Posted on 11/07/2004 6:46:05 AM PST by CHARLITE
I’m not surprised that a Party, who thinks George Soros represents American values, still can’t figure out what happened on November 2nd. No wonder Bill Clinton is still the star of the Democratic Party, he’s the only one who is even close to getting it…
Three days after the outcome of the 2004 election became clear, former President Clinton had a message for Democrats on the brink of suicide: “Buck up. It's not that bad. You need to improve your image.”
"This election presents a great opportunity for President Bush and a great opportunity for Democrats, and the two are not necessarily in conflict. It would be a mistake for our party to sit around and ... whine about this and that or the other thing." Clinton said in his first public remarks since Democratic Sen. John Kerry's defeat on Tuesday.
I said Clinton is the “closest” to getting it… but even he is missing the mark by a smidge…
It’s classic Clinton; he only recognizes the “image” problems facing the DNC, completely ignoring the fact that their current image matches their current platform and base philosophy perfectly.
Clinton is almost right, the DNC does have a severe image problem with all those red counties across the country. But the problem doesn’t stop with just their image, it runs much deeper than that.
Remember when the extreme left in America (yeah, it existed back then too, just in much smaller numbers) was afraid to elect JFK because they thought he would turn the whole country Catholic? These are the same folks that fear Bush’s moral convictions, only now they are greater in number, more extreme in their secular beliefs, and they control the Democratic Party.
Few Presidents have spoken more of their religion than JFK, and he would be no more welcome in the DNC today than George W. Bush. This is not just an image problem, this is a major philosophical shift in the heartbeat of the Democratic Party, and Americans figured that out.
Clinton went on to say, "If we let people believe that our party doesn't believe in faith and family, doesn't believe in work and freedom, that's our fault."
Again, he limits his diagnosis to the Party “image”. But the fact is the Party philosophy matches today’s image perfectly. They don’t believe in faith, or family, or hard work, or even freedom.
Instead, they have built their Party on a platform of secularism, same-sex unions, free stuff and in general, socialist principles. The American people didn’t misinterpret this in the 2000, 2002 or 2004 elections, they just flatly rejected it.
Spotted Al Gore was too left of center for America in 2000, but the DNC didn’t get the message, so they lost more congressional seats in 2002. Now John Kerry and John Edwards were too left of center for America in 2004, and they still don’t get it.
Already they are ramping up to run someone even further left in 2008, America’s surrogate Marxist, Hillary Clinton. Whether America is ready for a female President or not, clearly demonstrated in the last three elections is the fact that America is not yet ready for a Marxist President. Hopefully, it never will be!
Even worse, like other socialists around the globe, Democrats look at that big red map and conclude that the race was close. That all those red “hillbilly” counties that cover the map from sea to shining sea, are just too backwoods ignorant to know that they should welcome a secular socialist society with open arms.
Now clearly, somebody is “out of touch” with America, “out of sink” with true American values and principles, and it defies any form of logic to think it is all those folks who live in all those red counties.
They figure all us backwoods folks don’t know what the word “progressive” means. But it turns out us hillbilly’s can do a little cipherin’ of our own. All we have to do is look at the policy platform of the modern DNC, and we can see that “progressive” means “secular socialism”, a Godless society run by Godless men who appoint themselves God.
For such a hifalutin bunch of pantywaists, Democrats sure is slow to catch up with us bible thumpin’ baccer spittin’ hillbillies, ain’t they? Forest Gump was quicker on the uptake than these pompous windbags. Maybe they need someone to draw them a picture…?
A classy bunch they are too… (Click this one with discretion; they ain’t so classy after all)
Yep, it’s going to be entertaining watching these pretentious secular socialist puff-bags attempt to re-invent themselves between now and the next election.
We’ll have to keep in mind that it is only a re-invention of their “image”, because none of them folks who live in those little blue counties see anything wrong with their anti-American flag-burnin’ blame America first stinkin’ thinkin’. So they are not likely to change anything that matters any time soon.
Comments: jbw@jb-williams.com
(Hot-links are always provided at JB-Williams.com)
What matters to me most is: These people (al-qaeda, just saying or typing it makes me frown) interpret constant olive-branching and casualty fatigue as weakness. This president is unfazed by casualties (though I don't doubt he probably feels bad about every single one, and has spent a lot of time talking to the Lord about it). He's not about to olive-branch these folks if he knows it'll be pointless. We don't need to ask Al-Qaeda what we did to "anger them so!?" We need to smash them relentlessly. They truly deserve their deaths, because they are so morally repugnant. One side develops more accurate bombs to avoid needless civilian damage. Seen pictures of Germany after the war? We don't really do that anymore. The other side cuts heads off, screaming "God is great." They videotape it, and I bet soon they'll release DVD's with commentary. There is no moral equivalence here, in Chechnya, in Israel, or anywhere else they slaughter the weak.
Sure, I worry about religious extremism. Robertson and Falwell don't cut off Feminists'/Leftists/N.O.W. hags' heads. These people shoot little kids in the back, hack heads off (reminiscient of... hrm... Jenjis Khan, maybe?), and act like animals. I'm a quadrillion more times worried about the latter side than the former.
I hope that smirk made a thousand commies wrench in anguish. He so richly deserves this win, after all the crap he's had to cheerfully swim through.
That was GW's famous grin drives the rats into a deeper level of insanity.
Does it amaze anyone but me that there are 252 electoral votes in the blue areas?
"HOW DID THEY RE-ELECT THAT FRIGGIN CHIMP! RAAAAR!!!"
The best is when the mouth foam starts up.
Typical Klintoon.........
Say anything to get elected........
Saying this and all the while preparing for Hitlery to run in 2008.
Her slogan is: We'll take things away from you for the common good.
I had a hard time deciding who to vote for this year, but the only thing President Bush and I agree on is our pro-life views,(although I think the best way to prevent abortion is to make sure we provide women good opportunties and access to quality child care, and health insurance for them and their kids, job training etc.--- things that I don't think Bush attempts to do) . But I will tell you that I prayed and prayed and prayed about my decision, and felt very comfortable when I made the choice to vote for John Kerry. It makes my blood boil when other Christians tell me that President Bush was the only moral choice. I don't necessarily view him as a moral man. (What is so moral about protecting the wealth of corporations that harm our environment? What is so moral about cutting funding to programs that help the poor obtain safe housing? What is so moral about cutting funding to help our brothers and sisters in third world countries fight the AIDS epidemic? )
Interested in freeper responses to this.
That "sink" was rather striking until the author increased the number of language errors in jest. So I suspect it was deliberate. (Perhaps even a slam at Clinton.)
My remark to them is "Great keep it up and you clowns will get less votes in 2006, 2008 and for decades.!"
Matthews: "Tell me something I don't know."
Dowd: "I think there's going to be a Rapture, and you and I are going up, and all these hypocritical conservatives who tell us not to do things and then do them, are not."
Think she's bitter?
She calls Dick Cheney "dark" and "paranoid." I wonder what she considers herself?
Hmmm. I assumed that since they were indirected speaking of Clinton, this was word play!!!
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.
