Defense of Republicans on this site

is really irritating me.Posters are questioning that they are the enemy. We are the "democratic underground" unless I took a wrong turn.
And the last time I looked, they were the opposing party. This is an election year and this is WAR.
James Carville said it best"the other side is ALWAYS wrong" So please, explain to me why so many people have this need to glorify McCain ,who is still a repug with a horrendous voting record, and Az Chair of the Bush Campaign and praise some other repugs they find to be "good" people? There seems to be more of this lately.I would think posters would better spend their time getting Kerry elected then praising Repugs!

mccain is very popular among the moderate republicans and independents which kerry will need to win the election. and if he comes out against bush or even the other way around, it could lead them to vote for kerry or at the least to not vote for bush.

i agree we shouldn't glorify him. but we need to understand he is popular among swing voters. that doesn't mean making him vp but just using him to help kerry. even just saying mccain is kerry's best friend in the senate could work. and he is especially good when right wingers attack kerry's military service or record on defense.

I understand your point, but McCain doesn't help us that much. He only jepordises our base. And there are others far better to defend Kerry's war record, such as Max Cleland. And McCain isn't that popular.If he were he would have gotten the Republican nomination in 2000. He is a opputunistic turncoat and his party doesn't trust him. We already have the better chance at the I's as that vote historically goes to the challenger.As for the moderate Repugs? Who cares.We don't need 'em. The R's figured out for themselves that they don't need any votes but those of the evangelicals and fundamentalists(See;PBS Jesus Factor)and we don't need to do anything but keep our base and expand it. Show me any Republican who is running around praising the Dems.And don't use Zell, he is an anomaly and doesn't count.They stick to their base.We act as if we need them and tha is a disgrace,

he is not popular among many loyal republicans. but he is popular among independents and some moderate republicans. in primaries it's mostly party loyalists who vote so mccain lost but did well with independents and moderates who are swing voters in the general election.

it's not true the republicans only need the fundamentalists. they need others also that's why bush ran the campaign trying to appear as a moderate with the compasstionate conservative line.

"Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?"

McCain appears on stage with his adopted Bangladeshi daughter. The little seed planted in voters minds thrives, and McCain loses.

When in doubt, appeal to racism.

I suggest you watch it.It is part of the Repug Tactic to be able to win with only the fundamentalist evangelical vote. This is almost what they did in 2000. This is why Ralph Reed will drive them to the polls. Notice Bush isn't appealing to anyone but his base anymore?

Fundamentalist evangelicals only make up 17% of the population and Bush would lose big time if only they voted for him...

I serious doubt this is the plan. Karl Rove knows better...

In both cases the corporatists controlling the party manipulated the Hell out of the system so their own greed and corruption would survive.

No, we don't need the Republicans, but there is an ENORMOUS amount of fed-up swing voters, and McCain speaks to them.

Sorry, but McCain is a mouthpiece--war hero, great on the chat shows, good-looking.

You don't have to like it, but he's a big factor.

Let's focus on the Dems that are criticizing Bush shall we?

That is far too kind...I prefer repukes...Because everything they do causes regurtitation...

Although in a sense, you are correct, because foul-smelling sheeple are sort of repugnant...

that he would consider appointing judges that were anti-abortion as long as Roe V Wade would not be overturned, I have to shake my head.

What DOES JOHN KERRY STAND FOR?

I feel Kerry is taking my vote for granted, and he better give it serious thought where he is coming from

it's wanting to get votes of those who don't agree with you on every issue.

with DU'ers Praising and defending Republicans?

Did he REALLY say that? <sigh> Please say no. :(

What difference does it make what a judge's personal opinions are? What matters is how he or she would rule on the law. Inquiring into candidates' personal lives is intrusive and unnecessary. What we need to look at is their record. Can they be fair and impartial, or does their record show a marked bias?

That's what matters, not some kind of ideological litmus test.

but most people here think Repukes are sacks of shit, including McCain.

Repukes are utter, utter scum.

at least not that I've noticed. John McCain is just one of those mavericks that independents and moderate Democrats respect. I don't want him on the ticket -- that should be reserved for Democrats only -- but McCain is not popular with his own party but that doesn't stop him from speaking his mind.

He puts his ideals before politics and practices what he preaches, most of the time. He is hated by GOP House members because he won't put up with their nonsense.

John McCain emphatically says he won't switch parties, and he probably won't -- although I think there's a possibility he might become an independent.

Just my 2 cents.

we seek "the good", as do you. (I am using the term in the sense a philosophy student might.) I believe the good is approachable but not attainable ... we can do better.That belief is rooted in the observation there are no perfect human beings ... that all human beings make errors. (This is the actual meaning of the word "sin", which derives from a Greek archery term meaning a body habit which causes one to miss the mark. A sin is therefore a mistake, an action which produces unintended consequences.)

Error, however, can be detected and corrected by various means. Dialog between honest people of opposing viewpoint, for example, can reveal truths and strategies neither side would have otherwise considered.

Liberals tend to be more aware of this than conservatives ... it is rather against our nature to presume the other side is always wrong. Thus we observe there are honorable republicans, people who honestly disagree with us but who also seek the good. These people deserve our recognition and to some degree our support.

Then there are the Straussians ... facists in republican clothing. Unfortunately, the goons in power are Straussians. They are neither honest nor honorable. Our republican brothers and sisters ... those with whom we can have honest disagreement and dialog ... must needs be liberated from their influence.

They must open their eyes, see these would be emperors as they really are (fundamentally un-American) and cast these bastards out. Then we can resume the important business of discovering new truths through honest and honorable conflict and debate, neither of which is possible in the current climate.

All of which bring us back to your very valid point ... we must get Kerry elected for the good of the nation and (ironically) the good of the Republican Party.

I love to watch McCain and his ego. It is also sort of funny how mad he makes his own party. I would not vote for him but I can enjoy the show. I also would not vote for the Dem from Ga.

Operatives.

Place is full of em. Shoulda seen primary season. Sickening.

Julie

Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, the chimp, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, Trent Lott, ASSCROFT, Santorum, Frist and THEIR agenda. McCain supports the agenda. Just remember at all times what the hell they're up to and why WE are Democrats. Think about our environment, public schools, welfare program, Social Security, Medicare, foreign policies, gays, separation of religion and education, the deficit, ROE v. WADE, ect... For me, that's all it takes to know I would NEVER vote for ANY repuke, ever. That includes McCain or any other so called "moderate repuke." A repuke has no business on our 2004 ticket. NONE. They support everything we are against.

That's even more dangerous. We do need to be respectful of others' opinions. As I understand it, feeling threatened by a person who does not conform 100% to your own mindset is the essence of conservatism.

'loyal opposition'. I thought the republicans were supposed to be the party of hate.

Now, if we push you off this cliff, and you don't use your evil powers to fly away, you will die an honorable liberal death.

.

Perhaps she had a rough day.
Saracat, you ask us for a contribution.
Well, you know, we're all doing what we can.

is my preferred time for discourse and my opinion remains the same. I 've had the same "rough day"that every Dem has had since the coupe.

I'm two and a half hours from waking up at that point.

Ah, I remember those days...the dawn patrol!

Anyway, I'm sure that you are quite consitent. That's better than most politicians right there.

A favorite of mine and of Bonnie and Clyde!

Politics is NOT war. War is war, a political debate should not be a war. We are all Americans, and both political parties have allowed this culture of hatred and acrimony to exist between the parties. Republicans are not the enemy. They are fellow Americans. I hate it when I am called a traitor because I'm a Democrat and I'm not going to be a hypocrite and question the motives of other Americans who have different beliefs from me.

I'm not defending Republicans. Some of them surely are problematic in terms of preaching hatred of Democrats. But Democrats that preach hatred of Republicans are no better. We have to raise the level of debate in this country. Repug is just as stupid a term as DemoRAT.

