Who will stand up and say it?

Just finished watching Bill Mahr; Cornel West, Alec Baldwin and Whoopi Goldberg were on the panel tonight. Baldwin said something to the effect that those in power now have their lips super glued to the Christian right's ass; Whoopi said that she's mad--the Democrats don't have one ball between them; Dr. West (a religious man) said that the Bible is about justice and mercy, not greed and power. Everyone vehemently agreed that what is needed is SOMEONE to finally stand up and state the obvious--the Christian right has hijacked the politics in this country, morals and values are NOT what they are about. (I'm paraphrasing) Greed and power are not what the Bible is about. But WHO do we have that will stand up and say this? Who has the balls to point out that just because you say you're a Christian, it doesn't mean you actually are one. You don't have the right to ignore the rule of law, force everyone to live as you want, demonize any opinion other than you're own, subvert this country's history and constitution to pad your bank account, and corrupt the name of Jesus to the point that truly just and ethical people become uncomfortable saying His name.

Okay, so this has spun into a partial rant, but the question is still valid:

WHO IS GOING TO FINALLY HAVE BALLS ENOUGH TO POINT THIS SHIT OUT TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!! OUT LOUD AND WITH CONVICTION!!!

I'm a super pissed Charlyvi :mad:

but so far, nada.

does not give US attention on the matter.

That is the biggest problem. We have several people talking about the issues above, but Ruppert Murdoch and co. have hijacked America.

sad really. he does have the balls to stand up to the Repukes!

I went to his speech here in DC recently.. He spoke of this, rightwing loonies that don't have real values. He said he has met thousands through the red states, and he has set them straight! The time will come Dean will speak to the media.. I mean he told Air America Radio, to wait, and that "soon" he would do many on-air interviews and possible take calls himself! I'm giving Dan a chance, its been what.. 2 months... The media turns a good rally into a circus, we are better off making our own media, and we are!

he HAS to go to the field first. If you have a roadblock, you have to go AROUND it...pretty soon, they will run out of roadblocks, and the MSM will have to pay attention. Then it will be time to hammer away, and then the people will be ready to hear it....they are almost there too, I believe.

when he said that the MSM has put the gag order on Dean ever since he went on "Meet the Press" (I think)and said that media conglomerates like GE/NBC should be broken up as it stifles any notion of free press.

Nobody says it clearer than these people do themselves.

They may have been a vehicle for the neocons, but the wheels are coming off and no lemon-law will safe them.

If the fanatics outside Terri Schiavo's hospice didn't wake this country up, it's hopeless.

and things would get back to normal. I think we know what happened.

by the religious right pharisees.

Its more than the evangelistas..
its the neo-cons,american blue bloods,MM ,international power elites who have bizness ties with bush cartel
bet this the bush boot will kick his allies too..Its in the veins of most traitorous family bush..

It is who is going to stand up FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE and stand up to the slugs that are "controlling" our world, our nation, our media, our information? (IMHO)

The majority of people don't approve of what is happening, it is just that they don't have a voice, some one who will stand up to the weed and the repukes and the moral not/majority.

The majority of the American people don't have a clue what these people are like--it's totally unbelievable unless you follow it. If someone in a position to reach them would just grow some balls and SAY IT without fear, with true conviction, this country will not be lost.

were a couple of threads on it on DU.

...Everyone vehemently agreed that what is needed is SOMEONE to finally stand up and state the obvious--the Christian right has hijacked the politics.....

They only call it that. They are the Christian wrong.

Parents' and Grandparent's GOP a bad name!

:hi:

That's what I call them.

stated Christian, either right or wrong.

And it is truly sad that a Republican had to say what no Democrat will. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I MEAN.

last wednesday - I'm not sure what paper it was in but CSPAN's Washington Journal did a 1 hour int he segment on two opposing articles (both ont heir website at the time) one which was advice to Dems and one which was advice to Republicans - both solid, imo.

nt

truth and who will stand up to their evil schemes.

