forward to seeing Hillary and Kerry go head to head. That's going to get ugly.
I am sooooo sick and tired of the party lines bullshit and can someone explain to me how this is thought to be a winning tactic by the Dems? They lost by a lot in the last election. How exactly do they think they will win the next one if they don't do something to appeal to the MAJORITY that disagrees with their politics?
Although, I'll admit that I'm kind of looking forward to seeing Hillary and Kerry go head to head. That's going to get ugly.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
You mean like... graphically or like... mean?The quote in the post was from "My Cousin Vinnie."
I am sooooo sick and tired of the party lines bullshit and can someone explain to me how this is thought to be a winning tactic by the Dems? They lost by a lot in the last election. How exactly do they think they will win the next one if they don't do something to appeal to the MAJORITY that disagrees with their politics?
Although, I'll admit that I'm kind of looking forward to seeing Hillary and Kerry go head to head. That's going to get ugly.
You mean like... graphically or like... mean?
I will have nightmares about that, thank you.
Sure, but Bush is in charge now, mid-terms come up in November, people associate with Pres with the party...
That is correct.
Remember, when most people talk about politics in the 80s or 90s, they don't discuss who controlled the Congress or who was on the Supreme Court. They say "Reagan freed the hostages" or "Things were so good under Clinton."
They are the face of the government during those times, good or bad. Thus, the Dems are going to shove down our throats that we have it really bad right now and everyone in the world hates us, all because of Bush. At least, that'll be what they say until November 8th, 2008.
Personally, I hope that no matter who runs for the Dems, at least one person has the balls to say to the candidate during one of the debates: "It's been 8 years of Bush and the world is still here contrary to what your party tried to make us all believe. You either lied or you don't know what you're talking about, which is it?"
Although, I'd bet the answer to that question would begin with: "Thanks to out brave efforts in Congress..."
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Just opposing Bush is not a platform.
You should've filled Kerry and the Dems in on that in 2003.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Are we really as bad off as all the talking heads like to make us out to be? I'm personally better off now than I was in Clinton's terms and even better than during most of Bush's first term. I don't usually associate the president with anything related to how I'm doing since that is a bit more local than what he has influence over.