Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did I hear Kerry right? Support Bush to.....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:18 PM
Original message
Did I hear Kerry right? Support Bush to.....
unite the nation. I just watched Kerry's concession speech. He talked about uniting as a nation and begin the healing process. Did he ask us to lay down and roll over and march lock-step with this administration???? (stop being divided)He should have told us to unite even more and fight back against the little turd from Crawford. Instead of standing strong and encouraging us to fight back every chance we get to send a message to bush that we won't give in, he belly's up like a puppy. The brown shirts will have to hang me from my own tree before I support the neo-cons. Not one frickin word about beginning an impeachment. There is no backbone on the hill only brown nosers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Skull & Bones...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. Unfortunately, I'm beginning to see it now.
I see how it works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaLynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. My sister thinks they had a gun in his back.
Who knows. I laughed when Perot pulled out of the race because of threats to his daughter. Now, I know it was probably all too real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carl Brennan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. hmmm, I never heard about Perot's daughters being threatened. Do you
have a source for that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FloridaPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. After the election that he was in he said that was the reason why
he pulled out. His daughter was getting married and he had threats that the wedding would be disrupted. I heard it from him when he was on the news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
U2Shark Donating Member (427 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #10
31. Didn't he say
something about the republicans sending ninjas to her wedding?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #10
39. I remember that. At the time
Edited on Wed Nov-03-04 10:41 PM by Minstrel Boy
I knew so little of what the Bush bastards are capable of I figured Perot must have been crazy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. it began on Oct. 10, 2002....
107th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. J. RES. 114
October 10, 2002

JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations; Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people; Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq; Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 (1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949 (1994);

Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President `to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677';

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and `constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688';

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable'; Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'.
SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS. The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
(c) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS. (a) REPORTS- The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).
(b) SINGLE CONSOLIDATED REPORT- To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.
(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- To the extent that the information required by section 3 of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of such resolution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
41. I have a simple question for you
"Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and"

I thought for some crazy reason the Constitution was the supreme law of the land. Yes, I know how hard it is to amend the Constitution. When does a "Public Law" supersede the Constitution, that's my question.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrispyQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. I didn't hear it, . . .
...but if that's what he said, what a waste of the $700 I sent to his campaign.

Hotler, I will be hangin' from the tree next to you! And our noses will not be brown!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seaj11 Donating Member (506 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
5. Concession was the gentlemanly thing to do.
It's also the opposite of what the Repugs were going to do if Kerry won. Remember, they said they would sue. Kerry knows we Democrats won't give up. He has to put on a good face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Yeah, and they have the WH and Congress and the Judicial Branch.
Gentlemanly you say? I see Daschle "gentlemaned "himself out of a job too! When are we going to learn. Polite equates with loser!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. Kerry quit knowing "...we Democrats won't give up"???
How does that makes sense if Kerry won't fight?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seaj11 Donating Member (506 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Because we'll keep fighting for what we believe in.
And so will Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #12
30. Kerry already quit.
What part of "just walked away" don't you understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seaj11 Donating Member (506 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Honestly!
He didn't walk away from his party! We're all upset here. I'm upset too. I'm especially upset that DUers are splitting into these two ranks. I am proud of Kerry, and that's that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
28. This commoner sez: "F* gentlemanly" (you got it from Scarborough)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
La Lioness Priyanka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
7. noblesse oblige
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
8. Fuck that noise
I would rather die than "unite" with any of those pigs. Fuck the whole lot of them. Kerry is really starting to bug me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UNIXcock Donating Member (464 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
13. I'm of the belief that ...
... although our candidate lost, we must try working together to make the country a better place to live. I'm willing to meet and shake hands if I'm truly sought out to help resolve the issues. We must get our country back together and healthy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w13rd0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Only way I'm shaking one of their hands...
...is if I've got a gun or a shank in my left.

Fuck that noise. These people are self-deluded traitors, and they've enabled the institution of a 1-NationalParty police state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. Meeting the neo-cons half way won't work.
The neo-cons hate everyone that's not their own kind. The neo-con goal is to starve government into the ground and eliminate the democratic party altogether. A one party system is the road to oligarchy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. They've been very successful
:-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cat Atomic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. I'm not shaking hands with any of those pigs.
If they want unity, they know where to find us. About 12 paces to the left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
14. It's called being classy
That support Bush stuff is all rhetoric and you know as well as I do that Senator Kerry will be fighting like hell to fight Bush's agenda in any way that he can. But it's important to be a good looser as well as a good winner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cat Atomic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. We've got lots of "good losers".
Edited on Wed Nov-03-04 09:45 PM by Cat Atomic
Practice makes perfect, I suppose.

These are bad days. I understand that Kerry is a professional politician, and this is what they do after a loss. But I think the time for professional politicians has passed. It's time for honesty, even if it *gasp* angers the Nazis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radar Donating Member (447 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. BartCop.com mentions this...
"Why did we lose?

Pick any of the last 100 issues and choose a reason.

I listed the reasons every day why Kerry was blowing it.
Those truths cost me a great many subscribers. I lost so many subscribers,
I'm once again able to thank each PayPal subscriber individually.

Biggest reason - Kerry refused to fight. Convention week, he said, "No Bush bashing."
That was a hueueuege mistake. NaziCon2004 was four nights of pure Kerry bashing.
Democrats always play nice, and that's why the voters wouldn't trust us to handle Osama.
It seems like Kerry had no desire to win.

Kerry took the summer off. I wonder if he regrets throwing that time away.
Kerry had a chance to change history, but Kerry went windsurfing instead.

"I would've handled Iraq the same as Bush, even if I knew Saddam had no WMDs."
A dagger in the heart of his campaign. How stupid can a man be to say he's "just like" his opponent?
It seems like Kerry had no desire to win.

Kerry insisted on getting in every Dukakis tank he could find.
Again and again, Kerry posed for pictures that made people laugh out loud.
Again and again he did this, apparently totally unable to learn from his mistakes.
Every day, Bush looked presidential, beating the podium promising to "fight terra,"
and then they'd switch to Kerry, acting like a teenager on dope for the cameras.

Kerry's last and best chance to save this was the debates. When he told Vernon Jordan to agree
the rule that the candidates couldn't ask each other questions, he lost the election that very day.
That guaranteed that Bush would never be asked any tough questions.
How could Kerry give Bush a get out of jail card?
It seems like Kerry had no desire to win.

Kerry refused to speak like a normal man. He always talked like a Harvard pinhead.
How could he make a mistake this big?
How could he make a mistake this big, again and again and again and again?
Night after night, Jon and Dave and Jay and the others made fun of his stiff style,
be he stayed stiff, month after month - he never even tried to speak to the people.

His refusal to fight back. Like Gore, he told us 1,000 times how much he was going to fight,
but when it came time to fight, he laid down and went to sleep.
They ran thousands of Swift Boad ads, and kerry refused to answer those thousands of ads.
Kerry thinks you fight fire with dignified silence. How naive can a career politician be?
It seems like Kerry had no desire to win.

He allowed Karl Rove to describe him, and he let others use Rove's description all year.
"The most liberal man in the senate?" Not even close, but since Kerry refused to deny it,
and he refused to ask on what that lie was based, people assumed it must be true.

This is extra hard to take for so many reasons:
Our side is right, the facts are on our side, but Kerry adamantly refused to state the facts - why?
Kerry lost to the worst candidate in history. This candidate Bush is twenty times worse
than the candidate Bush that Gore ran against, and Kerry got his ass whipped b y this loser?
In BCR Show 58, I said Kerry had 100 attacks to use against Bush, he used maybe ten of them,
and even those he barely mentioned, in a whisper, only on occasions when it didn't matter much.

In the back issues, again and again, I wrote, "If only Kerry would mention THIS or THAT,"
but Kerry refused to fight and I wish I could tell you why.

Don't say:
The media was against him. They were, but they were agianst Clinton, too.
The GOP had more money, because money wasn't a factor.
The incumbent is tough to beat - look at Al Gore.


Bottom line: Kerry didn't want it enough to fight for it.
He wanted to win playing polite and playing by the rules like Democrats always do.

You want to know a secret?
We're going to lose in 2006 and 2008 and every election after that until we start to fight back.

America was afraid to trust our safety to a non-fighter.


Think of the signal this send to the rest of the world:
"America loves Bush, America loves killing Arabs, America loves stealing your assets."

God, that makes me sick.
Our worldwide reputation just took another nosedive.


Last thing: Before you write to say, "Fuck you," address the reasons why we lost.
I'm not a genius and I'm not always right - but I am this time.
If I'm wrong, show me how I'm wrong instead of screaming insults."


http://www.bartcop.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. Bartcop is spot on
will anyone at the DLC listen? Hell no-they're drinking with their BushCo buddies tonight!!
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loathesomeshrub Donating Member (669 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I totally agree. We are always
Edited on Wed Nov-03-04 09:45 PM by loathesomeshrub
way too nice. If one is playing dirty, you can't play nice. You must respond in kind, and now we all have to suffer 4 more years of hell thanks to that policy of being honorable and classy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cat Atomic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
17. Shut-up and put on your armband!
Edited on Wed Nov-03-04 09:46 PM by Cat Atomic
I guess we're all supposed to be "good Germans" now. No thank you, sir.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AuntPatsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
22. I will never support the pretender, never!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
26. Did Kerry listen to Springstein's "No Surrender."
Teresa said it would be four years of hell..She is right..The Repugs have made it quite clear in how they run Congress, there is NO compromise..Do as I say..They close Democrats out of hearings even and Democrats go to hearing w/o hearing a first reading for mark up.
You can not compromise when it comes to selling out Social Security. Or privitizing medicare..Or unnecessary war..
Kerry need know, we will not surrender...Fight on principal to the end...These sob's are selling our our country to the highest corporte bidder/briber...
I suggest the next election starts the day after the last...We all know that...I today demand we start local chapters of Progressive Democrats of America...We do not need blood letting. But, we need steer the party in a progressive direction..
Kerry comes to town, tell him No surrender...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deadparrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #26
36. Let's make it up to Teresa
by kicking her old buddy Santorum's ass in 2006.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sweet Freedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
27. I'll do it...
as soon as the repubs admit they mercilessly hunted Clinton; as soon as they stop using the names "Hitlery", "feminazi" and saying "liberal" as if they're vomiting through their teeth; when they stop calling us heathens, commies, pinkos, baby-killers, socialists; when they admit that smirky is NOT a good Christian...

as soon as * admits Iraq is and was a mistake AND all his fault...

as soon as the media starts doing their jobs...

yeah, I'll do it...

WHEN DONKEYS FLY!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
29. It is possible to be a good sport and still...
stand tall and proud yet show strength. I think something is up with the way Kerry/Edwards never really took a bite out of george/dick during the campaign. They had soooo many chances to expose the neo-cons for the thugs they are and yet went right up to the line and then stopped. Almost like the the whole campaign was choreographed. Now we're being ask to tote the line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NightTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
32. How the fuck am I supposed to unite with Bush supporters?!
Those fucking people are so far to the right, they think Timothy McVeigh got a light sentence. Fuck them all AND the Panzers they rode in on! :grr::nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seaj11 Donating Member (506 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
34. Hey mods!
I believe this could be moved into the Fighting forum. :/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
35. Not a chance I would support that immoral bastard
I will fight him every day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zero Gravitas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
37. FUCK BUSH
and the ignorant morons who voted for him

Bush will never be my president. Fuck them! Fuck them all.

Soon enough the consequences of Bush's recklessness will come home to roost and we'll all be sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iwantmycountryback Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
38. Kerry said the right thing
But I sincerely think he wasn't being sincere. I really do hope so. We can't let this administration get away with anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
40. The DNC/DLC might have lost the presidency....
...and a couple of Senate seats, but they sure hauled in the money!
Both parties of our two party system can really rake it in if they keep the public evenly divided. The Media reaps windfalls also.


Do you really want to know why the election was so close?.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the_outsider Donating Member (258 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
42. he is part of the system, he has to play by the rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-04 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
43. Been striking and boycotting for 4 years and here goes 4 more.
Haven't paid a single dime in taxes to support the Bu$h government, and have pretty much boycotted all corporate products.

Unite as a nation? With the neocon fascists?

Not.Gonna.Happen.Ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC