Why Kerry Failed

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Straybow
Maybe because the left-wing internationalist suck-ups are at least marginally traitorous, America-hating whimps?

Half the population of the U.S. can't be traitors.

Question: How old are you, 30? 35? What do you know of politics before 25 years ago? Both the Kennedy and Johnson campaigns were ugly and marred by old-style ballot-box-stuffing. Johnson's political machine in Texas is the only reason he was on Kennedy's ticket.

37, old enough to remember the '76 campaign. I've studied the others. While it's true the campaigns of the Vietnam era were nasty, the U.S was in the midst of massive protest movements. After Watergate, things calmed down quite a lot, at least until Reagan began calling all his opponents liberals (including George Bush) as if it were an insult.

By "massive" fraud you mean the Democratic refusal to count 14000 absentee ballots from overeas military that the Dems believed would favor Bush, or the Dem hacks in the FL SC disregarding Florida law to allow recounts to continue after Dec 18, or the Dems' routine false claims of intimidation of black voters by Republicans?

The Democrats only challenged 3,000 absentee ballots and because those were clearly illegal under Florida law! Out of 700,000 absentee ballots, that's hardly trying to disenchfranchise the military. If the Republicans hadn't blocked recount efforts, the FSC wouldn't have had to order the recount to go past the deadline (shooting your parents then asking for leniency because you're an orphan). And 50,000 Floridians were illegally prevented from voting by being wrongly included on the felon list, almost half of them were Black, which means it was likely that 50,000 would have voted for Gore.

The Republicans limited their assessment of voter stupidity to those who may have punched the ballot incorrectly.

Actually, no. The constant refrain was that "Democrats" were too stupid to vote.

We just want to make sure the truth is as widely known as possible: the Dems' ugly, demeaning opinions on all who fail to acknowledge their inherent right to rule.

Which is why you lie and obfuscate as much as possible. I can count the number of honest Republicans on my hands.

[Agathon]

The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry."

Pretty much. You only need to look at how many people believe that Saddam Hussein had a role in 9/11 to know this is true.

[PLATO]

Its funny how everybody is looking for a "reason" that explains why Kerry lost. It is really simple...ALL things considered, the MAJORITY felt that Bush would be a better President. It really is that simple folks.

Hard for the lefties to take, but nonetheless true.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
[Q] Originally posted by Straybow
And 50,000 Floridians were illegally prevented from voting by being wrongly included on the felon list, almost half of them were Black, which means it was likely that 50,000 would have voted for Gore.

I still love this, Che. How in the world do you know how the 50,000 would have voted?

BTW, does anyone know why the list included so many non felons?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Agathon

The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry."

Pretty much. You only need to look at how many people believe that Saddam Hussein had a role in 9/11 to know this is true.

Pretty much the same thing as the left saying that high taxes, strong unions and strict enviromental laws bring jobs and prosperity.

[Ned]

Originally posted by PLATO
Its funny how everybody is looking for a "reason" that explains why Kerry lost. It is really simple...ALL things considered, the MAJORITY felt that Bush would be a better President. It really is that simple folks.

Hard for the lefties to take, but nonetheless true.

In the words of Luke Skywalker when Darth Vader said to him that he was his father, "Impossible! Aaaaggghhhh!"

[Berzerker]

From Limbaugh -

The reason conservatives are winning in the arena of ideas is because for 40 years conservatives have been educating people about two things -- well, three: about the Constitution, about liberalism, and about conservatism.

Ronald Reagan is the conservative icon and he trashed the Constitution. I'll bet that wasn't part of Rush's initial thought --"well, three".

The elites and the superiority are tied together and they are all on the left: the left coast, and in the leftist hangouts of the East Coast. They are truly superiorists. It all ties in together. They are superiorists and they want to remain that way.

This coming from a guy who makes his living by accusing liberals of being stupid? Sorry Rush, I am an elitist and so are you. Damn near everyone is an elitist because we typically value our own opinions over others. Only the humble and ignorant may qualify as non-elitist because they don't know and don't pretend otherwise.

Imagine if somebody did the same kind of piece, imagine if a Krauthammer or me or anybody on the right, wrote a piece about how absolutely stupid some of the people who vote for Democrats are

I don't have to imagine, I saw it back in the 80's when Krauthammer was literally defaming babies (you read that right) because their mothers were using crack cocaine. He said these babies would grow up and form a permanent subculture of criminals, etc. It was BS then, it's BS now. The irony is back then many on the left were goose stepping right behind Krauthammer...

It's American humans that cause war.

Slight difference - when my "taxes" are being used to kill people abroad, I kinda feel a little responsible.

It's American humans that imprison.

Quite prolificly too. Well, we can't let the little people make their own decisions about "drugs" and other personal matters because Rush knows better...oops... Okay, Bush knows better... umm...
Okay, "Slots" Bennett knows better... These are the people who "trust" us to run our own affairs?

It's American humans who are committing all the evil in the world.

Again, when you and your cronies are using our taxes to kill people in other countries, that should get the attention of any person concerned about morality...or those "values" we keep hearing about. When I express my anger about this being done with my money and "in my name", that doesn't mean I could care less about evil half way around the world, it means I want y'all to stop using my money to kill people in other countries largely because, being the elitist that I am, I know there will come a day when the enemies you've created abroad will follow you home and kill people here...Oh yeah, that already happened. For people like Rush, supporters of globalism and every GOP military intervention or sneak attack, to accuse opponents of "hating America" for expressing displeasure with their aims at empire is fascistic demagoguery.

It's American humans that are responsible for terrorist acts against us. They're the ones.

If y'all hadn't spent the last 50 years ******* around in the Middle East, we wouldn't be in this mess. Does the fact someone from the ME finally got mad enough to attack us absolve you of the responsibility for making someone mad enough to attack us? Nah, plenty of responsibility to go around Rush just as I will hold Bush, you, and the GOP responsible when NYC or Washington does go up in a mushroom cloud because Muslims hate us because we are free.

[Sava]

berz

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
I still love this, Che. How in the world do you know how the 50,000 would have voted?

Can I be absolutely sure how they would have voted? No. Can I make an educated guess based on the racial, gender, and economic statistics of the group? Yes. Statisitically, had they not been prevented from voting, slightly less than half would have voted, and more than half of those that did vote would have voted for Gore. Now, it's theoretically possible that that would not have occured, but it's improbable.

BTW, does anyone know why the list included so many non felons?

Because the State of Florida illegally told the company vetting the list to cast as wide a net as possible. Let me repeat that. The State of Florida illegally told the company vetting the list to cast as wide a net as possible. The company was told that the counties would be further vetting the list, but then the Secretary of State, Kate Harris, told the countries that they could not vett the lists, as it was against the law for them to do so (she was wrong, and some counties either fixed or threw out the lists as being too flawed to be useful).

Previously Florida used an Orlando based programmer to handle the vetting, and he charged the state $5K for the job. In 2000, a Republican-connected, out-of-state firm was hired for $1.5 million, in breach of Florida law. Florida law states that all the criteria must match for someone to be struck from the voter list, but Kate Harris' office told the company to violate the law, against the company's protestations.

Despite there being physical evidence of law breaking, the civil rights commission found there was no wrong doing.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ned
Limbaugh on the left's delusions:

"All right. It's a tossup here as to which column is the most outrageously hilarious. Paul Krugman, in the New York Times today, or Jane Smiley in Slate MSN.com yesterday. My vote -- it's a tossup, but I have to say that it is Jane Smiley at Slate MSN.com. She's a novelist of some repute, although I've never heard of her, but she has written a couple novels out there.

See, I love this. Limbaugh gets his knickers in a knot about liberals calling conservatives "ignorant," but then admits he's never heard of Jane Smiley, one of the most prominent authors in the US and winner of two of the US's most prestigous literary awards (the National Book Critics Circle Award and the Pulitzer Prize, both for A Thousand Acres; the novel was also a best-seller).

Here's the deal: if you've never heard of one of your country's foremost literary figures, you're ignorant. By definition.

[JohnT]

Uh, no, it means you're ignorant of modern literature. Not "ignorant" in general.

I read at least a book a week and don't have an idea who she is either - with over 1,000,000 titles being printed yearly worldwide (and 141,000 in the US), it's not really necessary to read any specific writer to keep yourself off the "ignorant" list.

http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/research/projects/how-much-info-2003/print.htm

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by JohnT
Uh, no, it means you're ignorant of modern literature. Not "ignorant" in general.

Right. And if Limbaugh were, say, a NASCAR driver, it would be no big deal (I can't name anyone on the NASCAR circuit, and I'll bet Jane Smiley can't, either).

But Limbaugh presents himself as a man of ideas, a man fit to pronounce on politics and culture. For him to, in one big breath of hot air, to presume to analyze American culture while admitting his ignorance of it -- and to not notice the irony -- is too, too rich.

[JohnT]

But it doesn't mean he's ignorant of "American culture", it just means he's ignorant of "Jane Smiley." The fact that he is unaware of her whopping 9 book addition to American culture doesn't mean he's ignorant of that culture... just her little, tiny addition to it.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by JohnT
But it doesn't mean he's ignorant of "American culture", it just means he's ignorant of "Jane Smiley." The fact that he is unaware of her whopping 9 book addition to American culture doesn't mean he's ignorant of that culture... just her little, tiny addition to it.

That's four more books than F. Scott Fitzgerald had written by the time of his death in 1940. Would a political commentator who claimed in the 1930s never to have heard of F. Scott Fitzgerald have been merely ignorant of Fitzgerald, or more broadly ignorant?

[JohnT]

Jane Smiley is no F. Scott Fitzgerald. And this isn't the 1920s, where a mere fraction of the print that is generated today was made. Not to mention the lack of television, internet, email, and all the other attention-grabbers and information pushers that have been developed since that much more sleepy age.

At that time, being a New York Times bestseller meant something. Nowadays, people like Dilbert, Oprah, and the season 1 Survivor gang are all New York Times best-selling authors.

So.... who cares? The fact that she's a NYT best-selling author doesn't really mean **** anymore.