Some Republicans are good people. I have a number of Republican friends who are just as concerned about our country as you and I. They don't agree with the Bush administration, and though they may disagree with me on some things, I know they are good people who just want our country to be the best it can be. I welcome debate with them, and I welcome them expressing their views which are just as valid as mine.

Politics is not war and as long as we perpetuate the belief that our enemy is our fellow citizen, politics will remain divisive and ugly.

We need dialogue. Just look at our current mess to see what can happen when the lines of communication are severed: chaos.

Perhaps our party was there when we held all the power, enthusiastically primped the war machine and corporate entitlements more than the populist FDR base ideals, but most certainly the GOP has been in a constant culture war against democracy almost since Lincoln's time.

A war against unions. A war against taxes as support for social programs. A war against the consumer and the working class. A war against law and democracy. Since all those are a threat to the dominion of the upper corporate plutocrats we are not talking about rational debate.

Certainly the common Republicans are not all rich SOBs or radical right wing extremists, but their anti-populist trajectory ever scornful of the
legitimacy of civil government over business interests will never get them out from under their corruption. we are not talking how best finance a road or even manage Social Security, This is a power struggle between elements for who convictions and compromise have long been exhausted in favor of destructive aggression. I realize some few GOP RINOS and the DLC are trying to revive the bipartisan sharing of differences theme, but it is inappropriate even to their own survival at this time. the Dems NEVER let themselves get taken over by the left much less the far left. I doubt the GOP can let go of their wild eyed rightwingers and even survive as a viable party, having long long since moved away from centrist, rational groups with larger populations.

And believe me, a lot of people here and abroad ARE dying because of this war of plutocrats against the people even if Congress shares tea and cookies and pines for the charade of civilized discourse- a mask for its true effect on human life. Losing the war of words and votes will guarantee a war of bullets and bombs.

That said, our rhetoric must be civilized if we want to prevail over the destiny of war, must be better and more populist and genuine and committed than the blowhard shouting matches all sides can be dragged into. It simply must have spine and resolute intelligence and not simply answer insult with insult.

for dialogue is over. Dascle and Gephart reasoned themselves into a stupor and we lost both houses. The average voter is an idiot and that is the element we need to appeal to.The Black and white stances, "if your not for us ,you're against us" appeal to the sheeple and that is what we fight against. Adlai Stephenson didn't win either. We have chaos because we tried to diaogue and didn't act. The biggest criticism they level against us is that we would "negotiate " everything.Haven't you heard that leveled at Kerry? He still be negotiating? We must level the playing field and fight fire with fire.

Negotiating with fanatics is like negotiating with wild animals: futile and dangerous.

I do not think, however, that the "average voter is an idiot." Nor do I agree with those who assume that non-voters are idiots.

Your original argument, though, was that certain opinions--and those people who hold them--should be banned from these discussion groups simply for having those ideas. I agree with purging and banning people who flame and harass others, but not simply for dissent. I need to make a T-shirt: "Dissent is not Disloyalty." I can disagree with you and still support you. And I do.

Thanks for helping me procrastinate! (working on my resume and job hunting)

I said that I found rupug defenses irritating. I find they harm our cause. I find lots of things irritating such as Bruc Willis and Arnold Swartznegger movies, and every Kung Fu movie ever made but I don't think they should be banned! I don't believe in censorship , but I believe I can express my right to be annoyed by a particular thread!



That was a funny typo "cretain for certain" Giggle.

Even Kill Bill? (which I haven't seen)

Sorry. I really should confine myself to the lounge today. Better yet, I'll just do what I'm supposed be doing right now.

Salud!

orders. Politics is the highest form of war. Republicans are the only enemy to be concerned with. Getting rid of them is the only worthwhile objective.

Hate is the problem, whomever is directred toward.

How many parties would be in your new constitution?

idealistic position.And exactly the one that lost us elections. Dems are always resonable and thought provking. It has been analytically proven that the more intelligent of us are Democrats, but still we lose.As Adlai Stevenson replied to the person who "every thinking person will vote for you","thanks but I need the votes of the majority"!
And the Repugs are doing just fine with the attitude you distain.Last I looked, they control everything.And they do noy "believe your views are as valid as theirs".Scott McClellan speaking for the Party line told us to "watch our mouths". And the "nice Republicans" s.upport this.Politics has always been war, only "nice " Dems didn't realize it. But the ones who did like Carville, Clinton and the Daley Machine Won!

Idealistic, perhaps, but I think it's also a realistic goal. 50% of the potential electorate actually takes the time to register and vote. The other 50% does not. Why? I would speculate that at least a large portion of that non-voting block does not vote because of the acrimony in partisan politics. What if instead of trying to convince everyone why Republicans are evil, we convince them why we are good. If we get just 1/10 of that non-voting block voting Democratic, we would never lose another election.

The attitudes of the current Republican leaders do not justify us stooping to their level. We can either elevate debate, or lower the bar, and I don't want to be part of any further lowering of the bar in this country.

Vote much more often tthan Dems. That is one of our problems.We must get the Dems to Vote.Do you know we outnumber them in registration but we don't vote?And the factoid of not voting because of the "acrimony of partisan politics "is baloney. Most voters don't even know what the word partisan means. This is not aneducated electorate.Acrimony hasn't hurt the Repug vote.They are loyal foot soldiers and our people are not. Maybe some voting Democrats would like to elevate the level of debate, but most just need to be energised.I don't care about Elevating the bar.We can do that later when we reform the education system so the voters can understand the debate.What we must do is win by whatever means it takes or thee will be no discouse to elevate!

Your disdain for the electorate might be part of the problem. Another problem we have is that the electorate views us as elitists who think we are better than they are. Views like yours certainly don't help us debunk that criticism.

I agree that our base needs to be energized, but playing dirty trick politics ain't the way to do it. It actually is a well-educated electorate, but an electorate that has tuned out politics. If a voter is going to be swayed by nastiness, then they aren't likely to be voting Democratic no matter what we do.

I'm not saying we try to reason with the likes of Tom DeLay, Bush and such. That would be completely useless. I'm just saying we stick to our principles, and push our positive agenda out there. By sinking to the level of Tom DeLay, we'd make ourselves no better, and guess what. We are better. The day my party starts taking political cues from a Tom DeLay is the day I start looking for a new party.

But I agree with you. This is war and any kind word about the enemy is appeasement.

.

you would like him? It seems you arbitrarily dislike him because of the (R) and not because of his views?

In case you have not noticed, the Repubs hold the White House, Senate, & House.

You can call them dirty names, & rant & rail...but it will get you no where.

Instead, you can try to find a few decent Repubs & join forces to oppose this corrupt administration.

Yesterday the House passed a budget bill filled with goodies for their corporate sponsors, & more tax cuts for the wealthy.

Now the bill goes to the Senate...the Hastert/McCain fight yesterday was over tax cuts for the wealthy. There are a few moderate Repubs against this bill, like Susan Collins of Maine. If the Dems want to block this bill, they have to work together.

Or the Senate Dems can go off & scream & yell at the enemy.

I, for one, would rather see that horrendous spending bill blocked.
It is bad for our country, puts us deeper in debt, & increases the gap between the wealthy & everyone else.

But I guess you would prefer not to make an alliance with the enemy.

Infiltrated the ranks?
All joking aside, who he married is irrevelevant to the fact that his political philosophy is the only one that works. In case you haven't noticed, it is the same one the Repugs have used and it's workin just fine for them!
Repeat after me,there is no such thing as bipartisanship.They have betrayed us every single time we have tried ! Carnahan and Cleland learned the hard way.This is why Daschle is such a disaster.His negotiating has gotten us nothing.We can't forge an allince with the enemy because they have no honour and won't keep their word.Sorry but your position is not practical in the real world of politics today!

