|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Still think Silvio Berlusconi is a winner? (Reply to this comment)
by thewasp
Oh well, ten minutes is a long time in politics. I've read enough now to add you to my WOT, regardless.
Cheers,
Jason Galbraith
(thewasp)
|
Jul 27 '06
3:58 pm PDT
|
|
Belatedly-- (Reply to this comment)
by gaviidae
---found your list of winners and losers, and I think it's LOADED with great insights. VERY glad I phinally phound it!
Gavia
|
Jan 23 '05
11:23 am PST
|
|
Re: It's premature. (Reply to this comment)
by gaviidae
Vicfar sez:
Your list of winners and losers simply highlights the sickening mentality that is spreading in the US more than ever before.
Vic's comment AGAIN reveals HIS sickening mentality!
Gavia
|
Jan 23 '05
11:16 am PST
|
|
Begging Indulgence (Reply to this comment)
by DAnneC
. . . in light of our differing political views. But the biggest losers by far are the American people.
Darla
|
Jan 15 '05
2:33 pm PST
|
|
- (Reply to this comment)
by Sordid-1
LOSERS: Election-contest lawyers. Oh, well, even sitting and waiting is billable time, right, boys?
I was as surprised as anyone that Kerry opted to lose with grace. However, this Kerry quote from CNN today flashed me back to what "coulda been."
In an interview with WCVB-TV, Kerry said, "Fifty-thousand votes -- we'd be in a different place, having a different conversation," a reference to Ohio, which decided the race.
All I could think was that the "different place" and "different conversation" was in a courtroom rationalizing excuses to throw away the 100,000 extra Bush votes that would have made the margin obtainable.
S-1
|
Nov 17 '04
3:50 pm PST
|
|
FOOKIN' BRILLIANT, LAD!!!!!!!! (Reply to this comment)
by green1
Brilliant analysis; I agreed with probably all of it.
"Pajamahadeen": I can't wait to see that in Webster's!
Right on about Andrew Sullivan. I've thoroughly enjoyed his blog over the last few years, but his endorsement of Kerry was beyond perplexing and disappointing.
Green1
|
Nov 06 '04
7:57 pm PST
|
|
50 million voters might take issue with you! (Reply to this comment)
by mrvincent
100k the other way in Ohio - would you have posted a concession letter here.
|
Nov 06 '04
7:03 am PST
|
|
Vitty will never "get it" (Reply to this comment)
by ebrown2
Russ, from the Belmont Club
"I find it amazing that folks who call themselves "progressive", out of hatred for Bush, feel that it would be better if mysogenistic, Islamo-facist thugs prevailed in Afganistan and Iraq. These same folks, who in "solidarity" with the Palestinians make common cause with groups like Hamas that execute homosexuals and (female) adulterers by stoning (as the Sharia commands), then accuse Bush - the scourge of the Islamo-facists - of homophobia for political gain.
The American and European left has abandoned the indigenous left* and progressive groups in Iraq and Afganistan. The Left, which used to have a radical programme calling for human emancipation from tyranny, has failed to recognize the radicalism of Bush and the Republicans, a radicalism equal to that of Lincoln's and the Republicans of times past. Destroying dangerous tyrannies and replacing them with consensual governments in an attempt to drive a stake into the heart of Islamofascism (much as we drained the fascist swamps 60 years ago) is a radical and progressive policy that the Left should support. Instead the Left has adopted a reactionary pose out of fear - fear that such shibboleths like "multiculuralism", "capitalist exploitation", and "3rd-world moral superiority" will be exposed as Emperors without clothes.
It is time for the Left to engage in some real soul-searching and ask themselves "Who have we got into bed with?" When OBL starts talking like a Michael Moore script and uses DNC talking points, it is time to reflect on what are the basic moral values that animate the Left, or if there are any moral values at all left in the Left. Until this happens I hope we never get with their program."
from:
http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2004/11/cormallen-recent-presidential-election.html
* (a good example of such abandonment would be the Western anti-war left's silence regarding such anti-Islamofascist African leftists as Nobel Prizewinner Wole Soyinka
http://www.digitalnpq.org/archive/2003_winter/soyinka.html
and the great Senegalese Marxist author and film-maker Ousmane Sembene, two men who have absolutely no love for Western corporatism, but truly LOATHE the racism and reactionary repression of women found in extremist Islamic circles.-Ernest)
|
Nov 04 '04
8:34 pm PST
|
|
Re: It's premature. (Reply to this comment)
by rooster3888
The US has sunk to a new low, where we can no longer be sure that our elections are honestly run
First, I don't like Bush much. I didn't vote for him. At the same time though, I am somewhat amazed at the gaping jaws of some Kerry supporters who simultaneously lash out with comments like, "I can't believe Americans are so stupid, ignorant, bigoted, etc. that they would re-elect Bush," and speak as if they are in denial, insinuating that there was voter fraud to the tune of 4 million votes, even though the evidence of any such fraud is extremely shaky at best -- if there is any at all.
For people who accuse Bush of being arrogant, I can't quite fathom why his opponents would adopt an attitude that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid and ignorant, and that if Bush was re-elected, it must have been because there was some fraud. He couldn't have won fairly! No way.
Face it, 59 million people, many of them neither bigoted, nor stupid, nor ignorant, voted for Bush. I was not one of them. But that is the case.
And how about, instead of searching for fraud, we look at the Democratic Party, and John Kerry who, when facing a man who p!ssed away billions of dollars in surplus, lost thousands of jobs, alienated our allies, and started a war, could not convince a majority of the people that he is even not as bad as George W. Bush. John Kerry did not even need to prove he would be a good president. He merely had to prove he would not be a bad one. And he failed.
If you're going to look somewhere, look at that. Not to toot my own horn here, but from the moment Kerry was nominated, I said he was just about the worst candidate to face off against Bush. I hoped he would prove me wrong, but with the exception of the debates (where he shined), he ran a campaign that I can only say was atrocious. He looked like an amateur.
Face it. John Kerry, and the Democratic Party, blew it.
|
Nov 04 '04
7:25 pm PST
|
|
FNC... (Reply to this comment)
by plorentz
I'm not sure that Fox News Channel is that much of a winner. Now that Bush has won his second term in a largely indisputable contest (even if Kerry wanted to fight Ohio, he was working against a massive - relatively speaking - 3% margin in the popular vote), and Republicans have become the indisputable champions of both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court, what does Fox have left to really fight for.
Not just that, but in the face of CNN's epic incompetence on Election Night (who though Wolf Blitzer could get any worse?), Fox not only have dominance in terms of ratings and (quite incredibly) credibility.
Which begs the question: What does Fox have left to fight for? To me, the network has always seemed to thrive on projecting a state of siege to its viewers. In the next four years, I think it'll become increasingly difficult for them to do that - because they've kicked all their opponents' asses so handily, the fight becomes increasingly less interesting to watch. And when it becomes less interesting, fewer people will watch.
Unless, there's a major shift in the mid-term elections (highly unlikely), I see Fox's ratings plateauing at best.
-Paul
|
Nov 04 '04
6:00 pm PST
|
|
It's premature. (Reply to this comment)
by vicfar
We will be able to put it all in perspective at the end of the Bush era, in four years.
Your list of winners and losers simply highlights the sickening mentality that is spreading in the US more than ever before. It's all about winning or losing, and forget the rules. There is no shred of morality in much of the Bush camp. The US has sunk to a new low, where we can no longer be sure that our elections are honestly run...and it's surreal to see self-proclaimed intellectuals such as yourself celebrate the whole thing as a victory of democracy.
Vittorio
|
Nov 04 '04
5:58 pm PST
|
|
.... (Reply to this comment)
by mrkstvns
"LOSERS: Election-contest lawyers. Oh, well, even sitting and waiting is billable time, right, boys?"
Now now, no kickin' thy brethren!
M
|
Nov 04 '04
4:56 pm PST
|
|
|
|
