Skip to comments.
Politics of hate won't beat Bush
The Indianapolis Star ^
| December 4, 2003
| Susan Estrich
Posted on 12/04/2003 8:24:51 AM PST by .cnI redruM
Edited on 05/07/2004 6:26:59 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Anyone up for a "Hate Bush" meeting in Hollywood? Doesn't it sound like just the sort of thing conservatives would invent to make liberals look stupid and open the conservative spigots?
But this was no right-wing conspiracy. Matt Drudge may be the one selling the idea that Hollywood held a "Hate Bush" meeting, but he didn't come up with the title. This is a self-inflicted wound by another silly Hollywood liberal giving honest politics a bad name.
(Excerpt) Read more at indystar.com ...
TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; asmartenemy; susanestrich
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Susan Estrich may prove more dangerous than all nine current dwarves seeking the Dem nominmation. She is smart enough to know how to win. Let's hope they treat her the way they treated Senator Zell.
To: .cnI redruM
I remember that she helped Dukakis to a great victory!
2
posted on
12/04/2003 8:26:54 AM PST
by
montomike
(montomike)
To: .cnI redruM
If they hate my president, they hate me, and my country.
3
posted on
12/04/2003 8:28:25 AM PST
by
kylaka
To: montomike
That's where she learned a thing or two. She did everything she could to try to prevent Gray and Cruz from driving the car off Chappaquiddick Bridge during the recall, earlier this year.
4
posted on
12/04/2003 8:30:46 AM PST
by
.cnI redruM
( "The American people would rather reach for the stars than reach for excuses why we shouldn't." -)
To: .cnI redruM
Hatred may motivate the left to contribute money, And, bottom line, that's ALL the event was intended to do. Nobody's going to be persuaded whom to vote for in November 2004 based on a party invitation in December 2003 but somebody might be persuaded by the ad fueled by the fundraiser the event produced.
And the left finds hating Bush very attractive, trendy and self-affirming. Ms. Estrich is only offended that her Hollywood friends are so public about it.
5
posted on
12/04/2003 8:35:27 AM PST
by
Tall_Texan
("Is Rush a Hypocrite?" http://righteverytime2.blogspot.com)
To: .cnI redruM
Give that woman a real voice and she could go someplace.
She's older and wiser than her Dukakis days. Generally, she tries hard to be reasonable.
Her voice again....wonder if she's a super-heavy smoker or just cursed by genes.
6
posted on
12/04/2003 8:36:20 AM PST
by
xzins
(Proud to be Army!)
To: kylaka
I wonder why people can't disagree with someone's ideas sans moral vilification.
7
posted on
12/04/2003 8:36:32 AM PST
by
.cnI redruM
( "The American people would rather reach for the stars than reach for excuses why we shouldn't." -)
To: .cnI redruM
Estrich has been hanging around the Fox news people, she is actually starting to make sense..
8
posted on
12/04/2003 8:36:57 AM PST
by
Paradox
(Cogito ergo boom.)
To: Tall_Texan
Bingo.
To: Tall_Texan
I'm not saying she had noble reasons for telling the Hollynuts to play nicely. She has enough tactical proficiency to understand why that Drudge story changed my mind and caused me to give another $20 to Bush/Cheney despite the fact that I'm still rather angry about The Prescription Drug Panderation Act.
If the Dems are bad and the Reps are weak metrosexuals on the issue of shrinking government, I'm an unmotivated member of the GOP base. If the Dems are a bunch of nose-pierced whack jobs, I'll hold my nose, ignore the garbage and charge once more into the breach. That's probably not just me.
10
posted on
12/04/2003 8:40:59 AM PST
by
.cnI redruM
( "The American people would rather reach for the stars than reach for excuses why we shouldn't." -)
To: Paradox
It's something in the cocktails those evil Fox News people serve in the green room.
11
posted on
12/04/2003 8:46:36 AM PST
by
.cnI redruM
( "The American people would rather reach for the stars than reach for excuses why we shouldn't." -)
To: .cnI redruM
The Republicans have an institutional advantage when it comes to raising money, because they are the party of business,
and because they have a larger small-donor base;
they also have an advantage because they control the White House and both houses of Congress. So.....
The repubs have an advantage because they are the party of business in one line, then they have a larger small doner base...so which is it, the big bucks guys or the small bucks guys? (could it be -gasp- BOTH?)
Also, just how did they get control of both houses?? See the first two sentences above.
12
posted on
12/04/2003 8:47:00 AM PST
by
going hot
(Happiness is a momma deuce)
To: going hot
She's not there yet, but compared to her wild Dukakis Days, she's a liberal who has grown.
13
posted on
12/04/2003 8:48:49 AM PST
by
.cnI redruM
( "The American people would rather reach for the stars than reach for excuses why we shouldn't." -)
To: going hot
and just exactly what is the definition of a larger small doner base? hmmm?
14
posted on
12/04/2003 8:49:09 AM PST
by
going hot
(Happiness is a momma deuce)
To: .cnI redruM
I think she is getting slowly more intelligent. As she does, first she begins to see the error in the ways of the dems. Soon perhaps she will realize that the dem party is totally worthless. Who knows?
15
posted on
12/04/2003 8:51:02 AM PST
by
going hot
(Happiness is a momma deuce)
To: .cnI redruM
Rush says that this event was to set up money for Hillary, and they are insulating themselves financially from the destruction of the Democrat party.
He said they are leading the destruction, and coming up with independent fund raising sources. They are not wasting time trying to save the DNC. They are letting Dean take it down.
To: .cnI redruM
It's easier on the senses to read Estrich rather than hear her.
17
posted on
12/04/2003 9:00:40 AM PST
by
CaptainK
To: .cnI redruM
Wow. When Estrich gets, be afraid.
To: .cnI redruM
...Harold Ickes and Ellen Malcolm, who have recognized that whoever wins the Democratic nomination will be at a severe financial disadvantage as compared to the president. Well, they certainly will with the Clintons carefully siphoning off the donations into their own slush fund and McAuliffe letting them get away with it. If they've even noticed it happening it isn't obvious.
To: Billthedrill
Dean has. That's why he has his on-line organization fund raising now for congressional Democrats.
20
posted on
12/04/2003 9:13:12 AM PST
by
.cnI redruM
( "The American people would rather reach for the stars than reach for excuses why we shouldn't." -)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson