Posted on 09/11/2005 11:16:29 AM PDT by jmc1969
Huh??? The only difference is that they've now escalated their screeching and harping to a fever pitch like something in the throes of a demon-possessed seizure fueled by the fires of Hell. In fact, their frenzy has become so completely out of control that I expect they are embarassing the devil himself.
The mute button seemingly in place since the Sept. 11
As you can see the MSM and dolled up reporters STILL assume that everyone is stupid.What a moronic thing to try to push off on people.
If they ever shut up, or even toned it down, I must have missed it. I've about worn out the mute button on my remote since 9/11/01.
The MSM have been the ones in power. They have no accountability.
Yep....that's actually a fairly accurate analysis you have sl....you forgot to add the write of this article is merely hallucinating, of course. : )
Only to someone with a naieve view of politics who insists everyone play for one team or the other. Well, politics is an individual issue. There is no fence. And it is not just another team sport. Everyone goes into the polling booth alone. And when someone disagrees with major points of a political party's platform, trying to force them to suppress their beliefs and stuff them into one of your party pigeonholes just because you want people divided into nice, neat little teams only pisses them off and sends them the opther way.
And as to "Independents" being a political party? You just don't get it. By definition, they have no party. And more and more these days, they are deciding elections, particularly on the local level. I've worked the phones in the last two major elections, and we lost not based on the republican party platform, but based simply on how many registered republicans we could get off their lazy butts to actually bother to vote and how many independents we could persuade to vote republican because they more strongly disagreed with the democrats. Just because independents haven't joined the republicans or the democrats doesn't mean they don't vote for republicans or democrats.
The last gubernatorial election here in Oregon was a perfect example. Quite frankly, we got our butts kicked, not by the democrats, but by the libertarians. The libertarians managed to attract the vast majority of the independent voters because they actually fought the state legislature's forced tax increase and proposed a conservative and sane budget. At the same time, I'm ashamed to say, the local republican leadership did nothing about the tax increase, and proposed a state budget that was identical to the democrat's. So the libertarians got the independent vote, and we aren't in the governor's mansion. And this will happen again so long as republican cheerleader twits keep dismissing the independent voters simply because they refuse to join the republican "team".
But what kind of conservative are you? Fiscally conservative, socially conservative, religiously conservative, conservative libertarian, limited government conservative, constitutional conservative, conservationist conservative, or what? Your lumping in many different political philosophies under one "conservative" brand name, attempt to define the republican party with all and then automatic declamation of it's superiority shows, yet again, your naive understanding of politics. And, for the record, republican does not always mean conservative.
They made a wrong decision, harkening back to my assertion of cluelessness, selfishness, and probable drug-addiction.
But for them it is the right decision. And your knowledge less repeated "drug addiction" insult is not winning you any debate points.
Again, the independents I know are all much more politically astute than the registered republicans or democrats. They have actually bothered to analyze the party platforms enough to decide that neither is right for them. Most registered republicans I know, and all registered democrats, only associate with their chosen party because they "like it better". Most have no clue as to what their chosen party is all about, and can't even name their local candidates. It's sad, really.
They don't all register. They stay home and play video games. Apathetic.
Now you're just being stupid. Have you ever bothered to actually go out and work for a campaign? People who are not registered to vote are Not Registered. You are right that they are apathetic and useless. But you are also quite wrong because they are NOT Independents. Independent voters, by definition, have registered to vote. They are not apathetic, they are among the most regular and consistent of voters, and they are often our best hope of keeping the democrats out of office.
I am sufficiently rational to belittle their wrong convictions and dismiss them universally.
Sorry. No. You're confusing rationality for ignorant arrogance. And dismissing them universally will cost the republican party a LOT of elections.
Video games.
Repeating an irrelevant non argument doesn't make it one. Especially one as trite as this.
Do you know any registered independents? Have you ever volunteered for a campaign, worked the phones and called people before elections and spoken to them? Do you have any clue what you are talking about? You haven't shown one yet.
I have worked on campaigns. I have spent hours talking with independents trying to convince them to vote republican. So I do know what I am talking about. And words cannot express how happy I am that people like you aren't allowed to run any republican campaigns (well I suspect your kind of thinking has caused us to lose a few).
We don't need indecisive, apathetic, clueless, selfish drug addicts.
More ignorant insults instead of supporting points. Clearly, you are simply incapable of understanding this, but I'll try to make it simple:
Every campaign I have ever volunteered in has won or lost based on two things: convincing independent voters to vote republican, and convincing lazy registered republicans to get off their butts and vote. We have always had much better luck with the independent voters. Convincing registered independents to vote is never a problem, they just need to be convinced to vote republican (or against the democrats more often than not).
In an election, it doesn't matter at all if someone is registered independent, so long as we can convince them to vote republican. Party affiliations do not win elections, votes do. Registered independents consistently vote, and if we cannot convince them to vote republican, then they will vote for the democrats. And arrogant, ignorant, and insulting comments (and thinking) like yours will only help to drive their votes into the hands of the democrats.
A lady never reveals her age, but it's been a long time since I was twenty. And as to everything else, I own and operate my own multi-million dollar (finally - and still growing despite the incredibly small-business hostile Oregon political and tax environment) custom metal parts design and fabrication company. Does that sound like someone who "hides behind others"?
I do a lot of campaign volunteer work for the republican party, the Oregon Firearms Federation, and the NRA (though they've been a bunch of do-nothings lately in New Orleans). So ignorant disparagement of independent voters really annoys me. When ignorant "card carrying republicans" start spouting off like Mr. McKing, it only costs us votes. A LOT of votes.
People like him need to learn that it's a hell of a lot more important that people vote republican than that they "be" republican. Until people like him learn that, their ignorant arrogance only hurts us.
But what kind of conservative are you? Fiscally conservative, socially conservative, religiously conservative, conservative libertarian, limited government conservative, constitutional conservative, conservationist conservative, or what? Your lumping in many different political philosophies under one "conservative" brand name, attempt to define the republican party with all and then automatic declamation of it's superiority shows, yet again, your naive understanding of politics. And, for the record, republican does not always mean conservative.
My goal is to define conservatism. This is true independence; to actually make a statement rather than cut ties with your best asset - the political system - in a childish bid to prove (to nobody) that you are free.
Again, the independents I know are all much more politically astute than the registered republicans or democrats. They have actually bothered to analyze the party platforms enough to decide that neither is right for them. Most registered republicans I know, and all registered democrats, only associate with their chosen party because they "like it better". Most have no clue as to what their chosen party is all about, and can't even name their local candidates. It's sad, really.
All they are doing is muscling for pet-projects, special interest, and personal agendas. There is a knee-jerk reverence that is given to the misleading label "independent". They use this as a tool to get what they want at our expense. "What's in it for ME? Gimme gimme!" Selfish.
Now you're just being stupid. Have you ever bothered to actually go out and work for a campaign? People who are not registered to vote are Not Registered. You are right that they are apathetic and useless. But you are also quite wrong because they are NOT Independents. Independent voters, by definition, have registered to vote. They are not apathetic, they are among the most regular and consistent of voters, and they are often our best hope of keeping the democrats out of office.
Well I might be willing to humor them for votes, but that would be dishonest.
Sorry. No. You're confusing rationality for ignorant arrogance. And dismissing them universally will cost the republican party a LOT of elections.
"Arrogant" is thinking one is really objective and above all doctrine. If such people wrote their own manifesto - something original and not copied from the Constitution or off the web - then I may entertain their thoughts. However, one can predict such works to be wholly unoriginal, hardly "independent", and above all not even interesting. (Or else someone would have written it already...)
To your enumerated points:
(1) So?
(2) You restate the points made in (1). Repeating a meaningless (non-) argument doesn't make it true. Particularly one so lame.
(3) Right vote, wrong voters. I have no use at all for those sheeple.
The next time you're on a campaign, call independents and tell them how useless they are. They don't come to FreeRepublic very often.
Fell for what? I thought we were having a discussion, but apparently you'd prefer to engage in childish games. Grow up.
My goal is to define conservatism.
