Some Class V* for us, from Mark Warner at YearlyKos
By smagar Posted in User Blogs — Comments (74) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
From the diaries...
I'm sure I'm not the first to notice this. But, Mark Warner has done us a favor. According to this Washington Times account of Mark Warner's trip to YearlyKos (H/T RCP), Warner has made some of the choicest Democratic moonbat charges his own
Fine. Now that he's made them his, he can defend them.
DEMOCRATIC RIVALS WOO LIBERAL BLOGGERS
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
June 11, 2006Democrats with national aspirations performed a delicate dance at the liberal blogger convention here this weekend, eager to court the powerful new political movement, but wary of getting tainted by the movement's more radical element.
Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, who is making moves for the Democratic presidential nomination as a more widely acceptable alternative to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, has gone further than anyone else to court this crowd. Friday night, he threw a swanky party atop the Stratosphere tower high above the Las Vegas Strip featuring sushi, chocolate fondue and martinis that were named after Markos Moulitsas, convention host and founder of the popular left-wing blog DailyKos.Mr. Moulitsas declared that as a "first date," it was pretty "cool" and the chemistry between the two men was clearly enthusiastic.
(All emphasis added)
- Would that be Markos "Screw 'em" Moulitsas?
- Aren't some (if not many) of the Blackwater Security Group employees your former constituents? How about the four who died in Fallujah (and thus earned Markos' sign of respect)? Do you know? (You should).
- Do you think the milbloggers will take kindly to your playing kissyface to the man who so publicly scorned the four men from Blackwater who died and were tortured and mutilated in Fallujah? Did you think about that? Are you thinking now that, maybe, you should have?
- Who do you think Virginia's voters will be more kindly disposed to--the memories of the Blackwater Four, or the kindness and compassion of your new-found "date"? (I'm talking Virginia, not Vermont here, Governor).
"He is one of the people who made this a credible event," the mega-blogger said of the former governor, a reference to Mr. Warner's early decision to speak at the convention.
- Are you willing to state, for the record, and for the ears of Redstate/military voters, your opinion of the value that DailyKos adds to American politics?
- Is there any portion of the tone of DailyKos that you do not embrace? (Oh, do tell! Your date is listening!)
- Apparently your personal gravitas is viewed as a reason for YearlyKos being of some importance. Given what Kos has said about the Blackwater contractors, and that his site is a venue for lots of rock-throwing at American operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, are you comfortable with an image as someone who, through his support, is granting legimitacy on Kos?
But the most buzz was over Mr. Warner, who in his keynote speech wandered into the deeply anti-war crowd with a sharp critique of President Bush's handling of the Iraq war without explicitly stating his position on the war.
- Did the Kossacks tell you, as they imbibed your drinks and ate your food, that you could hope to run for President by throwing rocks at President Bush's handling of the Iraq War without going on the record with specifics on WHAT should have been done differently and HOW it should have been done?
- If so, what was in those drinks?
"This president has never tried to bring this country together," he said. "He has missed so many opportunities."
- Did you think we'd miss the word "never"? Did you think we'd let it pass?
- HOW should the President have tried to bring the country together?
- WHAT opportunities did he miss, and WHAT should he have done differently?
(At this point, Governor, you may be thinking: "But, the Kossacks told me that I'd never actually be asked questions like this!" They won't be, Governor, in Vermont or New York . But, I thought your appeal was that you could win states like Virginia and North Carolina ? See where I'm going here?)
In foreign policy, Mr. Warner advised Mr. Bush to "unite our friends and divide our enemies, not the reverse."
- What, in your opinion. has President Bush done to "repel" our friends that was unjustified? Many of our "friends" overseas, for example, are repelled by our invasion of Iraq?
- What alternatives were offered by our "friends," rejected by President Bush, but would have been adopted by you? For example, would you have agreed to keep 250,000 American troops in Camps Virginia, Pennsylvania and New Jersey over the summer of 2003, while Hans Blix inspected Iraq further?
- Isn't it a good idea to unite our enemies, if that makes them easier to kill? Fewer targets, smaller aimpoints, etc...
- Did you think you wouldn't get questions like this?
"Manipulated intelligence, selective leaks, no plan on what to do after we took out Saddam Hussein; he didn't listen to our military leaders, he had no real effort to try to form an international coalition,"
- "Manipulated intelligence"--what, when, by whom? If you have enough specifics to make the charge in public, then please share those specifics with the public, and stand by what you say.