The GOP has been taken over by twin demons: cancerous corporations and theocrats. If progressive ideals--and the people who hold them--are to survive, progressives must go on the offenseive. Otherwise, we will wake up with a little Taliban of our own.

James Carville MARRIED a republican, & not just any repub, but the lady who ran Poppy s campaign.

Talk is cheap.

Infiltrated the ranks?
All joking aside, who he married is irrevelevant to the fact that his political philosophy is the only one that works. In case you haven't noticed, it is the same one the Repugs have used and it's workin just fine for them!
Repeat after me,there is no such thing as bipartisanship.They have betrayed us every single time we have tried ! Carnahan and Cleland learned the hard way.This is why Daschle is such a disaster.His negotiating has gotten us nothing.We can't forge an allince with the enemy because they have no honour and won't keep their word.Sorry but your position is not practical in the real world of politics today

While I share your loathing for Republicans, I would point out that this is a home for *progressives*, not merely Democrats.

I highly doubt that such an animal exists. If McCain were to become a Democrat he'd be one of the most conservative Democrats. If progressive can be applied to him as well then the adjective means nothing. If "progressives" include those who support McCain, then this board is home for all but the most rabid conservatives.

I personally don't want McCain on our ticket, etc., but I know genuine progressives who admire him for his integrity, honesty and genuine service to the country. It would be a bit of a stretch to say that anyone who admires McCain can't be a progressive, or to say that anyone who defends him (or some other principled Republican like Dick Lugar, e.g.) can also not be a progressive.

As far as integrity goes, anyone can have it and one can defend the integrity of someone with whom they disagree.

But when people vehemently defend and admire conservative political stances then it is only logical to conclude that they are conservatives themselves and thus not progressive

In fact, that's the distinction that I myself draw.

the other side isn't always wrong. That's moronic.

Second, "the other side" isn't always the Republicans.

Look at snapshots of the records of bothJohn McCain and http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/John_Breaux_SenateMatch.htm">John Breaux.

There is very little difference between the two. Granted, McCain (as opposed to Breaux) favors voluntary school prayer and opposes civil rights protection for sexual orientation, but scores a bit better in support of a woman's right to choose than Breaux.

Both voted for the Iraq "war" and support church based welfare services, and both favor increased spending on health care and maintaining most affirmative action programs.

McCain rates a slightly right/conservative, Breaux rates a slightly left/liberal with a slight populist slant.

The two would vote the same on the vast majority of legislature, but Mccain is dismissed as "the enemy" and Breaux is discussed as a VP possible.

How does that make ANY sense?

I'm not promoting McCain, I just believe that loyalty to the Democratic PARTY is not what we should be looking for, but loyalty to Democratic PRINCIPLES.

word I would use to describe Carville.When someone else developes a techinique that wins elections as well as he does they can criticize.Unless you have a better solution and a better track record, your opinion of his statement is irrelevent.
I agree with you about Breaux and McCain.I loathe both of them! I also agree with supporting Democratic principles.But the Democratic Party is the only viable Party we have to do that.It is unfortunate we have some "bad apples" to use a current phrase.
I feel the only important thing is to win And right now, I don't give a damn how we do it.Principles be damned!

And if principles are no obstacle, why aren't DU hackers nuking Diebold?

Front Man?

where he could be front man. Without them he was just an unknown Gov. from Arkansas. Clinton wasn't always famous you know.Begala and Carville crafted the strategy that pushed him to the forefront.

In other words, you've got it reversed.

But his campaign strategies were Begala and Carville. Ask anyone .Read any of the books. They got him into the limelight and handled damage control. Hillary also planned strategy. Not Bill. He was the candidate and the charisma factor but they figured out how to market and elect him.

who was very good in his day.But he turned back into his original slime. He was useful tho'

ailmost all the winning Dem races.And we should nuke Diebold. I don't have a problem with that.Anyone got any?

:argh: