Political civil war that really does sum it up....sm
Posted By: Democrat on 2006-06-27
In Reply to: Why insult my views? - an observer
And it really is a sad state of affairs.
You raise a good point about bin Laden, I never thought of that. He could have died of natural causes and be buried somewhere. It's not like he was the most vigorous being (healthwise). Who knows?
Catching him two years ago would have meant more politically and *antiterror* wise than it would mean today.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
civil war
During the civil war the rich people, who owned slaves, worked up the poor people, who did not own slaves, into a frenzy about how the north was bossing them around, how they should leave the union and it was an ideological war. All the rich people left their plantations and went north until the war was over. The poor people fought out, brother against brother, without shoes, for an idea. The rich people came back after it was over and kicked the freed slaves off their land, right into the laps of the poor people who had to compete with them now for jobs. The rich stayed rich, alive, and healthy, and all of the poor people were slaughtered.
Are all you republicans rich? Don't fight for them, they are on vacation.
Thank you van - and thank you for being civil
Everyone here gave me a headache I shut it down for awhile. Talk about jumping on and attacking. Heaven forbid anyone should ever put their opinions or beliefs up on this board.
You are correct and I did state in one (if not more) that I was incorrect and he did not lie. But even after saying that they kept attacking and attacking. Then bringing up past posts that had nothing to do with this.
Thank you for posting below all the countries in the Middle East. That helps sort things out.
Like I said, they have every civil right I have.....
--
I definitely agree with you - we all need to be civil
Sharing one's viewpoints is one thing. There is no need to call people nasty names. Those other bashings you are talking about came after I posted my message, so I didn't see them.
I hate to quote Rodney King but we all do need to get along. Having one viewpoints is important (it's what makes us human beings), but not everyone will agree with us, and as you stated in your message calling you a d-bag (that has got to be so low class) just because you don't agree with someone? I think I called someone that in high school (but that was over 30 years ago). We will all disagree about issues, but I hope people would be nicer and just say "I disagree and this is why", and leave it at that.
I am sorry you were called all those horrible things. I just want you to know that with our disagreements I in no uncertain terms think you are a d-bag or jerk or anything horrible like that. You are a person just like me. Strong in our beliefs, just different in our ways.
You do Civil War re-enactment?
Politics aside, I feel like I'm meeting some new FRIENDS on this board! By any chance are you going to participate in the Prairie Grove, Arkansas re-enactment the 1st weekend in Dec? We're working to get recognition for the Battle of Cane Hill and hopefully in the next few years we'll have a re-enactment here.
Why have civil defense. NM
x
Civil Defense
civil defense: NOUN: abbr. CD A range of emergency measures to be taken by an organized body of civilian volunteers for the protection of life and property in the event of natural disaster or enemy attack.
Well....civil unions would have
to be something we would do on a country wide basis. I mean...what is the point if you can't leave your state because other states don't accept them. I meant this as a country wide thing. If the whole country recognized civil unions with the same benefits as marriage kind of thing. I guess I wasn't specific enough.
As it goes, same sex marriage is only accepted in the states that allow it. I mean...you have to live in those states to have the rights of marriage...right? Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one because I really don't know.
For someone who "laments" civil debate
you do a fair job of attacking me - it at least feels like one - and I am hardly a Republican... something you obviously hate.
I totally share your disgust of the fascists in power and those who defend them. But if you think for a New York Second the Democrats are much less corrupt you are fooling yourself.
Ask yourself WHY in the face of clear criminal conduct the Democrats have not only successfully challenged bu$h but have HELPED TO ADVANCE THE VAST MAJORITY OF HIS AGENDA (POLICIES).
You do a little real research on this and get back to me. Maybe then you'll hve a better idea why I am a recovering Democrat.
Clinton himself said it best: Fool me once (democratic party), shame on you; fool me twice, shame on ME.
They are the first to invoke their civil liberties. sm
And the first to silence others who do not agree with them. They have attempted to bring the office of the Presidency down to their level...disrespectful, unhallowed, a slip shod Animal House with pizza lovers who trash the house when they leave and steal all the W's from the keyboards. Their beloved Clinton sold the Lincoln Bedroom to people who had no awe of anything, much less respect for all who slept there before. They had sex with young interns and said it wasn't sex. They lied under oath and brought their shady cronyism into the White House. Theyrefused background FBI checks and refused to have their medical records made public, both firsts in any presidency. In other words, THEY HAD NO RESPECT FOR THE OFFICE. This from a man who promised the most ethical presidency ever. And those very same people who continue to support Clinton to this day swear it was all about sex post on this very board about following rules. It boggles the mind.
Lincoln and civil rights
Although you are correct that Lincoln was a Republican, in those days, Republican was not what it is today, nor Democrat, no Tory nor Whig, etc. How could it be, the times they have-a-changed. He called himself a Democrat many times during his career and was extremely anti-slavery but did not fall in with the abolitionists. What with Republicans, Democrats, Whigs, Jacobins, etc. it would be really difficult to say one party abolished slavery.People from all sides supported and opposed it. Lincoln just happened to be president and the **War of Northern Aggression** quelled those who had seceded.
Lincoln was very anti-war, did not like the idea at all so the civil war was distasteful to say the least. He did, however, have no problem enlisting and personally fighting in the European versus Sac Indians war which makes him not my most favorite president...but then, everyone makes mistakes. He did that in his younger years.
The civil rights act I have always believed rests with LBJ. He is not my favorite either. In fact, I did not like him much at all, but he did, in his predecessor's memory, carry the civil rights act to fruition. I remember him saying on the day that he signed it, the south is lost to Democrats as of this day. Here is a link of the timeline. It is pretty straightforward, comes from LBJ for kids site so it is not overly lengthy or boring.
http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/lbjforkids/civil_timeline.shtm
Civil Rights Act voting
Actually in the House 100% of the southern Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Act so it seems you may have skewed the results a bit in order to generalize. Actually the vote went by geography rather than party lines as is obvious below.
As far as the Dems having a lot of catching up to do....politics change over time. Democratic affiliation changed with FDR. Perhaps you have a lot of catching up to do yourself!
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT VOTING
The original House version:
- Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
- Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)
- Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
- Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)
The Senate version:
Not semantics - Law. There was a need for the Civil Rights
movement of the 50s and 60s. That movement did the job and now it is all water under the bridge. Quit whining about slavery and mistreatment. Quit living in the past. That's all African-American's based their votes on in this election, was the past and skin color. It's racism and ignorance pure and simple. The hypocrisy is the democrats/liberals and their message of tolerance. Now it's the whites that are disciminated against and all tolerance is gone.
Currently in Kentucky ther is a civil
trial going on against members of the KKK for beating up someone at one of the county fairs.
You in your view civil rights don't mean anything? (sm)
Civil and political rights are a class of rights ensuring things such as the protection of peoples' physical integrity; procedural fairness in law; protection from discrimination based on gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, etc; individual freedom of belief, speech, association, and the press; and political participation.
So acorrding to you, we should just scrap this whole civil rights thing that would protect those who do not have as large a voice and go for a majority vote?
marriage vs civil union
As a nation, we did not used to spend so much time splitting hairs over words.
What if back when the 19th amendment was enacted, they had said: Women having the right to 'vote' would upset men. So instead of 'voting' we're going to call it 'ballot casting.' That way, women can have the same rights as men, but only men can be 'voters' and won't feel they're losing their special status.
How about if during the civil rights movement, when segregation was eliminated, instead of integration they had called it: 'The right to attend the same schools and go to the same restaurants and ride in the front of the bus'? Calling institutions 'integrated' would upset the southern states.
How about when women began to demand 'equal pay for equal work'? What if they had said: Okay, you can have the money and the responsibility, maybe even the corner office, but only a man can be called VP of Sales. Instead, your title will have to be something else, maybe Sales Coordinator, othewise the men who are VPs will get angry.
I suppose a fair number of women or blacks would have considered this a win, because they were gaining the benefit, if not the exact status of the changes. But a fair number of folks rightly would have said: Huh? Aren't these silly distinctions? A lot of people would have wondered why they didn't just shut up and 'settle.'
If a civil union conveys such benefits as inheritance rights, parental rights, credit rights, insurance rights, the right to make medical decisions for a spouse then, really, what's in a name?
Civil union rights.
"If a civil union conveys such benefits as inheritance rights, parental rights, credit rights, insurance rights, the right to make medical decisions for a spouse then, really, what's in a name?"
I understand your point.
But why, then, is so important for same-sex couples to use the word "marriage" if - as you pointed out - it's just a word.
Why aren't people fighting to have all the rights of marriage applied to civil unions? Seems to me that, while most Americans are against gay marriage, most Americans are actually FOR civil unions.
Civil marriages don't just involve
Lots of people are married by JPs. Have for years. And a church might decide that they would not hire a heterosexual on the basis that they "weren't married in the church". Granted, most don't even inquire, but it could happen, if we accept the governor's ridiculous statement. And he suggests that if they did, it would be hunky-dory. Churches aren't required to recognize "civil marriages" by his pronouncement. This would obviously have to include homosexual and heterosexual marriages or now we have a THIRD type of marriage.
My point is that there is no legal differentiation between a "civil marriage" and one that is performed in a church and never has been. If the governor is now suggesting that there is such a difference, he is nuts.
This is what I found on the civil rights vote.
House Debate and Passage
The House of Representatives debated the bill for nine days and rejected nearly one hundred amendments designed to weaken the bill before passing H.R .7152 on February 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11. A bipartisan coalition of Republicans and northern Democrats was the key to the bill's success. This same arrangement would prove crucial later to the Senate's approval of the bill.
I thought after reading your post that there was something wrong with that statement, Republicans passed the civil rights act; Huh?? Then I remembered at that time the south was predominantly Democratic and I believe those elected officials were voting more on their constituents' demands than on the platform of the Democratic party. That also explains why Johnson said, **As of today, Democrats have lost the south.** and he was right. It looks to me like a bipartisan deal. I got the above information from the Everett Dirksen Library Archives.
This also demonstrates to me how a party can change or evolve its platforms. The Democratic south was once **the little people, the working class, the most good for the most people party.** After the civil rights act the south became predominantly Republican and remains so. In 1964 the south did not want equal rights for women, blacks, religions. They wanted things to stay the way they were. I think the Republicans provided that for them. In 1964 I think it safe to say that WASP was pretty much the bulk of the Republican party and that appealed to the south who were being forced at gunpoint to change.
I don't know about the suffrage movement but I always wonder if they caught the same flack then that NOW gets now. I am going to look that up though.
don'forget civil rights lawyer
and constitutional law professor. Yep, I think he think on his feet with the best of em.
We are heading toward a civil war of a magnitude we cannot foresee
Never in my lifetime have issues gotten so ugly/hateful. This will be the first illegal election in history if Sen. Obama is elected. People do not care that he does not meet the requirements to be President. They will go against the constitution just to get him elected. Why? I know there are a lot of people who would like Arnold Schwarzenegger to run for President. If Obama who is not a native born, and is possibly not even a US Citizen can be elected and have the constitution violated for him, then we should be able to do it for Gov. Schwarzenegger. There are so many people who will say we have to protect the constitution, yet they’ll turn a blind eye when it comes to electing someone who is not an American born, and who is possibly still a citizen of Indonesia (forget that he is Muslin, I don’t care about his religion, he may possibly be a citizen of another country). We have a candidate who is so busy running around like a chicken with his head cut off suppressing the truth from Americans, and there are Americans attacking others (no that that girl with a B in her face – I hope she is prosecuted for what she has done), but others who attack (verbally and physically) anyone who is not allowing this lie to proceed. Mr. Obama was supposed to be checked out thoroughly before he could run and the DNC failed to do that. Mr. Obama is calling for the health records of all candidates, yet he won’t release his own. Sorry but a one-page statement from his doctor saying Mr. Obama is healthy, that's all you need to know, with no details whatsoever (and from someone whose parents died at a young age and he smoked his whole life and took drugs and drank) the American people have a right to know this – especially since their side is pushing to have Palin & McCains “full” records be known to the public and people are screaming and shouting its their right to know the full health records of the republicans, shouldn’t that go for Obama too? Then there is the issue of his school records. Why is he desperately trying to suppress those. Most likely it will show he is a citizen of Indonesia and never became a US Citizen. You know if a democrat president is elected fine, just let it be a legal one. Follow the constitution and not this love-fest everyone is sharing towards Obama. Some good democrats that would make fine presidnets are Richardson & Kucinich. I'd even be okay with Edwards.
But I say we are heading toward a civil war because we have people already threatening that if Obama does not win there will be “riots in the streets like we haven’t seen”, but if he is elected and it is illegal there will be riots of another kind. You are going to have so many Americans angry and disenfranchised with the government that if you thought the Boston Tea Party was ugly this will be worse.
Then we have the issue of the every day American citizens. We are suffering. There’s no doubt about it. We are heading into a depression (do not blame Bush for the whole thing as it started its downward spiral under the Carter administration and continued through the Clinton administration, and yes some republicans are to blame), but Americans are suffering. We are losing our jobs, our homes, cannot afford to send our kids to college, let alone buy gas and groceries or go to the doctor. More and more people’s savings are being wiped out and their retirement plans are worthless. Yet the politicians (both republican AND democrat) are getting richer and richer. The latest saying in the Washington political scene is “if you were not a millionaire before you came in you will be one when you leave”. Politicians are no longer working for the American people; they are working for themselves and their rich friends and against us. They don’t care about us - they don’t care one iota. They have made so many loopholes to protect themselves and have lied so many times they are covering their lies with lies and saying exactly what they think we want to hear.
All I say is if Sen. Obama is elected, the election will be a fraud, the office of President will be a fraud, and with the three branches of office (house, senate, and president) ALL being democrat, he will not be impeached for fraud and they will continue on with their illegal activities. And the country will see a civil distress. Why should we abide by laws when our government doesn’t.
People need to wake up. The constitution is being violated and they are all okay with that. It’s all very sickening. I just think its disgraceful that people would rather see our country destroyed than to elect Senator McCain. Sure I wish it was someone else (R. Paul, M. Romney, D. Hunter or any of the others, but its not). If McCain gets in don’t worry, it will only be four years and then another election will be held and maybe this time a candidate will be chosen on the democratic side that is legal. That is of course if the Mayan calendar is wrong.
First of all, blacks received the right to vote after the civil war,
try 140 years ago (NOT 40) when the Reconstruction Ammendments were passed between 1865 and 1870. Women received the right vote with the 19th Ammendment in 1920 (88 years ago).
I think history has established that slavery is wrong. I refuse to believe that I, as a white person, must continually apologize to the black man or woman for slavery that happened to their ancestors centuries ago! I personally have never codoned or owned slaves and they personally have never been slaves. So I ask you, what does slavery have to do with Obama being elected president? What does slavery have to do with his compaign and this election? Who is making race an issue here? I'll answer the last one, YOU are by insinuating that Obama and all African-Americans deserve special accolades just because they are black. They did not suffer as slaves. They did not have to overcome slavery. And today's African-Americans receive more rights and more governmental assistant, then any white person I know. Just look at affirmative action for crying out loud!
You already posted this question. Civil unions are
*
Rahm Emanuel wants forced civil service
Listen to the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfV8iXiB9Xg
DH said its disgusting that he's laughing about it.
Jeez - is JTBB the only civil person on this board
Believing that the whole thing is one intermingled war in the middle east is not spin. Those are my beliefs. When I talk to my friend and she talks about her husband in Iraq and she says the middle east, then she talks about her son in Afghanistan and she refers that to the middle east, that is why I always believed both countries are in the middle east. That is not spin???? And for pete's sake don't call me ignorant!!!! Like I said I always believed both Iraq and Afghanistan were in the middle east. I'm not trying to incite war against Obama - sheesh! Get a grip. I read a news story and posted it here about Obama sending troops to Afghanistan. The article said 17,000 troops are going to Afghanistan. That is not spin, that is citing a news article I read. He lied - Okay I'm wrong about that. He did not lie about the sending troops to Afghanistan thing (I don't remember him saying he would send them, but I've heard they are on youtube and if they are on youtube then I believe JTBB (she's the one who pointed me in the right direction).
You know I could say a lot of negative and nasty words to you like you did to me, but I'd probably be banned, so I'd appreciate it if you keep your closed minded opinions to yourself. Your whole post to me sounds like BS in itself and your just too eager to attack.
we'd be better off without illegals..he deserves a commendation, not a civil suit...
++
Civil Liberty Effects - Police State Pizza
http://www.adcritic.com/interactive/view.php?id=5927
National security? Civil liberties? Must be socialist conspiracy
This is an amazing article that not too suprisingly will probably go unaddressed, right along with Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae corporate bailout story. The're too busy getting ready for the coronation ball. However, I just wanted to thank you for passing this along. The links and other articles also lead to some insightful and interesting reads on stories that will probably end up thrown under the royal coach. Let them eat cake!
Community service and CIVIL service - not the same thing nm
x
political ads
First of all, I have to say I am so sick of the ads; I think they should limit TV so they can't start months and months before the election and then can't take up every single commercial break. But my question is, has anyone else noticed the ads change according to what the public is saying. The public sentiment runs one way, the ad reinforces that sentiment. The public says something else and the ad changes to what the public wants to hear. I want to tell them "get a platform and stick to it. Let us know what you really think and what your real plans are so we can make an informed decision." All this back and forth is making me dizzy and just more proof that you just can't trust them.
I never said what political persuasian I was. sm
You presume an awful lot and have attacked here more than once without provocation. As far as Chelsea, I don't see her mentioned here. However, making no presumptions, a Christian person does not post as you do. So am I to assume you post as more than one? It isn't nice to have presumptions made about oneself, is it?
The Christian right isn't political at all. sm
There are many Democrats who belong to the Christian right. I am not sure why you feel politicizing religion is so important, but I realize how important labels are to you. It's unfortunate. Jimmy Carter just recently came out and spoke against the Democratic party for abandoning God. If Christians feel they have to place to turn but the *right*, whose fault is that? Pat Robertson doesn't speak for me. However, he is a good man and a Christian man. As far as calling for an assassination that's bogus and was taken out of context and anyone who cared to do their research would know that. But it's just way more convenient and fits into the left's philosophy to damn him to hell. THERE' s the left for you.
Next we will be checking the political....
affiliation of serial killers. Sigh. What do you think Osama bin Laden would register as if he could register to vote....ummmm....don't think it would be with the Christian right.....? Are we going to try to list the perverts and see whose list is the longest? Why even post this, when you have cigar-wielding Bill Clinton on your list? Do you honestly think this man in the bathroom did what he did because he is a Republican? If so, that means Billy must have wielded the cigar because he is a Democrat....?
I repeat...why even post this?
political comedy
You are right. It is so ABSURD that it is funny. 
BS from a political watchdog?
Do you even know what that means?
But it would be political hay if it were an Obama
@
Making political hay.
These dadgone Republicans will make hay out of anything even if it makes them look like idgits.
This is what happens when a political camp
ignorance as they support candidates that do not even have the sense to equip their supporters with enough ammunition to be able to defend their own party's own platform positions. Their white matter is so atrophied from lack of exercise that they are not able to come up with anything except vacuous statements such as these.
They travel in packs and set out on their hunts, in search of the slur, slander, dirt and lies, on a mission to convince themselves and each other of their social superiority and to bolster their delusions of grandeur, couched in their unfounded beliefs that they are the Ones...the pure, true, real Americans and that the opposing candidate and the "theys" that support him are the "Others," the cursed Moslem terrorists, subversive socialists, Anti-American militant camp of racial mongrels, the great unwashed underbelly of the nation, composed of factions of militant tribal warriors whose shared vision is to bring their country down.
Their eyes are glazed over after weeks and weeks of speaking with forked tongues as they get themselves all caught up in the rapture of self-righteous indigation and self assurance. The fervor of their mob mentality is reaching ever such higher proportions, whipped up into frenzies of verbal volleys, the rhetorical equivalent of suicide bombs, which they hurl without abandon across vast stretchs of cyberspace, confident their strikes are surgical and secretly hoping to take down as much collateral damage as possible. They start to mistake their bully pulpit sermons for strength in numbers, all forceful and mighty, these champions of truth and might.
This process is a natural by-product of weeks upon weeks of chanting hate-speech mantra, reinforced by spinmeisters and hammering hatred that issues forth from their fearless leaders at campaign rallies. This causes them to eventually adopt this kind of arrogance that ultimately morphs into some sort suspended, animated, twisted logic that actually allows them to believe that they are calling the faithful to arms, energizing their base, and calling forth armies of fellow true, pure Americans, marching to the polls down the road to nowhere.
Face it, Bradley, your guy is all washed up and your party's going down.
Political nuttiness.
Who cares? I'll vote for the person I feel is the right one for the job and all of this political nattering isn't improving your line counts, is it?
Okay. use your kid to get your political opinion
nm
That is if political boards like this are
allowed to remain in existence when Obama's regime takes over.
Thank goodness, no more political ads! nm
))
Political humor
Subject: Will Obama get Osama, or will Osama get Obama?
After numerous rounds of 'We don't even know if Osama is still
alive', Barrack Hussein Obama has now been telling everyone he will
capture Osama Bin Laden when elected.
So, Osama himself decided to send Barrack Hussein Obama a letter in
his own handwriting to let him know he was still in the game.
Obama opened the letter and it contained a single line of coded
message:
370H-SSV-0773H
Obama was baffled, so he e-mailed it to Howard Dean.
Dean and the DNC and his aides had no clue either, so they sent it
to Joe Biden.
Joe Biden could not solve so it was sent to the FBI and the CIA.
Eventually they asked John McCain and his Staff to look at it.
And within minutes McCain's Staff e-mailed Obama with this reply:
'Tell Obama he's holding the message upside down'.
Top 10 political newcomers
OMG! Get ready for a big shock by one certain individual who made the list!
Top 10 political newcomers of 2008
By: Alexander Burns
January 3, 2009 07:09 PM EST
Even in a year dominated by oversized political personalities — Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and John McCain chief among them — a few lesser-known newcomers helped define the electoral landscape.
These new arrivals on the national stage — relative unknowns who burst onto the scene, behind-the-scenes players who suddenly took on high-profile roles, politicians who took their act beyond their state’s borders — made 2008 a livelier, more engaging political year and seem likely to continue shaping the political environment for better or for worse.
Gov. Sarah Palin: The Alaska governor was a significant political figure in her own right before 2008, but in the span of just a few months the former Wasilla mayor exploded onto the national scene to become the first woman nominated for national office by the Republican Party and one of the most controversial political figures in the country.
Her introduction to the public wasn’t as smooth as it could have been: After a dazzling performance at the Republican National Convention, a series of campaign-trail missteps diminished Palin’s electoral appeal. But the GOP base never stopped loving Palin, and despite her ticket’s defeat, Palin remains an enormously popular conservative who’s poised to help determine the future of the party.
Caroline Kennedy: The last living child of President John F. Kennedy, the 51-year-old Manhattanite emerged from her famously private lifestyle in late January, writing a New York Times op-ed endorsing Obama for president.
A joint endorsement rally with her uncle, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), followed a day later, vaulting Caroline into the front lines of the presidential campaign. After the end of the Democratic primaries, she headed up Obama’s vice presidential selection process with Eric Holder and spoke at the Democratic National Convention.
Now she’s reportedly a leading contender for the Senate seat Clinton will vacate when she takes up her new post at the State Department. Quite a debut, even for a Kennedy.
David Plouffe: An unlikely celebrity, the Obama campaign manager usually attracts distinctly un-glitzy adjectives like “soft-spoken” and “camera-shy.” But as the operations guy behind the Obama phenomenon, Plouffe cultivated a reputation as a no-nonsense political chess master.
Plouffe won’t take a position within the administration, though he may continue to play a role shaping Obama’s movement outside the White House. He is, however, cashing in: he’s already signed on with the Washington Speakers Bureau and is penning a future best-seller, tentatively titled “The Audacity to Win.”
Sen.-elect Kay Hagan (D-N.C.): Few expected this obscure state legislator to have much of a shot against a political titan like Sen. Elizabeth Dole. Sure, Hagan was the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s anointed candidate, but most political prognosticators expected her campaign would fall short in the end.
But after winning her party’s nomination in May, Hagan proved an adept fundraiser and relentlessly attacked Dole as an out-of-touch Washington insider. By the fall, Hagan was surging, and when Dole blasted back with ads linking Hagan to an atheist group it backfired. Hagan won by 9 points.
In a non-presidential year, Hagan would likely have attracted more attention as a political giant-killer. Hagan will have to settle for a humbler title: United States senator.
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.): Like Palin, Corker held high office before 2008. But it wasn’t until the Senate’s showdown over a proposed auto industry bailout that the former Chattanooga mayor distinguished himself as a serious player on the Hill.
Drawing praise from the GOP leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, as well as from Democrats like Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, Corker took the lead in shaping the Republican counterproposal to Democrats’ aid plan for Detroit.
His performance over the past month — which even a partisan like Durbin conceded was “magnificent” — makes him one of the few Republicans who looks better after Nov. 4 than he did before, standing out as a possible future leader in a party that’s been largely decapitated.
Meg Whitman: The former ebay CEO left her corporate post only about nine months ago. But thanks to her work on behalf of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s primary campaign, and the McCain-Palin ticket in the general election, Whitman is on her way to becoming a significant national political figure.
Though Palin ultimately took the prize, Whitman was buzzed about for the vice presidency after McCain listed her among the three wisest people he knew (the other two were Gen. David Petraeus and John Lewis, the Democratic congressman and civil rights hero). Whitman also delivered a solid, if unmemorable, speech at the Republican National Convention.
She’s now eyeing the 2010 California governor’s race, and with her business background and deep pockets Whitman has a real shot. If she were elected governor of the most-populous state in the nation, Whitman would immediately be find herself on the short list of Republican presidential contenders.
Beau Biden: During the Democratic convention, few speakers inspired as much on-air swooning as son of the now vice president-elect, Joe Biden. CNN’s David Gergen called Beau Biden’s address a “remarkably good speech” and “a home run.”
The 39-year-old Delaware attorney general's National Guard unit was deployed to Iraq in October. When he comes back, he’ll have the chance to put his famous name to use when his father’s Senate seat comes up for a special election in 2010. He hasn’t said that he’ll seek the job, but Joe Biden made his own preferences clear by engineering the appointment of a placeholder for the seat.
“It is no secret that I believe my son, Attorney General Beau Biden, would make a great United States senator, just as I believe he has been a great attorney general,” Biden said in a statement after his longtime aide, Ted Kaufman, was tapped for the seat in November.
Gov. David Paterson: When Paterson was elected lieutenant governor in 2006, New York’s political class viewed him to be a senator-in-waiting, ready to step up in the event Hillary Rodham Clinton won the presidency. An affable political operator with a wry sense of humor, Paterson was expected to spend a term or two in former Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s shadow until the crusading former prosecutor decided to go national.
That plan didn’t quite work out. Spitzer resigned in disgrace after a personal scandal, leaving Paterson in charge. Paterson, it seems, had a few skeletons of his own in the closet. Fresh off revelations of his own personal indiscretions, Paterson was then confronted by the Wall Street crisis, which has left New York’s budget in a shambles. Now he finds himself at the center of the succession spectacle over Clinton’s soon-to-be-vacant Senate seat.
Elisabeth Hasselbeck: This slot might actually be an ensemble prize given to the entire cast of ABC's “The View,” the women’s chat show which emerged this year as morning television’s most entertaining and unlikely forum for political debate.
But if there’s one member of the show’s cast who stood out, it was former “Survivor” contestant-turned-conservative pundit Elisabeth Hasselbeck.
Cut from a different mold than your typical right-of-center talking head, Hasselbeck frequently clashed with her considerably more liberal co-hosts, including the venerable Barbara Walters, by defending the McCain-Palin campaign. In October, Hasselbeck went so far as to campaign with the GOP vice presidential candidate in Florida.
If there were any doubts about her stature as a rising GOP pundit, they were dispelled last week. After complaining on the air that she didn’t receive an invitation this year’s White House Christmas party, Hasselbeck promptly received a apology from the White House. It turned out she had been invited but her invitation did not arrive on time.
Rachel Maddow: Since taking over the 9 p.m. slot on MSNBC, Maddow has posted strong ratings by finally giving liberal cable-watchers the show they’ve always wanted. Less combative than Chris Matthews and less self-righteous than Keith Olbermann, the former Rhodes Scholar has defined herself as a thoughtful, sharp — and sharp-tongued — host who presents her perspective on the news without being cranky, gimmicky and repetitive.
For Maddow, as for all liberal commentators, the question is how she’ll keep her audience engaged without the Bush administration serving as a foil. Judging from her quick start, it’s a good bet she’ll figure out a way.
some political humor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzlIm_T8xjM&feature=channel
Political humor
YOU MIGHT BE AN OBOT IF…
You’ve never paid any attention to politics until Obama ran for President, and now you’ve become a political expert by reading Huffington Post and/or Daily Kos.
You feel tingles running up or down your legs when That One is orating.
You get called a Cheetoh a lot but you don’t know why.
You believe there are only about 200 PUMAs in the country.
You weep with joy while repeating the mantra “YES WE CAN!”
You think Hillary Clinton tried to “steal” the Democratic nomination.
You fly into a rage when anyone suggests Obama is unqualified for the presidency.
You’ve used the word “racist” more than any other word in the last year.
You’ve developed a keen interest in Hawaiian body surfing.
For the first time in your life, you are proud of your country, but only because it elected a black president.
You believe that with Obama as president, this is a New Age when all wars will end, everyone will be provided for, and you don’t have to worry about paying your mortgage anymore!
You think Obama is a Great Man because of his magnificent accomplishments … like getting elected, and uh, uh, uh…
You think all Hillary Clinton supporters are middle-aged lesbians (not that there’s anything… yada yada yada… )
You get a lump in your throat when you hear the words “President Obama.”
You get a lump in your pants when you see Michelle Obama.
You think Bill Ayers was a non-issue, and was done wrong by the evil media.
You plan to name your children Barack and Baracka.
You believe that saying his middle name is racist.
You think the political platform of “change” is original to Obama.
You believe PUMAs are Republicans pretending to be disaffected Democrats, kind of like Joe Lieberman.
Political humor
YOU MIGHT BE AN OBOT IF…
You’ve never paid any attention to politics until Obama ran for President, and now you’ve become a political expert by reading Huffington Post and/or Daily Kos.
You feel tingles running up or down your legs when That One is orating.
You get called a Cheetoh a lot but you don’t know why.
You believe there are only about 200 PUMAs in the country.
You weep with joy while repeating the mantra “YES WE CAN!”
You think Hillary Clinton tried to “steal” the Democratic nomination.
You fly into a rage when anyone suggests Obama is unqualified for the presidency.
You’ve used the word “racist” more than any other word in the last year.
You’ve developed a keen interest in Hawaiian body surfing.
For the first time in your life, you are proud of your country, but only because it elected a black president.
You believe that with Obama as president, this is a New Age when all wars will end, everyone will be provided for, and you don’t have to worry about paying your mortgage anymore!
You think Obama is a Great Man because of his magnificent accomplishments … like getting elected, and uh, uh, uh…
You think all Hillary Clinton supporters are middle-aged lesbians (not that there’s anything… yada yada yada… )
You get a lump in your throat when you hear the words “President Obama.”
You get a lump in your pants when you see Michelle Obama.
You think Bill Ayers was a non-issue, and was done wrong by the evil media.
You plan to name your children Barack and Baracka.
You believe that saying his middle name is racist.
You think the political platform of “change” is original to Obama.
You believe PUMAs are Republicans pretending to be disaffected Democrats, kind of like Joe Lieberman.
Political humor
YOU MIGHT BE AN OBOT IF…
You’ve never paid any attention to politics until Obama ran for President, and now you’ve become a political expert by reading Huffington Post and/or Daily Kos.
You feel tingles running up or down your legs when That One is orating.
You get called a Cheetoh a lot but you don’t know why.
You believe there are only about 200 PUMAs in the country.
You weep with joy while repeating the mantra “YES WE CAN!”
You think Hillary Clinton tried to “steal” the Democratic nomination.
You fly into a rage when anyone suggests Obama is unqualified for the presidency.
You’ve used the word “racist” more than any other word in the last year.
You’ve developed a keen interest in Hawaiian body surfing.
For the first time in your life, you are proud of your country, but only because it elected a black president.
You believe that with Obama as president, this is a New Age when all wars will end, everyone will be provided for, and you don’t have to worry about paying your mortgage anymore!
You think Obama is a Great Man because of his magnificent accomplishments … like getting elected, and uh, uh, uh…
You think all Hillary Clinton supporters are middle-aged lesbians (not that there’s anything… yada yada yada… )
You get a lump in your throat when you hear the words “President Obama.”
You get a lump in your pants when you see Michelle Obama.
You think Bill Ayers was a non-issue, and was done wrong by the evil media.
You plan to name your children Barack and Baracka.
You believe that saying his middle name is racist.
You think the political platform of “change” is original to Obama.
You believe PUMAs are Republicans pretending to be disaffected Democrats, kind of like Joe Lieberman.
More political humor...(sm)
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=215336&title=President-Goofus-and-President-Gallant---Peer-Pressers
Political Debate
You know, shelly, I love a good political debate/discussion. I sometimes have my own views changed or modified by a good point from someone who is well informed and thoughtful and whose views are different from mine. But you bring nothing to the table here. You and others like you have blinders on, shelly. Is your faith so fragile that you refuse to hear or consider any other point of view?
I'm very disappointed at what has happened to political discourse in this country, but I also realize that your narrow point of view applies only to you and other narrow-minded, naive people like you, and you're definitely in the minority in this country.
Many people who would like to have a serious political discussion on this forum simply refuse to be pulled in by folks like you, and have thus abandoned the forum.
You might do yourself a favor and allow yourself to read and/or hear something that doesn't line up with your preconceived world views. You might learn something, and your faith might actually be strengthened by considering an opposing point of view.
But I'm not holding my breath...
Because he's a political satirist?..(sm)
LOL. He actually graduated cum laude from Harvard with a degree in political science. Let's not forget we (well maybe not all of us) also elected an actor to be president.
The only thing that scares me about Franken is the hairdo. ROFL. He really needs to work on that. Maybe some gel or something.
|