And my goal is to get people to vote conservative. Making up your own definitions and then trying to force them down people's throats is not going to win you any friends come election day.
This is true independence; to actually make a statement rather than cut ties with your best asset - the political system - in a childish bid to prove (to nobody) that you are free.
You seem to think that because people are not directly affiliated with any particularly party, that they are "detached" from our political system. Absolutely untrue. Go ahead and look at the voter turnout records. Unless you are actually afraid of actual facts, you'll see that on most elections the turnout of registered independents is significantly higher than registered republicans or democrats. In the recent Oregon election, I believe the numbers were 80% of independents voted versus only about 60% for both democrats and republicans. And look at states with open primaries. You'll find that almost always a third to half of the voters that vote in open primaries are registered independents. So explain to me again how they are "detached" from the political system.
All they are doing is muscling for pet-projects, special interest, and personal agendas.
No. Absolutely wrong. You still don't get it.
Again, how many registered independents do you actually know? How many do you speak to? Have you ever volunteered on a cmapaign and actually tried to get people to vote conservative or republican? Ever?
Or do you just blather on about your own desire to have everyone on one team or another and your pathetic and useless goal of "defining conservatism"?
If such people wrote their own manifesto - something original and not copied from the Constitution or off the web - then I may entertain their thoughts. However, one can predict such works to be wholly unoriginal, hardly "independent", and above all not even interesting. (Or else someone would have written it already...)
You really have no clue what an independent voter is, do you?
(1) So?
So it directly disproves your assumption that independents are unregistered. If you had half the brains you think you have, you'd have known that from the starte, and wouldn't, even now, be coming back with the ever so witty "so".
(2) You restate the points made in (1). Repeating a meaningless (non-) argument doesn't make it true. Particularly one so lame.
No. Go back and re-read. There is in fact a difference between simply registering and registering independent. Most people who register, register for one of the major parties based on "gut feelings". And then don't bother to vote.
And "lame"? I didn't think kids today still used that word.
(3) Right vote, wrong voters. I have no use at all for those sheeple.
And I say God help us if you ever get anywhere near a decision making position in the republican party.
The next time you're on a campaign, call independents and tell them how useless they are.
You really have no clue, do you. If we were ever so stupid as to follow your advice, Kerry would be president (and worse).
Again: How many campaigns have you worked on? How many times have you called people trying to convince them to vote republican? How many independents do you know? Have you ever been to a campaign rally? Have you done any work with any pro-Second Ammendment organization? Ever? Just where do you base your absurd assertions?
They don't come to FreeRepublic very often.
Again you demonstrate the depths of your ignorance simply knows no bounds. Do you _really_ think that's true?
Winning elections is secondary to staying principled. That's how we win, in part.
You seem to think that because people are not directly affiliated with any particularly party, that they are "detached" from our political system. Absolutely untrue.
It is EXTREMELY true.
Go ahead and look at the voter turnout records. Unless you are actually afraid of actual facts, you'll see that on most elections the turnout of registered independents is significantly higher than registered republicans or democrats. In the recent Oregon election, I believe the numbers were 80% of independents voted versus only about 60% for both democrats and republicans. And look at states with open primaries. You'll find that almost always a third to half of the voters that vote in open primaries are registered independents. So explain to me again how they are "detached" from the political system.
They want stuff. I don't wish to sacrifice our republican agenda to satisfy their petty demands.
Again, how many registered independents do you actually know? How many do you speak to? Have you ever volunteered on a cmapaign and actually tried to get people to vote conservative or republican? Ever?
I don't even want them near me. Go be a democrat if you're not going to join us - we shouldn't have to bargain for votes because someone "likes gun control but hates abortion..." That's their conflict, and we mustn't give in to coercion if they threaten to vote liberal. Essentially, I see independents as liberals who want to make a deal. No way, no deal. You vote for us, or get lost...
Or do you just blather on about your own desire to have everyone on one team or another and your pathetic and useless goal of "defining conservatism"?
It ain't pathetic - it's noble - and it ain't useless since others absorb my ideas to eventually influence policy.
You really have no clue what an independent voter is, do you?
It's someone who thinks they are better and special, despite being neither.
So it directly disproves your assumption that independents are unregistered. If you had half the brains you think you have, you'd have known that from the starte, and wouldn't, even now, be coming back with the ever so witty "so".
"So" is an accusation of inconsequence, by which I still stand. If we lose elections for refusing to patronize the indecisive, non-commital, altogether selfish voters who use issues-of-the-moment for their personal gain, then we are better for it.
No. Go back and re-read. There is in fact a difference between simply registering and registering independent. Most people who register, register for one of the major parties based on "gut feelings". And then don't bother to vote.
The distinction is real, but has little to do with the subject.
And I say God help us if you ever get anywhere near a decision making position in the republican party.
Not likely.
You really have no clue, do you. If we were ever so stupid as to follow your advice, Kerry would be president (and worse).
No, I voted for Bush. I hate Kerry.
Again: How many campaigns have you worked on?
None! I have a REAL job.
How many times have you called people trying to convince them to vote republican?
That's like telemarketing. I'd be so annoyed, I'd vote the opposite out of spite if someone called my phone, no matter what party they were with.
How many independents do you know?
I know many haughty people who think they are above the system.
Have you ever been to a campaign rally?
I'd be bored out of my head... no.
Have you done any work with any pro-Second Ammendment organization?
Postcards, membership dues.
Just where do you base your absurd assertions?
"Enlightened." They are enlightened.
Again you demonstrate the depths of your ignorance simply knows no bounds. Do you _really_ think that's true?
Video games.
He has been trying to pass himself off as a nascar loving, good old boy.I thinks he trying to pull a fast one and court conserative voters for the approaching 2006 elections. He is as phony as they come, his presentation of the news will not woo anybody.
> You really have no clue, do you. If we were ever so stupid as to follow your advice, Kerry would be president (and worse).
No, I voted for Bush. I hate Kerry.
Such cognitive dissonance I have never seen! You still don't get it.
What is your one vote compared to the millions of independent votes cast in 2004? But you said it yourself that you would rather lose elections than garner independent votes. Well, without those independent votes, Kerry (who you hate so much) would be in the oval office and we'd all be screwed.
I've said it before, and I'll repeat it. God help us if you ever find yourself in a decision making position within the republican party. Given your posts, I'm not all that concerned.
And for the record, I have a job. I own my own company. We grossed almost three and a half million in business in 2004, and unless things go south very suddenly and badly, we'll be doubling it this year. And this is in spite of all the democrats and republicans-in-name-only in Salem. I do a lot of campaign work because I want to keep things going this way (and for other reasons). So tell me all about this "real job" of yours that keeps you from actually giving a second of your time to actually help the party you identify with so much?
What can you say for yourself other than being an ignorant, bigoted, exclusionist, pigeonholing, holier-than-though country-club-lican wannabe? You who've never actually worked for the party and just want to tell people "get on or get out". You claim to know all about independent voters, and yet you yourself admit you've never met any or discussed politics with them or tried to engage them to vote republican. And you take pride in your ignorance.
On second thought, don't answer that. I'm sure you'll just try to make another tired attempt to cloak your ignorance and bigotry in terms like "nobility" and vainglorious declamations of self importance. And it will mean nothing more when our flag is waved by a treasonous war protester.
You're a cheerleader, nothing more, pushing your "team" for all it's worth, and you don't know what you're cheering for, and you don't even realize politics is not a game.
When you've grown up, we might have a use for you. Until then, I can only advise you, for the good of the republican party, to continue your policy of avoiding independent voters and independent thought lest your bigotry, ignorance, and hubris permanently end any chance we have of getting them to vote republican.
And I just know I'll be getting another pig-ignorant response to this because I just know you childishly think getting in the last word somehow makes you a "winner". And also because I suspect your "real job" isn't so real or such a job that it keeps you from playing such games on this forum where actual adults come to seriously discuss politics and issues instead of childishly demanding that everyone conform to your self conceived "noble" definition of what being conservative or republican is.
Congratulations, sir, you are Clueless Twit of the Day.
Or a brazen, cynical liar and scumbag propagandist.
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.