Posted on 10/07/2004 3:08:46 PM PDT by Kaslin
It's an old San Francisco saying from the '60s or '70s. I don't know who came up with it.
(Sigh.)
It all depends on the Democrat. Would she paint Zell Miller with the same broad brush?
The problem with Mrs. Noonan's conclusions is that there will always be a second party to contend with. Will that opposition be loyal or not? That is the real question in my mind.
Conservatives already left the Democratic party en masse in the 80's and 90's. And they left a power vacuum in their wake. Take a long hard look at the Democratic party circa 2004 and ask: do you like what you see? Do you like who rushed in to fill that power vacuum once most of the conservatives left?
Trying to get the few remaining conservative Democrats to jump ship doesn't seem to me to be a very helpful suggestion.
And for the record, I do think she is a beautiful woman, both internally and externally. I just disagree with her on this. Therein lies the difference between loyal opposition and the disloyal.
I had a similar thought and commented on it last night. I see the poisoned political discourse swirling around me. I've read far too much history in my life to not draw some very unpleasant analogies.
What I see is scaring the living hell out of me.
Two words always come to mind when I think of Peggy. Lovely and Genuine.. And thanks for the new rule, if I think more about her I might get in trouble, but she definately stirs my being.
Lets just hope that millions are coming to the same conclusion you came to.
Unless someone can figure out a way to post a pix of her mind, we'll have to content ourselves with what we have.
Even so, I have always been skeptical of the Democrat party through most of my short life. I can understand where the idea that Republicans are rich snobs against the lower class came from. But I cannot understand why, after a 100 years this sort of classification would hold relevance, that so few people cannot see how things have changed.
Its why I refuse to even use the word 'liberal' anymore. It has been so bent out of shape that it no longer precisely describes the political war we are in. Democrats are MARXIST, plain and simple. And in ten short years, we have forgotten how to constantly spell out the horror of Marxism for people.
As for the divisiveness, America has been through this before. I said to my husband tonight : "we are seeing families go against each other, just like in the War of Northern aggression."
I think the best thing conservatives can do is continue to bolster up those who have fallen unsure of what is going on, letting them know that there is a positive side to choose, and that we keep stressing how different we are from the Marxist, and how choosing that side will only destroy the country.
Wasn't it much, much worse in the 1800's & 1930's?? All those nasty editorial cartoons... How is this any worse than '68? Didn't pols used to duel with real guns?
I see this election as nearly the last gasp from the Baby Boomers trying to recapture their idyllic youth.
I heard Hugh Hewitt or one of those talkies going over the demographics of likey voters & 43 has the youth vote while JFK has the old hippie vote.
Thanks for the post! I am glad she is more involved lately. She just keeps getting better!
No way. If he had, don't you think the media would have been right there with him?
of course the camera crew would be there, but what if his reception was a bit, say, "icy"? would we ever see the film? I would love to hear from any troops he might have visited.
I've been missing Peggy. So good to hear from her. Bump.
"Anyone know why Zell Miller had to be replaced?"
AS I recall, he had to return to the Senate to cast a vote. Something the democrat candidates can't be bothered with.
Depends. Nasty editorial cartoons? We do those with photoshop, and many can be seen on FR. (I suspect my fellow Democrats do similar things on DU or other venues, so I'm not saying one side is worse than the other on this). Judging from what I see here....some are quite funny, others are vicious.
I think it's probably on a par with the 1930's or certain parts of the 1800's. I don't think 1968 is a good analogy. I view 1968 as a noisy minority trying to wrest control of the Democratic party. The GOP didn't really have the same issue to contend with at the time.
I can only tell you what I see. What I see is that support for GWB vice JFK is split pretty much on class lines. Age doesn't seem to be much of a factor.
We seem to say that every four years - hatred and polorization. As a very young boy in the 30's I remember my dad, saying - "Roosevelt is a Communist." He actually wasn't far off though given Roosevelt's love affair with Joe Stalin.
The difference today is there is so much media and most people are bombarded by TV and radio - there isn't time for reflective reasoning before mouthing off compared to the printed word (not including the Internet of course which is also instant).
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.