- "selective leaks"--again, what, when, by whom? And, when are leaks ever anything but selective, Governor? Did you think we would't pick up on that?
- "no real plan on what to do after we took out Saddam Hussein"? What would your plan have been, and how would you have executed it? For example, if you'd have had more troops on the ground, from where would you have gotten them? If they were to be foreign troops, from what countries? And, if they were to be US troops, (a) how many more would you have sent (b) how would YOUR plan have made Iraq more secure and (c) what US security responsibility would you have left uncovered in order to resource your plans for Iraq? I'm presuming, Governor, that you feel that you could have done better? OK--please tell us how.
- "he had no real effort to try to form an international coalition," Again, what did the President do wrong, what would you have done differently, and how would that have built a better WARFIGHTING coalition? How, for example, would you have convinced Chirac to send in the French Foreign Legion?
Notice, I focused in mostly on quotes from Warner or his "date." Especially in the review of Warner's remarks.
These words are now HIS words. These are now HIS positions. HIS allegations.
Which, in the months ahead, we'll all expect him to stand behind, and justify with hard facts and rational, realistic reasoning.
The line that earned him the most enthusiastic applause with hoots and hollers was his call for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to be fired.
But seconds later, Mr. Warner said that "we are all glad to see the end of" terrorist Abu Musab Zarqawi. That line was followed by silence.
- Governor, have you ever heard the phrase, "You are judged by the company you keep?"
- What will you bring Markos on your second date?
(* Included in honor of this, the week of the US Army's birthday, June 14th. Army supplies are broken into nine groups, or "classes." Class I is food, Class III is fuel and machine lubricants...and Class V is ammunition.)
I think Kos gets way too much real estate on right leaning blogs.
The more she's mentioned, the more powerful she gets, the more self-fufilling the prophecies of her influence become.
...I don't think it's mentions on right-leaning blogs that cause Kos and the other top lefty bloggers to become paid consultants to top Democrats. More and more these guys are becoming representative of the Democrat's base, not because of anything we on the right are doing, though.
...and click-throughs are what causes their perception of influence to translate into real power.
The Internet is the real "echo chamber" -- it creates & influences "Pop-Litical" culture... Left & Right both seize each other's memes and spin them back into the echo chamber.
Whatever. As long as they don't nominate Hillary, I think the country is in good shape.
A: Telling your parents you're gay.
Honestly, what's with the man-love? If you're over the age of 15, you really shouldn't be using the word "cool" to describe a "first date."
somebody sounds a little scared of gay people, yikes
I flee in terror at the sight of that.
Before I even respond to your post, please take note that (1)I plan to support Mark Warner's Presidential Candidacy in 2008 and (2)I don't often visit the DailyKos site, mostly because I don't find the style of rhetoric valuable or even all that entertaining. Politicians have always made issue of the company their opponents keep. But these days, its been taken way too far.
Everyone with credibility in America agrees, or should agree, that every governing body should have a loyal opposition. Politics is not an exact science. If there was a right way, I wouldn't need to spend four years a getting a degree in it. The probelm today is that both sides are strongly opposed to their opponents' definitions of "loyal" or mainstream. Much of the criticsm by the right of the left-wing blogosphere is indeed warranted. I am upset with the direction the Democratic Party has taken since 9/11, and feel that we have strayed away from American values, ideas, and consequently the American people. But at the same time, I can't stand the Republican talking points touting their monopoly over the Constitution and the American Way.
On the other side, I feel one of the greatest sucesses of the Conservative Movement has been the effective expulsion (or at least the muting) of many controversial viewpoints from its ranks (i.e. the racist right, the anti-Semitic right, anti-Catholics, Social Darwinists, John Birch-esque security types, and a spattering of others). Thiese achievements took decades to come about, but recent elections show that the hard work has paid off at the polls. Be proud of yourselves. But quick, take this pop-quiz. If you were an aspiring Republican Presidential candidate, would you attend a public fundraiser with James Dobson? Jerry Fallwell? Anne Coulter? Pat Robertson? How about Sun Myung-Moon? Of Course I am bringing out the old straw man by automatically assocaiting all conservatives, most of whom are people of character and integrity, of being at the whims of these extremists (and if you think I am dropping that label lightly, I'll gladly supply proof). But such people (exception: Coulter) have much closer ties to the Party than it lets on (Moon is, of course, the founder and owner of the newspaper from which your article originated).
It's said that wars make strange allies. Of course politics and war should not be equated in a perfect world, and its a sad reflection of times that they are. I'm supporting Warner becuase I think he can bring the national unity and healing Americans so badly want and need, and if he has to woo a few Radicals to get the money and clout to do it, so be it. Here' a suggestion for you, as well as one I'd make to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committe: spend your time touting your own agenda.
was a very attractive pres. candidate. He's now in bed with pond scum.
Michael Yon on yesterday's Northern Alliance podcast said that he knew one of the 4 contractors killed and mutilated in Fallujah and that he had been a SEAL (as I always suspected, given that they were Blackwater employees). Every time the story is told, I am outraged and disgusted anew that the finest specimens of human beings on the planet were so dishonored and dehumanized AND that Kos rejoiced. Now to find that Warner is sucking up to Kos and his fellow slimeballs is way too much. This is guilt by association, pure and simple.
Warner is no longer even fit to run for dogcatcher in my book. This ought to be the end of him.
Net "Ratings" and click-throughs are what causes their perception of influence to translate into real power.
You have to admit...Kos whistled, and the following Democratic party leading lights came running:
- Mark Warner
- Bill Richardson
- Barbara Boxer
- Harry Reid
- GEN Wesley Clark
It does appear that the man has much of the Democrat leadership well-trained.
The real question is--how well does that speak of the Democrat leadership ?
We'll know in November.
(whom I don't know much about), your list had better look both ways before they cross the street, because I wouldn't be inclined to remove my foot from the gas. I might honk.
that they're..well, liberals. (Pragmatic Progressive)
Before I even respond to your post,
Oh NO! Don't make me WAIT!
please take note that (1)I plan to support Mark Warner's Presidential Candidacy in 2008
Please take note that I could care less
and (2)I don't often visit the DailyKos site, mostly because I don't find the style of rhetoric valuable or even all that entertaining.
Take further note that I care even less
Everyone with credibility in America agrees, or should agree,
I have to ask...are you standing in front of a mirror as you write this?
But quick, take this pop-quiz.
No, I don't think I will.
Here' a suggestion for you,
Tell ya what--keep it. Find someone who cares what you think.
as a reader and poster at dKos, I'm not going to defend what he said about Blackwater, and I don't think you'll find many who will. He's apologized for the comments at any rate, and gave two reasons:
- He stated plainly that he wasn't anti-contractor, he's anti-mercenary, which is a reasonable position to have. His comments were an emotional reaction wherein he unjustly equated contractors with mercenaries. He recognized this error in his mea culpa. What caused this?
- If you had grown up in El Salvador when he did, you'd be quite likely to hold a similar opinion toward mercenaries. It was an emotional outburst, we've all had them.
The bottom line is, he made a stupid statement and apologized for it. If that's the worst thing he ever does, he's leagues ahead of most people. I suppose you've never made an idiotic statement you later wished to retract?
I suppose Ben Domenech's misdeeds are reason enough to not pay attention to anything anyone says here? Are you a 'slimeball' for posting here? I don't feel like a slimeball for posting there.
Daily Kos remains a good site full of interesting reading. If you want to attack it go ahead, it's a free country, but remember that the posters there are more than able to defend themselves, while attacks do draw attention to it, whence people who have previously not made a decision for or against the site can read it and decide for themselves.
What Americans "want and need" is to rid themselves of the political party that puts Michael Moore in the VIP box at its convention and pays homage to the Kos lunatic fringe. Sounds to me like Gov Warner did a little more than just "woo a few Radicals to get the money". Yes, that must be done to run as a Democrat but it's also what will prevent Democrats from ever getting 60% or more of the country behind them.
There is no way the Democrat Party is going to bring the nation together. It is a party that has failed to get solidly beyond 50% of the vote since it went off the cliff during Vietnam. Carter's 50.x % isn't beyond the margin of error much less anywhere near the majorities Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I commanded. Bush II at least cleared 51%. Again, something the Democrats haven't done since before Vietnam spilled over. And as you noted, your party has gone off the cliff yet again by straying "away from American values" since 9/11. The long term damage to Democrats this time will be worse than post-Vietnam. You don't do what the Democrat Party has done since 9/11 and ever get to be a solid majority party again. You go by the way of the Federalists and Whigs who both were thrown into the ashbin of history after they ended up on the wrong side of a war. The Democrat Party has been on the wrong side of the War on Terrorism the better part of the way, particularly when it comes to "non-citizen terrorist rights" and Gitmo. Heck, their war is with the Commander in Chief, not the enemies of this nation.
I too am tired of the 50/50 tie bickering, but in a post Vietnam and now post 9/11 world only the right Republican can get this country back to 60/40. You don't need a four year degree in pragmatism to understand that one.
Tell Gov Warner not to reserve the VIP box seats for Moore or Moulitsas just yet. That honor will belong to Hillary or Gore as you guys continue to pound your post 9/11 nails into your political coffins.
He was bragging about it a year later. Kos was exactly sorry enough to keep the political advertising flowing back in to his site. When it became clear that the Democrats would come regardless, he suddenly felt "vindicated" instead.
Daily Kos remains a good site full of interesting reading.
Besides the obvious "no accounting for taste" cliché, I would just point out that the article wouldn't have been written, or front-paged, if we agreed. I would have hoped that would be obvious.
...but that seems to be about Mike Pence. If you didn't post the wrong piece, I'm just not following you, care to enlighten?
And Kos did give an unqualified apology. Now, maybe you're different, but when people say "I'm sorry", I tend to accept it and move on.
In this case that the president has missed opportunities to bring the country together. Seeing as these opportunities are not specified, You can't argue the point.
On the other hand while the president may or may not have missed opportunities to bring us together the left and the democrats have not missed a single opportunity to drive us apart. Whether it be changing the approval process for judges, defaming serving millitary, supporting a U.N. beuracracy that feels the U.S. consists of idiots led by the nose the Dems have lept at the chance to split the country.
I have real reservations about the current composition of the republican leadership in congress. My own feelings are they timeshare a single braincell between them and corporations are bidding on it continuously, and between them they probably couldnt produce a whole testicle. What makes someone who before they were elected couldnt have cared what the times or wapo had to say become deathly afraid of them after election ? But despite their failings they are better than the democrats.
You do not see the republicans coming anywhere even close to acknowledging or associating with the equivalent idiots on the right. Thats a shame the democrats have valid points but every time they try to make them they always cover them in dung.
Hmm yes I agree we could do with a loyal opposition. Do you know where we could get one ? The current opposition is anything but loyal.
See the correct one in the comment directly above yours.
Or here.
"Vindicated" can mean a couple of things. Either way, it's not bragging, and not much context is provided. All I see is noise from a right-wing blog, I hope you can understand why I take it with a grain of salt. Either way:
"Everybody says I'm an a**hole, and they're right, I am," Moulitsas says.
(shrug)
I speak for myself. I freely associate with the site because there is good content on it. Kos can say what he likes- again, I'm not going to say everyone on this site is a plagiarist, and it's unfair to infer that everyone on dKos shares Markos' feelings on a particular issue.
"Vindicated" can mean a couple of things.
"Sorry" isn't one of them.
Either way, it's not bragging, and not much context is provided. All I see is noise from a right-wing blog, I hope you can understand why I take it with a grain of salt.
Yes, it's that right-wing blog Washington Monthly.
Oh, and here's your context:
When I asked Moulitsas recently how he felt about the episode, his mouth stretched into a smile: "Vindicated," he said. The media has recently begun to question the role of American contractors in Iraq, he pointed out, which was the point all along.
For those of us who do believe that words have actual meaning, "vindicated" means that you were shown to have been right when everyone else said you were wrong. The context provided makes it clear that he's ultimately not sorry for the comment, which was your original "point."
By the way, you might want to consider whether there's a fundamental difference between a personal mistake unconnected to politics, and a statement of personal belief (about which one feels "vindicated") that the murder, torture, and dismemberment of four of Gov. Warner's constituents are different both in class, but also in category.
Read it. Was banned as soon as I admitted I was an Army Recruiter. You can keep it.
The Blackwater "mercenaries" were contractors providing security for other non-military contractors. Kos' excuse, and your defense of it, is completely absurd.
The idea is that "mercenaries" are completely unprincipled and will go anywhere and do anything if the money is right. Ex-US military such as the Blackwater folks are probably quite principled. At any rate, in Fallujah they were guarding shipments of food. Celebrating the deaths of people tortured and murdered for guarding food is not "a reasonable position to take".
The gutless lib has taken down his original post but
here's his so called apology.
Even a lawyer couldn't possibly construe this as an apology.
Like my Grandma used to say. *"The company you keep speaks more about you then any words you say"*.
I'm not going to equivocate, I don't agree with his position.
You know, if you just go to DailyKos for classical history, I'll bet you can find some other sites with more information and less screaming, profanity-laced tirades from spoiled college students and burnt out "activists".
Make all the comparisons to Redstate you want, you can't tell me the vitriol-meter comes anywhere near the Kos level. And that's just for the Kos front-pagers, to say nothing of the user submitted tripe.
You do not see the republicans coming anywhere even close to acknowledging or associating with the equivalent idiots on the right.
Should I pull out the Falwell quotes first, or the Robertson ones?
And while Warner attended the convention, he didn't pander. His message was what it was, and he didn't suddenly veer to the left just because of the audience.
A fallwell or a dobson or a robertsonwith with a michael moore or a cindy shehan demonstrates the problem.
A troll was flushed out into the open, where he was promptly dispatched.
Consider this my Springer Spaniel moment.
while Warner attended the convention, he didn't pander. His message was what it was, and he didn't suddenly veer to the left just because of the audience.
I'm simply remarking on his words. They're his now. He owns them.
Not lifestyle.
To the extent that I can guide the commentary on my story, this particular subthread is heading someplace I'd prefer not to go. This smells of threadjack.
If you want to discuss this subject, please take it elsewhere. Feel free to start your own diary on the subject.
for promoting my diary. Much appreciated.
in doing that. The topic is not really of interest, and I will certainly respect your intentions regardless.
Is always enjoyed. Please keep writing.
It is the Democrats who divided this country. After 9-11 we were all united, but the Dems saw their popularity slipping away, and Bush's popularity soaring, and so made a calculation that the only way to have any hope of regaining power was to follow a scorched earth political policy.
The Dems should have supported this country in time of war; instead they put their own partisan ambition above the country.
The Dems have behaved shamelessly as the minority party in time of war. For that reason alone, they do not deserve to regain any power, but to continue to be stripped of it. The less the influence of the Dems, the better for this country.
His words are his words. But he's not responsible for two words of Markos' from two years ago.
Thanks for wading through all the muck.
This isn't really the forum for that contest. I recognize that I'm a guest here.
Courtesy of Pragmatic Progressive.
'1)I plan to support Mark Warner's Presidential Candidacy in 2008 and (2)I don't often visit the DailyKos site, mostly because I don't find the style of rhetoric valuable or even all that entertaining.'
You support a man that talks just like them though. That goes out of his way to be JUST like them. How does that work, exactly?
that every governing body should have a loyal opposition.
If you are defining Warner and his new found Kossack friends as 'loyal opposition', well, that's a definition of that term I'm unfamiliar with!
HA! It says exactly what we already know about the leadership. The problem is the lightly politically engaged voter in this country is not blog-literate doesn't know what it means that they are there.
If anything, Kos doesn't get enough conservative "ink". Shining the light on their insanity and then highlighting who is courting (ick) them is good.
I'm emailing my personal lists to spread the word.
I mean, naming drinks after Kos? Eww! Warner sucking up to these nutbags should be well known. I mean, just imagine the media frenzy if one of our candidates was caught sucking up to our bloggers thus. And the liberal blogs? They wouldn't be able to call up Armstrong Williams or Maggie Gallagher fast enough.
In fact I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they've already done that very thing for a far less egregious example of sucking up than this disgusting warnerkos party.
Russ Feingold?
From the get-go, the Dems were rabidly anti-Bush. "he was selected, not elected" etc. They opposed everything he did except for the passing of the Patriot Act (which they have condemned ever since) and the invasion of Iraq (which most of them have condemned since the going got rough).
They use every dirty trick in the book to undermine him at every turn, then criticize him for being a divider. Sickening.
- Who do you think Virginia's voters will be more kindly disposed to--the memories of the Blackwater Four, or the kindness and compassion of your new-found "date"? (I'm talking Virginia, not Vermont here, Governor).
I never said that Mark Warner is now saying "screw 'em."
He IS now saying, though, that intelligence was twisted, that a more meaningful warfighting coaltion could have been built, etc...
Those are now his words. He said them. So, he owns them.
And, he did openly court the man who made "Screw 'Em" famous. Maybe Redstate voters--the voters to whom Warner is supposed to appeal--won't care.
And, maybe they will
when people say "I'm sorry", I tend to accept it and move on.
So, when Trent Lott appologized for saying we would all have been better off if Strom Thurmond had been elected President when he was running as a segregationist, you accepted it and moved on? You posted on Daily Kos, that he had appologized and that should be the end of it? Why do I doubt that? Why instead do I think that the left demands that the right accepts their appologies even if they are obvious lies or contradicted with while ignoring heartfelt appologies from the right?
within reason and following the rules of decorum, no photos please! But when you come up with a "screw them" quote for four tortured and burned Americans pull that first. A basic rule, when attempting to make comparisons first consider the differences.
In addition; throwing a party for Kos is an endorsement of Kos, an endorsement of his record and what he has said. In the absence of a disavowal for particular statements Warner stands behind Kos's record, there being no reason to think or even suspect otherwise.
Now if you'll be so kind as to tell us when Mitt Rommney or other Republican presidential aspirants have thrown a party for Pat Robertson,bearing in mind my first para, I'd be interested.
It was a party for the site's readers. Markos didn't throw this convention, didn't organize it, and certainly can't control what the attendees think. Markos attended, gave one speech, and spoke at a few panels.
I don't hold John McCain responsible for everything Jerry Falwell said just b/c he spoke at Liberty's graduation. I don't believe McCain believes that "AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals"; he was speaking to the students, not agreeing with Falwell.
Romney has done interviews with The 700 Club; not sure what else he's done with/for Robertson.
from the left on this stuff. As you pointed out, they have a double standard. You can see it another way. When someone on the left offers an apology, that's supposed to be the end of the story. But compare that to how Bush gets treated.
- The left/MSM demand that Bush admit mistakes were made.
- Once he finally does, then you demand he apologize.
- Next come a demand for reparations depending on the "victim".
- Lastly you can claim that you now have proof that Bush caused all the problems. Case closed.
are you saying that they are truly representative of the democratic base? if so, then it is perfectly normal for politicians to court them, if they have significant influence with a large bloc of voters.
or are you saying that they have the appearance of being representative? cause then you are back to mujadaddy's argument that right-wing blogs hating on them are what gives them that appearance of power.
It was a party for the site's readers. Markos didn't throw this convention, didn't organize it, and certainly can't control what the attendees think. Markos attended, gave one speech, and spoke at a few panels.
In this instance, I believe you are making a distinction without a difference. Kos founded the site to promote his views, and gather like-minded people around him. If it was a party for site readers whom he attracted to HIS website for the purpose of spreading HIS thinking, it was just as much his party as theirs.
I don't hold John McCain responsible for everything Jerry Falwell said just b/c he spoke at Liberty's graduation.
Not the appropriate comparison: McCain didn't found Liberty, Falwell did. If the students at liberty throw a party at which Falwell happens to speak, there is a bit more too it than Falwell happened to speak, which is the analog to your statement. Presumably, the students and other attendees are endorsing what Falwell thinks in that instance.
Romney has done interviews with The 700 Club
ditto, only substitute Romney for McCain and Robertson for Falwell. In both instances the speaker is not a founder.
Oh, and just to refocus this back on the posting since the thread seems to be drifting: Warner threw the party for Kos and named a drink for him. In politics you don't do those sorts of things unless you are endorsing the positions of the person you are honoring.
Kos founded the site to promote his views, and gather like-minded people around him.
There's a huge amount of intra-Dem dissent on the site. Just look at any primary race as it's discussed on the site -- and, what, do you think that Markos is going to annoint someone next year for the presidency and the whole place will genuflect?
The party, and the weekend, were for the community, not Markos personally. And, yes, I was there, though not at the Warner party.
After reading smagar's diary and the WP article that very question came to mind.
What can be said of such people as those at this conference who applauded Senator Warner's suggestion that Secretary Rumsfeld be fired but sat in silence when he also said " 'we are glad to see the end of' terriorist Abu Musab Zarqawi.'"
Are they just dissenters of public policy, the loyal opposition to the ruling party or have they become something else altogether?
Whatever the answer, I know now that they absolutely must be stopped from regaining control of Congress. This blog and article (along with others I've read in recent weeks) have made me realize that whatever anger I've had at the Republicans for not listening to us and that perhaps "its time to teach them a lesson" by not voting is absolutely the wrong thing to do. And I plan to do all I can to help my local NC congressional candidate get elected.
you were seriously considering voting for him prior to the gala in Vegas?
He didn't say the line as an applause line, and he didn't get applause for most of the speech.
Just promise me that Vernon Robinson isn't your local candidate, because the stuff he's pulling is beneath us all.
I would still think there might be some postive reaction to Zarqawi's demise. In any case, in asnwer to your question, the Republican candidate for the NC 2nd district is Dan Mansell, who is challenging Democrat Bobby Etheridge.....
I'm a Democrat on Redstate. I come in peace. I like to talk policy with my opponents. I've never been naive enough to think that my ideas are always right all the time, and I read and post here by that virtue. I apologize if my language was too combative, my purpose here is merely to engage in honest, open discourse and debate. At times (if you review a record of my posts) my emotions have gotten the better of me, and I've subsequently apologized. Therefore, I apologize if I somehow offended you. But in the future I suggest that if you don't like what I have to say, ignore me.
If I thought that none of the allegations of wrongdoing in the Administrtation had any merit whatsoever. At the same time, I'm frustrated with the rabid talk of impeachment and other follies. The biggest source of partisan conflict and strife that I see today is the fact that the premises for each sides' arguments are so radically different. The partisan left maintins that the Administration is corrupt, rotten, and decieitful to the bone. This is obviously complete fantasy. On ther other side, the partisan right sees thae administration as nearly angelic and incapable of doing any wrong, intentional or not, unless its not being conservative enough in its policymaking. This view is equally ludicrous.
The only way to get out of this endless spiral is to compromise. Bush is not evil. It's hard sometimes, but I really want to believe he's trying as hard as he can to do what's best for America. Has he made mistakes? Absolutely. He's only human, it happens to the best of us. Some of these mistakes may have reprocussions, as they should. Calls for his impeachment are ludicrous, not least of which for the example of the damage the Clinton impeachment did to Republicans. Since I oppose Bush's agenda, I am quite content to let him finish his term as a lame duck anyway. I will excercies my ovte for Democrats in 2006 and in the 2008 Primary for the Presidential Candidate who best reflects my views. There, if each and every one of us could hold that view, flipping the parties around when necessary to fit our own ideologies and subbing out Bush for the current President in office of course, would America not be a better place?
If you were pragmatic you would be a Republican. If you were truly progressive you would be a Republican. The fact that you are not requires you to be neither. Compromise is not an option when the other side represents total negatives.
I believe the site is named Daily Kos, named after who? You are right that there is dissent, virtually all of it within the boundries of hard leftism, which you may like but which is beside the point. There are also degrees of venom, presumably to keep Kos company.
You ignored my point about the tortured and burnt Americans and Kos's vicious remark. As it is his site ,his remark, and his crowd, to separate Kos from what he, and I guess, what they say, is an evasion to weak to respect. Even as an evasion.
Other leading Democrats have dipped the knee to Kos, Kennedy for example. Neither in numbers nor attention nor flat out obsequiousness have republicans turned to a source so capable, voluble, and repetitive in the art of obscenity and vileness.
No hard feeling I trust!
You Don't Have to Rub it In My Face
With respect, politics is the contact sport of the mind. We trade blows with liberals here. The punches are clean but hard-hitting. We spar here. I was poking fun at some of the (IMO) pompousity in the language you were using. Liberals are welcome to come in here and scrap, but you're advised to not bring a glass jaw into this ring.
I had no intent to insult or demean you personally. I was jes punchin' back!
in the future I suggest that if you don't like what I have to say, ignore me.
Well, I suggest that, if that's the way you feel, you might want to comment in someone else's story. I always try to reply.
No harm, no foul. The next time I see your tagline in some of the comments to a story of mine, I'll bear this conversation in mind, and will frame my response to you a bit less combatively.
Welcome to Redstate!
in any case. (Sorry, just caught up with this thread.) But certain righty bloggers have been taking him seriously and I no longer do. Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. Associating with the bats in the Democratic belfry is not going to help the pres. wannabes. Just wait and see.
The only Dem I'd ever consider voting for now (I was a Dem for 24 yrs. and never once in that time voted for a Republican) is Lieberman, and he'd have to be running against McCain for me to do that.
The trolling here over Kos' idiotic statement and non-apology is wasted but the takedowns were outstanding. Kos is king of the BDS crowd and that's all I need to know. He's leading them all straight over the cliff, which is fine by me, except it doesn't help keep my party on the straight and narrow.
If it comes to a vote between Hillary! and McCain, my head will explode.