I'm not talking about Social Security--I think they're right about keepin mum on that, but when did we become cowards in the name of civility? We can't afford civility. WHEN DID WE STOP CALLING A WRONG A WRONG, OR CALLING A LIAR A LIAR?

but it is Clinton's fault. Even though Clinton knew he was being watched by the RWer's and they were out to destroy him and had tried for years to ruin him, he was so arrogant and so pompous that he allowed himself to be pleasured by an intern in the oval office "because he could" (his words).

The party was rendered impotent -- all of our candidates were suffering from comparisons to and associations with the immoral man who lied to the public about his indiscretions. Now don't beat me over the head, I know that he honestly answered the question asked according to the legal terms provided by the court, but he did not honestly answer the question. His pleasure castrated the party, they have no balls because they have spent years trying to recover from his lies.

What they don't realize is his lies are nothing compared to the lies of the weed and they need to stand up to the "moral" liars and for the American people.

:rant:

Of course, this is just my opinion, but yeah, I blame Clinton and I don't see him doing the party any favors today. I don't see Hillary doing us any favors either. She better get out of the center and over to the left.

I agree. But I've still got a soft spot for him--the problem being if he stands up and says tell the truth it sounds like sour grapes.

kiss the BFEE's collective asses!

They are evil and he and Hillary should not cling to them, they should point out how evil they are and push them away!

Every Democrat should push them away....and point out why.

until he was out of the Oval Office because his unchecked libido has given us exactly what we have today. He should have used his intelligence to come to the realization that he had a great big SEX target on his back...or at the very least, Hillary should have threatened him with whatever power she holds over him!

Clinton inadvertently energized and lent even more momentum to the 'Christian values run amok' wacko Far Right crowd (through the impeachment spectacle and all the perceived sleaze from it, and they used it to the hilt as did the media).

We should have won in 2000! (I know, but it should not have been that close.)

but why don't we take the fight to them? You mean we don't have any PI's around the country taking pictures of the "family values" crowd leaving a hotel suite? Then why the hell not? Only republicans like to believe who they vote for could also be a saint. We never do. Then the pictures should be released to the media. If the media won't do their job then release it to a blog. Get it out there.

Blow up the myths they tell themselves. If you show them, hard evidence, it's the only way they get it, they won't know which way is up. In fact unlike Dem's , it doesn't take much to confuse them.

I will offer my services to the DNC to teach them.

Howard Dean is doing fairly well but he has no media play. That's the problem. We need someone who can go on the rightwing shows and not be afraid. Be very clear and loud and fight them tooth and nail. We need our version of a young John Kerry.

Bill Mahr said on the show tonight, and Whoopi agreed, that the young Kerry would have won. I agree--back when he had fire in the belly. That's what we need, a leader with fire in the belly. The only problem is, when someone shows that fire, other Dems run away so they won't get scorched. WE NEED SOME SCORCHED DEMOCRATS!!

I'll be running for President around that time. :)

I know you meant that as a joke and I would love to vote for you in 2032. I can say that I used to swap messages with the President of the United States on DU way back in 2005. But we can't wait that long. I not even sure we can wait until 2012. If the neo-cons win one more election the country as we know it may be gone.

I once watched an old video on the CSPAN site of an interview with Kerry (you can find it on their site) and he was truly wonderful. He was very articulate, very clear and very on the ball. He didn't let the interviewer get him at all. It was a beautiful thing (he was talking about a book he had written).

should not be a publicly elected official...maybe not political at all...I wish we had a Billy Graham type. Jimmy Carter would be good, but he is not assertive enough...altho many moderate Christians respect him alot.

Where main stream Americans won't turn out to vote. Yes, we run the risk of a theocratic government imposed by the will of the minority on the majority.

Just like in England before we formed America.

After the Schiavo debacle, DeLay's corruption, and Chimpy's Social Security fiasco. But we still need someone on our side STRONG enough to call this religious fanaticism exactly what it is--a means to exert power over by the greedy over the needy.

under the busheviks we have:

government of the weedy, by the greedy, and for anybody-but the needy

:yourock: -- now, take a bow.

But they are cut off from each other. People stand up in their homes. People stand up on the streets. People stand up everywhere and everyday and announce that they do not buy into the right's advances. But there is no one there to hear them except their own circle of friends.

The interconnective web of our society has been taken over. It is the media. The media is supposed to serve us. Instead it serves the corporations. The corporations that benefit from us being dependent on them. The corporations that have no interest in us gathering together to solve our own problems.

The media gave us a display this week of why to fear the system. The system being our very own government. People forget that We The People are the government. The government is supposed to serve our interests. But the right has taught people to fear it and seek to dismantle it. This serves the corporations interests perfectly. A silenced and helpless public is dependent on them all the more.

Therefore the media does not cover the people standing up and demanding their country back. Unless those standing up play into the fear and descimation of a unified nation it will fall on deaf ears. It will go no further than a single voice can carry.

People stand up everyday. You just have to listen. They are there. We are there. Listen to them. You will recognise their call:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

And we are in the majority. This is what I'm saying--we need that central, unifying, courageous leader to voice our conviction. We need someone who will resonate, even through the corporate media. Someone who says such truths that most of America says "of course, that's what I've been thinking". But all of our leaders either compromise our convictions away or have no true courage. None of them would risk their position, so they rationalize their cowardice.

And they paid the price. The machine the right has created will simply not give them the spotlight. If a hero stands up and gives an inspiring speech and no one hears it what difference does it make?

Its really that simple. If there was a press that reached the people and presented the objective truth the left would have a chance. There would be heroes able to get their message heard. Ideas cannot spread without a method to spread them.

Fundamentalists have a natural advantage. Not only has the right coopted the media but the conservative churchs also exist as a strong distributer of their message. Liberal leaning churchs are simply not as efficient at distributing a single message. Each church directs its own sense of direction.

The left truly relies on objective prsentation of the facts. Without them the emotionalism of the right and their infrastructure simply dominate the distribution of ideology. So no matter how courageous the hero if they are not singing the rights song they will not be heard. Their message will die within earshot of the source.

I'm not being a smart ass here, I just don't know who has risked their position and lost. I know of people who have barely skirted the issue and lost, but more out ouf mealy mouthed compromise than forceful conviction.

We are not doomed, which is the feeling I get from your post. There is a vast well of people out there who do not feel this country is on the right track. All of us can remember dramatically different times just six years ago. What we need is a unifying voice, a voice that will cut through the media. Populism or whatever, once that voice is heard, nothing can stand against it. We are, at heart, a nation of rebels, that's why I find it so difficult to believe the Democratic party is so scared of their own potential.

But as an example just look at what happened to Dean. He tried to create a movement and the media evicerated him.

The critical point is that none of us will hear the voice of those brave enough to stand up. Not unless there is an infrastructure to bring it to the ears of the people. This has been going on for decades now. Those that want to fight the good fight have been trying all along. But their ability to reach the people continues to diminish.

Dean skirted around the rw christian issue--even tried to pander when he went down South. He ended up looking ridiculous.

I think the majority of this country is aching for someone to stand up to the right wing. MSM is in business for profit--if they find the "newest best thing" they will show it. Obama, for example. Even right wing pundits gave Obama kudos at the convention. I'm using him as an example. Sometimes in life, there are opportunities and truths so forceful and convincing they cannot be ignored. If MSM thought for a minute that their profits would lie with a left leaning candidate whom the majority of Americans support, despite MSM best efforts to trash him or her, they would flip loyalties in a nanosecond. We need the voice to accomplish this.

Also, don't mean to offend--just an honest disagreement!

:)

Dean is a creation of the current system. He is trying to make a difference within the system he has made his way up in. And it is a system that no longer gives voice to our issues. When he did start to speak up on those issues and began making a difference that was when he was felled.

We can disagree. We are both fighting for the same cause. We will find a way.

This may sound odd, but I think Dean became afraid of winning. When he realized he could actually win it, he began to hedge. Religion, for example. He should have told anyone asking that it was none of their business how he practiced his religion. That's just one example. I respect Dean tremendously, I think he makes a great party chairman. But, I honestly think when push came to shove, a part of him was overwhelmed. Who knows!

Not that it helps us, and he has since sold whatever soul and balls he did have.
But he called Robertson and Falwell "agents of intolerance" no one should pander too, how they use religion for money and power and so on.
Bush used that to call him a divider and finger pointer (as opposed to his self proclaimed uniter, problem solver self)

There was a real uproar and pundits immediately changed from believing there was a race to saying that was the end for McCain.

I'm not saying he is a great example but the memory popped up when reading your question of who spoke up and lost from it.

This will probably be a major reason McCain will never get the repuke nomination. The religious right will never accept him for dissing their false prophets since those guys never forgive or forget but only hate and seek revenge.

It will have to come from a Republican.

but I think a Democrat ought to be; Big Dog touched on it today when he said he was elected before the Southern white man realized Jesus was a repub (I'm paraphrasing). When I first read this, I wondered if it was his way of saying, STAND UP AND SHOW SOME BALLS!

But we all know what will happen, the hijacking religious right neocons with the help of the media will demonize them and will label them as just another partisan situation.

I posted this in the other 'angry' thread and it seems just as relevant here. Original Post: very well stated, IMO.

Anger is a good thing, a righteous thing, so long as it remains focused constructively. There is nothing the Right would like more than a reason to POLICE and oppress the Left more overtly than it does. We must remember, IT IS THEY WHO ARE BREAKING THE LAW. They have become a criminal class who see themselves as above and outside the laws that govern not only this land, but this Earth. We have laws that can deal harshly with criminals of whatever class, provided we can get them applied. That, of course is the trick.

Good phrase, though I would rather call it a return to the true paradigm. My hope of hope is that liberalism wins in the end--maybe in 06 or maybe 100 years from now, but it always wins in the end. Peace.

ARE the problem.

How you gonna out-bully the bullies with the bully pulpit?
Gonna be mighty hard





:bounce: :bounce:
---:wow:

to rape this nation in the name of greed and power.

and diffuses the groundswell of energy necessary to respond to the situation, that you raised in your initial question.

Tough talk and macho bluster might feel good at the time and get some folks excited for a time....looking for "who will stand up?"

and then it peters out....

and goes limp....

and you're left looking for the

Next Big Thing.....

Getting all hyped and excited and looking OUTward for the answer, ejaculating and getting soft yet again.

CAN WE FIND SOME NEW METAPHORS?

There is no out-bullying bullies, with or without a bully pulpit. The answer to your first question requires new modes of creative thought and action. AND LESS MACHO BULLSHIT.

And your metaphor is insulting. I am advocating that a Democrat stand up, publicly, to the religious right wackos in this country. I don't care how "creative" the approach is, as long as the truth comes out.

It's not an accusation, it's another way of looking at this.

You chose the metaphor.

When the truth comes out, it may not be "a" Democrat that stands up.

Dean and Kucinich both ran but were shrugged off by the DLC. Things will have to get better.. eventually.. I hope. :shrug:

That idea is so crazy.....it might just work!

He is a man of great moral character, an excellent speaker, he looks tough enough, does well with the ladies, he is witty and sharp.

hmmmm....

Anybody has his number?

that would be hard to overcome. the rw would slam him with a huge smear campaign. You thought Ol' Bill was a sex monster. He doesn't hold a candle to Mr. Baldwin. I do like him though. He was very sharp last nigh.

Sadly, no one seemed to notice. Remember his rants about fundamentalist preachers? He was put down by the party.

Remember he said was not going to listen to lectures from the right wing hypocrites anymore. Shh...Howard, you might offend someone.

I don't believe how many of you here do not realize he always did this.

We did have someone doing this, stump after stump, speech after speech. It was not tolerated.

"I want my country back. We want our country back. I am tired of being divided. I don't want to listen to the fundamentalist preachers anymore. I want America to look like America, where we are all included, hand in hand. We have a dream. We can only reach that dream if we are together."

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/2/1/64444/83014


Here is a long blog about it.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/001184.php

"Howard Dean has often been labeled the "prophet of rage." It's certainly true that he was an angry man -- angry at Bush, the war, the budget deficit, the mushrooming unemployment cloud, at all things that had gone badly wrong in three short years. This anger hit a chord with the popular imagination; dissatisfaction with Bush was high and Dean was the perfect protest candidate. Dean successfully channeled the anger of millions who felt apathetic and disenfranchised. He awoke voters and gave voice to the legions who intuitively questioned the policies of the present administration. He introduced serious dialogue to an administration whose every effort has been to deceive, distract and manipulate the masses. By talking about the misguided war in Iraq, the shameful lack of jobs, the destructive obese deficits, and the massive increase of our $7 trillion national debt, he caused America to question whether George W. Bush is the right man for the job."

Of course, the pundits claim Dean's "rage" undid him, that voters took a "second look," etc. etc. Nonsense really. The answer is much simpler. The DLC did not take kindly to this direct challenge. "Democrats are still so angry about Al Gore's loss in 2000 and the Iraq war that they simply will not stand for intramural squabbling," the New York Times quoted McAuliffe on February 17. "I'd much rather have a unified party with money in the bank." (He was singing a different tune in December.)

and I agree with the panel, but I DID hear Kerry speak about the true meaning of faith. I believe he DID win the election, but that it weas stolen.

The problem is, if the media doesn't cover it. it was "never said" even by folks here at DU. Search around on the internet; find good magazines and you will read these sentiments expressed.

I'm pissed, too, but I know there are people speaking out, and I know the message is agreed upon by the majority of American voters.

Did you see the West Wing episode that ended with Alan Alda saying something to the effect that if you ask your political leaders about religion you can "expect to be lied to?" That was the most profound "political/religious statement I have seen made in this country in years but very few of the people that needed to hear that message heard it!

So very true. The people who need to hear this stuff dismiss the show as "The Left Wing".

:sigh:

Generally, I think they're missing out on great writing (okay, the show's had its ups and downs and bumps in the road, but still...), then a point like that one about religion in politics gets made, and I really wish they were watching!

and the noteriety to get a commercial to this effect aired? I would bet money even Mel Gibson feels this way. The reality is it is time for those with noteriety, not just the DNC to step forward and help get the message out. I am tapped out! I have no more money to give to the cause and my "cause" keeps asking for more. They need to realize ordinary American citizens have an obligation to their families to make sure they don't end up in bankruptcy court and funds need to start coming in large amounts from those that have it to give.

No matter what the right tells you, they are very vulnerable to "hero worship." They are the ones watching these high profile individuals. Most liberals have long ago turned off their sets and realized the Oprah's and Alan Alda's of this world are no more human or enlightened than the rest of us, but they DO have the ability to fight the system by exposing it.

Liberal televison shows like the West Wing are not the forum for these statements. Reality shows like Extreme Home Makeover, American Chopper, or even NASCAR events are the place to make these statements. That's what the sheeple are watching!

with actual ideals. The problem is that most of the time such people aren't willing to play the game enough to get into positions of power. It seems that deals must be made, bargains struck, integrities compromised, etc. My guess is that many politicians start out thinking "it won't happen to me," but eventually they see that, in order to obtain X goal, they must compromise on Y issue. They sell off little bits and pieces of their soul without realizing it in order to get what they started out thinking was a greater good. Soon, they're just about soulless.

There are strong, charismatic leaders who are clear-spoken truthtellers with actual ideals, but I fear they'll never rise beyond the level of their congressional districts (I'm thinking of people like Cynthia McKinney and Maxine Waters and Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Jesse Jackson Jr.). I'm glad they're there, though.

that you are talking about.

In my book, the fact that he hasn't been in an elected position is a positive, because maybe he hasn't had to make the kind of soul-killing deals I hypothesized about above. I agree, too, that he at least from my limited knowledge does seem to possess those qualities.

The thing is, will he be allowed to do what he can do? Or is he such a threat to the Republican establishment now that there will be smear campaigns such as we've never seen before if he chooses to run again?... or is there a private aircraft crash in his future? I worry. Let's tell him not to fly when it's icy weather.

He has talked tough...I'd love to see him talk tougher still about the issues the O.P. brings up. I've seen him speak from the heart (apparently)--I'd love to see that even more.

I think that he is trying to get into a position where he will not so easily be discounted or diminished. Who knows with Dean as the DNC Chair, maybe an outsider will have a chance.

I urge you to learn more about Wes Clark, he really is the answer to what we need.

I'll never forget his comments about Bush "prancing around in a flight suit" come on who else has spoken that plainly.

He has said so many beautiful things, like when he quotes the Bible, it is from personal knowledge, he has been in several different churches during his lifetime. He understands things at such a deep level that it is refreshing, yet he communicates those things in a language that people don't get offended by - he is plain spoken and doesn't appear to be "affluent", as a matter of fact, he chose service of country for 30 years OVER personal gain and wealth and sacrificed his career and life as a General when it wasn't needed.

The man is an intellect as well as a hero as well as having the ability to communicate in simple direct yet not condescending or muddled terms.

Peace!

MSM just like they did to Dean.

http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/000083.php

THIS IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT TACTIC from the Tactical Assault Project

>snip<

Be Bold - from Tactical Assault Project

Here are some things that you should know about being BOLD:

* The bolder the lie, the better: The bolder it is, the more convincing it becomes and the more confident and truthful the liar appears. The sheer audacity distracts from the story's inconsistencies. Bush and Blair have truly taken this to heart.

* Nice guys finish last: When a person senses a weakness (niceness?) in another person, they instinctively lose respect for that person as a viable opponent. They start scheming, even if subconsciously, on how to take advantage of that weakness. This is one of those things that sounds terrible but fits perfectly into reality. I might be projecting a bit here. Nevertheless, Milquetoasts rarely have their day in the sun.

* Never Compromise: The bold never bend. It's not about being stubborn. It's about being confident in your position. People who are bold show a rigid strength, unwavering in the pursuit of their agenda, confident, unwilling to give an inch. The bold make the rules. The timid follow them. If someone senses your willingness to negotiate, compromise, back down, retreat or go on the defensive, they will instantly and instinctively enter the mode of the attacker. They will then have the upper hand.

* Boldness instills fear: Is it good to instill fear? Certainly in your opponents it is. Often in your subordinates. Rarely in your friends. Bold moves make you seem more powerful than you probably really are. It also casts an aura making you appear larger than life. Executed quickly and by surprise, the bold move instills fear and intimidates, setting a precedent that will automatically put people on the defensive in subsequent encounters. (Note: Not recommended for use in love-life)

* Enter the Room Boldly: Enter into every action with all fires burning. Enter timidly and you will inevitably fall to the demons of confusion and indecisiveness. Entering boldly creates clarity of purpose, vision for the future and focus on the objectives.

* Never Hesitate: The bold never hesitate. They work quickly and act decisively. Your hesitation is their time to think. Once they perceive your awkwardness, embarrassment and doubt, their sense of confidence instantly rises and their sense of respect for you instantly falls.

* Boldness separates you from the herd: It gives you presence while the timid fade into the background. Boldness draws attention.Those with attention have power. People stand in anticipation of what your next bold move might be.
Most people are not bold. For when bold acts are executed, there are consequences. Often negative. In reality, we may think of bold things but rarely bring them to fruition. Why is that? Generally, people want to avoid tension or conflict and be liked by everyone. People are concerned with what others will think of them. Often, the mere anticipation of criticism is enough to thwart any attempts at boldness.
How do the timid become bold? No one is born bold. It is a quality that must be developed. The only way to become bold is to act bold.With each act of boldness, it becomes easier and more natural. Once the power of boldness has been experienced, it becomes a growing taste within.
Be bold. Do something bold today.

As an experiment, engage someone in debate. Tell them that they are wrong (you choose the subject). Tell them why they are wrong and tell them that they should be embarrassed for thinking what they think. Be unapologetic. Be Bold.
As you boldly move forward, remember these things:
* Whatever the consequences are of being bold, the consequences of being timid are worse. Timidity lowers your value and creates doubt and obstacles.
* Problems that arise from bold moves can be hidden with even bolder moves.
In addition, it is important to note that timidity is not completely worthless. Strategically feigned, timidity (or "folksiness" in Bush-Speak) can build trust. This trust can be used to lure people in where you can then pounce on them with boldness.

You're not in Kansas anymore.

(snip)
So did "Downing Street" apologize for deceiving the world and presenting heavily plagiarized, years-old information put together by post-graduate students in California? Not on your life. Even after being caught red-handed, they brazenly and unapologetically retorted:


"Dismissing the gathering controversy as the latest example of media obsession with spin, officials insisted it in no way undermines the underlying truth of the dossier, whose contents had been re-checked with British intelligence sources. 'The important thing is that it is accurate,' said one source."



So there.

Indeed, such audacity seems to have become commonplace in politics. However the recent extent to which politicians have used the vehicle of brazen boldness to steamroll critics seems mind-boggling. You see, although Blair took the boldness bull by the horns this time, he was merely tromping in the shadow of the man who wrote the book, Karl Rove (To be fair, I want neither to cast blame on nor give credit to George W. Bush, who clearly has no decision making power whatsoever in this administration.)
Remember the original $1.2 trillion Bush tax cut to the wealthy (This was moderated by the senate from $1.6 trillion)? Many people were outraged by its passage.
Being a ‘uniter’ and not a divider, Bush reached out and...tried to rail through an additional $100 billion tax cut to the wealthy. This time, however, he took it one step further and mustered up the nerve to label the cut a "stimulus package". I'm sure that divisive extra step tore the fabric of Bush's 'uniter' mentality. Somehow he endured.
As if that weren't enough, Bush then proposed a $674 billion tax cut to the wealthy, once again under the guise of stimulating the economy. Problem is, 358 economists, including 10 Nobel prizewinners have officially condemned the tax cut as a hindrance, not a help to the economy.
Bush's response? "I think this is best for the country.” In addition, he continues to fight for a repeal of the estate tax, dividend tax and capital gains tax all of which heavily favor the wealthy. Any mention of cutting the payroll tax? No way! In fact, Republicans actually want to shift the tax burden back to the poor.

Enough. What is going on? Bush (and Blair) executes a brazen act.Then, after some public castigation, he follows up with an even more brazen act, and somehow gets away with it.

Q: How does he do it?
A: The underlying phenomenon that allows Bush to get away with all this is pure, unadulterated, brazen BOLDNESS.
It's true, being bold might piss off some people (like you and me) but the reality is that audacity has some very powerful effects.

Problem is they'd crucify him if he did.

Well, at least those who called me a Freeper the other day had better think the same. x(

I wish I could answer your question, but I have nary an answer. :-(

"A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side."

- Aristotle

Yep.

:) :) :)

Do people seriously think all of Europe woke up one day and decided the ways of their ancestors were bunk, and that some guy from Palestine was The Only True Gawd?

"You don't have the right to ignore the rule of law, force everyone to live as you want, demonize any opinion other than you're own, subvert this country's history and constitution to pad your bank account, and corrupt the name of Jesus to the point that truly just and ethical people become uncomfortable saying His name..."

Christians have been doing that ever since they got political power. Sure, terrorism is wrong, but the nasty truth of it is that it works.