News-Record.com

"Can you not champion individual responsibility and accountability, limited central government, a strong national defense, fiscal responsibility, equal opportunity"

Who ran on this platform? Seriously.

"Who ran on this platform? Seriously."

I wish someone would. A few weeks ago the Big 3 execs fly on corporate jets (bad PR move) to DC and ask for $25 billion. Congress turns them away. Now they drive hybrids (good PR move) to DC and up the ante to $34 billion. They are likely to get it. Amazing.

All through this last campaign I heard the same old, same old tactics from the GOP and it WAS based on fear. Obama was a Muslim who was going to take away our Bibles and make Islam the national language. Obama was tied to radical terrorists and was going to "pay back" all the "honkies" for wrongs perpetrated against blacks. Obama was for abortions and would make them mandatory. Obama was for gay marriage and he would destroy the sanctity of marriage as we traditionally know it. Obama was going to undermine the military. Obama was going to destroy the economy (which, if one has not noticed, happened on the Bush watch) And on and on.

The GOP did an even better hatchet job on Kerry and Gore. I read the comments here in this blog, the ones based on fear mongering, not on the so-called conservative values of the GOP. So what is Pitts saying that is not true of the GOP collectively?

To seriously consider grooming Palin for president in 2012 will only assure another defeat for the GOP. She shows little integrity, intelligence or allegiance. But, hey, go for it GOP. Just remember she lost the election for John McCain.

C'mon, Curtis- you know Pitts wouldn't be able to write a thank you note without attacking the right.
His writing is so transparent and one dimensional that reading the first line of any of his "opinions" is all that is necessary to know the rest of the screed.

Yvonne- Republicans lost, not because of Palin, but because they have lost their way. They are no longer fiscally, socially or militarily conservative.
Your opinion on why 53 million Americans did not vote for Obama is perilously close to being ignorant and uninformed.
You, like Pitts, are a shill for left wing ideology. You cannot see beyond the msm talking points.

Republicans lost, not because of Palin, but because they have lost their way. They are no longer fiscally, socially or militarily conservative.

I agree with you WJ; however I don't think Palin helped the cause. I think she caused a lot of independent voters to vote for Obama.

I think all bloggers will agree that our government is run by big business, not We The People.

Hope you all had a Happy Thanksgiving.

Only took me 5 tries to get on this morning...what's up N&R?

I would suggest Palin is responsible for a big chunk of that 53 million votes that went for McCain. I would also suggest she is somewhat responsible for the spanking Martin took down Georgia way yesterday. Seems she is more appealing to the informed that Ludicrous.

rahrah:
http://blog.news-record.com/opinion/letters/archives/2008/12/this_presidential_election_pro.shtml

"Can you not champion individual responsibility and accountability, limited central government, a strong national defense, fiscal responsibility, equal opportunity versus equal entitlement... and not be racist? Can you not present these concepts and debate them in an open forum and not be fear mongering?"

Good questions, Curtis. Ask them of the leadership of the Republican Party. When they figure out the answers the Republicans might start winning elections again.

Ellis,

Of course no one person or issue can make or break an election. But McCain was ahead in the poles until after Palin's interview with Charlie Gibson and dropped even more after the Sawyer interview. If you cannot see the correlation, you are deliberately displaying your intentional lack of reason. But if you want to continue to deny the truth and keep your blinders on, have at it.

IMHO, Sarah basically energized the people that Mac already had (social conservatives, albeit unenthusiastic ones) and alienated the people that he needed (independents). She eliminated his main campaign themes of the time (inexperience & celebrity) which were working somewhat. She was a net negative.

p.s. typekey stinks!!!!!!!!!!

Yvonne,

Show me the quotes you read here mentioned above. Taking away bibles, mandatory abortion and islamic national language? I wish I could call BS on ALL you mentioned but unfortunately I cannot.

What would you call comments as to McCain/Palin getting rid of Roe V Wade.... fearmongering perhaps?

Yvonne, you couldn't help yourself, could you?

"She shows little integrity, intelligence or allegiance. But, hey, go for it GOP. Just remember she lost the election for John McCain".

Your comment demonstrates exactly my point.

"I look at the relentless slandering of Sarah Palin by the media and the ads that suggested an overturn of Roe v Wade if she and McCain had gained office, and I look at your own fearful, one-sided, negative description of the 1950s era in your column and I feel compelled to suggest that you consider your own glass house before throwing too many more stones. "

Thank you, Curtis

Most people have selective hearing.

And this back and forth of, "You did it!" "Well, you did it too!" is just a little bit ridiculous.

I'm going to go eat some sausage balls.

Mick,

I have posted the truth. Take it or leave it. You can call it anything you like, BS, lies, half-truths. It makes no difference nor does it invalidate what I have posted.

When Palin made her acceptance speech, SHE was the one who stated she would try to overturn R vs W so I would call that a statement of fact.

Curtis,

Please show me where I have slandered Palin. I have posted opinions and facts, not slander. She is the one who did herself in by acting like a dumb blonde. She gave the impression she thought all she had to do is smile, wink and coo. She is the one who was so confident her looks would carry her thru she failed to bone up on foreign policy, the economy, history and a dozen things she needed to know. She is the one who became an embarrassment to McCain by starting her own campaign two months before the election.

To state provable facts is not slander. You need to know the difference.

I based my opinion on observation of Palin and facts. I can understand how you could be misled, especially since the truth does not support your defense of Palin.

"Good work, Leonard. You just insulted and branded nearly half the country (Republicans) with your charges, my man!"

You are an optimist Curtis. Try a little over a quarter.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-voters-identify-as-republicans

Another year of Bush in office & it would be down to Laura, Jenna & Barney.

p.s. Typepad stinks!!!!

Yvonne, I’ve said it before; you are truly a diamond in the rough. “You, like Pitts, are a shill for left wing ideology. You cannot see beyond the msm talking points.” This sounds like the ranting that Nixon made against the “press being the enemy” in the tapes that have just been released by The National Archives. Nixon started the rant and modern day Republicans keep painting the “msm” as the enemy. God forbid that the press report on Watergate.

During the presidential election, I came across some real jewels on the Republican Party and its ideology. The comments are from the “msm;” so, take them with a grain of salt.

“That could spell the end of the so-called Southern strategy, the doctrine that took shape under President Richard M. Nixon in which national elections were won by co-opting Southern whites on racial issues. And the Southernization of American politics — which reached its apogee in the 1990s when many Congressional leaders and President Bill Clinton were from the South — appears to have ended.”

“Instead, the Republican rump, the party that’s left after the election, will be the party that attends Sarah Palin’s rallies, where crowds chant ‘Vote McCain, not Hussein!’ It will be the party of Saxby Chambliss, the senator from Georgia, who, observing large-scale early voting by African-Americans, warns his supporters that ‘the other folks are voting.’ It will be the party that harbors menacing fantasies about Barack Obama’s Marxist — or was that Islamic? — roots.”

“But the G.O.P.’s long transformation into the party of the unreasonable right, a haven for racists and reactionaries, seems likely to accelerate as a result of the impending defeat.”

“It was adapted in 2000 in Atwater’s home state of South Carolina by Atwater acolytes in W.’s camp to harpoon McCain with rumors that he had fathered out of wedlock a black baby (as opposed to adopting a Bangladeshi infant girl in wedlock). Sulfurous Atwater-style rumor-mongering by Bush supporters — that McCain had come home from a Hanoi tiger cage with snakes in his head — aimed to stop him during that primary after he had zoomed in New Hampshire.”

“The Democrat was a ’60s-style liberal who would raise taxes and take away guns. He was weak and would not protect the country militarily. He was a member of the elite ‘Harvard Yard’s boutique.’ He had a foreign-sounding name and was not on “the American side.” He was on the side of the Scary Black Man.”

“Atwater gleefully tried to paint Willie Horton as Dukakis’s running mate. With a black man running, it’s even easier for Atwater’s disciple running McCain’s campaign to warn that white Americans should not open the door to the dangerous Other, or ‘That One,’ as McCain referred to Obama in Tuesday night’s debate. (A cross between ‘The One” and “That Woman.’).”

I saved the best comment for last. “One white woman said she feared that blacks would now become more ‘aggressive,’ while another volunteered that she was bothered by the idea of a black man ‘over me’ in the White House.”

Yvonne,

Uh huh. As I thought. BS. Take it or leave isnt really how it works when you throw crap like that. Oh and BTW, not being able to validate your opinions or even "facts" is pretty much the definition of BS.

Show show me where Palin said she would try and overturn R v W in her acceptance speech. I just now very quickly perused the transcript of her acceptance speech. Help me out as I couldnt find of what you type. odd. I might have missed it though. Its late and I gotta get a kid to swim practice. Googled Palin + Roe v Wade and acceptance speech and several combinations... no luck. Odd huh.

Your full of it.

"Show show me where Palin said she would try and overturn R v W in her acceptance speech."

Never mind her acceptance speech Mick, all you have to do is listen to "tingly legs" Chris Matthews on Lardball. Speaking of fearmongers, he states that Sarah Palin wants to outlaw all abortions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS9gLR6m2_4

There is no doubt Palin opposes abortion, but I don't think had she been VP she would have had the power nor desire to completely ban abortion.

I agree with rahrah, there is fearmongering on both sides. How were the sausage balls?

Tasty.

Well, for what it's worth, I never heard Sarah Palin say anything about Roe v. Wade. But then again, I never watched any of her interviews and missed her acceptance speach. You can pull up a transcript of it online. I read some (most) of it and didn't see anything, but I got bored and stopped.

I wouldn't want her to be President. But I really don't think she cost McCain too many votes. I think the war and the economy cost him the votes. Of course, I don't think she gained him too many either.

I really don't understand why people are still hung up on her, though. They lost. Who cares anymore? Well, who else besides sore losers and sore winners? In a few more years, if the hate persists, it may reach the same cult-status as hatred for William Jefferson Clinton.

Having a goat makes us all feel better though. Personally, I lay all of my earthly problems at the foot of this guy name Chad who was in my 7th grade class.

As far as telling whether a tactic is "fearmongering" or "telling it like it is" seems to be solely dependant upon your ideology compared to that of the issue in question.

rahrah, You've got my mouth watering! I usually only fix sausage balls once a year (Superbowl) but I'm sensing a batch coming sooner! Yes!
Thanks a lot! (said with sarcasm)

You are very, very welcome, Ellen.

In my family, sausage balls are a holiday treat. I eat them almost continuously from Thanksgiving to Christmas.

Mick,

"The GOP did an even better hatchet job on Kerry and Gore. I read the comments here in this blog, the ones based on fear mongering, not on the so-called conservative values of the GOP."

If you cannot follow my posts, how can you critique them effectively? The comments I referred to in the post above were in regard to the 2000 and 2004 elections. The questions you asked me were apparently in regard to Obama. ("All through this last campaign I heard the same old, same old tactics from the GOP and it WAS based on fear.") Now you tell me where I said those quotes came from this blog. (But how many times did you, neo, Tonymo, Bubba and others suggest the same thing I heard directly in conversations and received in emails?)

Besides, you are being lazy and want me to provide you with something you can find yourself with enough digging. Go back and read some of the posts in this blog for the comments I read regarding the fear-mongering from the GOP.

BTW, I heard Palin make her acceptance speech. I did not look it up and "quickly perused" it. And yes, justsomedude, it was as boring when she gave it as it is in the printed version. She sounded like a cheerleader in a contest in which the winner could flatter McCain the most. I remember saying to a friend, "McCain didn't want a running mate so he chose a cheerleader instead."

"Go back and read some of the posts in this blog for the comments I read regarding the fear-mongering from the GOP."

Give up the partisanship Yvonne, you have expended too much energy on GOP fear-mongering today. Just face the truth, BOTH PARTIES DO IT!!! I'll admit that R's do it too ok? Peace, love?

The example that Republicans will ban abortion is but one easy example. Neither Reagan, Bush I nor Bush II banned abortion!! I seriously doubt McCain would have done so either.

The example of Democrats taking guns away is another easy example. Neither Carter nor Clinton has done so, and I doubt Obama will either!!

Please just achieve a bit of balance. Thou art fear-mongering thyself.

I hope this post won't drop off my invitation for the B&B grand opening :0

Dan,

You are free to express any opinion you like without fear of retaliation from me. This is what I do for entertainment and diversion. I work, then reward myself with a little time on the computer. That is the reason my responses are so erratic at times or no response at all. However, I take all this bickering with a grain of salt and hold mighty few grudges.

Like most people who post here, I do tend to get a little dogmatic on certain issues. We all have triggers and respond accordingly. Sorry to upset your view of "balance".

I always smile when I hear or read the word balance. When I was about thirty pounds heavier than I am now, I was visiting NY with some friends. We were wandering about in some of the specialty shops. My skinnier friends and I were trying on hats in one of those shops (which had an Asian lady serving as saleslady). I was trying on a hat that was sleek and close to the head. The saleslady came running up to me clutching a more appropriate-sized hat (in her opinion) hat saying "No, no not that one. Try this one. You big lady. You need balance."

I thought her suggestion was hysterically funny while my friends were horrified that this woman had just called me big. (I was not all that big but was the heaviest of her and my friends.) She was not trying to be insulting. It was just her culture to speak openly and honestly, as she saw it.

Now you are telling me I need balance. What's next?

Dan,

You are free to express any opinion you like without fear of retaliation from me. This is what I do for entertainment and diversion. I work, then reward myself with a little time on the computer. That is the reason my responses are so erratic at times or no response at all. However, I take all this bickering with a grain of salt and hold mighty few grudges.

Like most people who post here, I do tend to get a little dogmatic on certain issues. We all have triggers and respond accordingly. Sorry to upset your view of "balance".

I always smile when I hear or read the word balance. When I was about thirty pounds heavier than I am now, I was visiting NY with some friends. We were wandering about in some of the specialty shops. My skinnier friends and I were trying on hats in one of those shops (which had an Asian lady serving as saleslady). I was trying on a hat that was sleek and close to the head. The saleslady came running up to me clutching a more appropriate-sized hat (in her opinion) hat saying "No, no not that one. Try this one. You big lady. You need balance."

I thought her suggestion was hysterically funny while my friends were horrified that this woman had just called me big. (I was not all that big but was the heaviest of her and my friends.) She was not trying to be insulting. It was just her culture to speak openly and honestly, as she saw it.

Now you are telling me I need balance. What's next?

Balance ... an intereresting concept.

Take a position - simply call it balanced - and that automatically shifts the center a bit towards your side. If those with opposing views accept some portion of your position, the center will shifts a bit more towards your side.

I do see your post more clearly now.

Unfortunately, In truth, I would never vote against the culprits you mentioned and the silly Obama comments. I would never attempt to say that BS wasnt out there either. Silly people say silly things. But I do challenge you to find where I said any such thing or anything even similar. You will find my posts quite different than you are no doubt assuming.

Now, about this one.... "When Palin made her acceptance speech, SHE was the one who stated she would try to overturn R v W so I would call that statement a fact."

Do you stand by that? You know, since you heard it. I too heard the acceptance speech. My memory sometimes fails me so that is why I went back and quickly perused the text. I suggest you do the same before you answer.