Posted on 07/24/2003 9:00:48 AM PDT by nwrep
I want to kick off a grass-roots movement to educate and inform discerning Democrats about the real nature of their party and am soliciting suggestions from Freepers. The reasons I am doing this are several, as listed below:
* I have several conservative Democrat friends who have always voted D, but who disagree with the stance of their party on issues like AA, tax-cuts, and regulations.
* These people do not understand that regardless of the "moderate" local Dem candidate they vote for, the party agenda is driven in Congress by an extremely liberal faction of the party.
* Case in point #1: I alerted one friend to Rep. Rangel's remarks about the death of Hussein's sons yesterday (Rangel said it was "illegal" for the US to kill them). The friend said he disagreed with Rangel, and the majority of the Dems would similarly disagree with the Congressman. I asked this friend if he knew who Rangel was. He had never heard of him. I informed him coolly that if the Dem regain the House, Rangel would become the Chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Cte., where all spending bills originate, and that he is one of the most influential members of his party in the House. The friend was shocked.
* Case in point #2: I asked another Dem friend what he thought of Kerry. He gave me a canned response about his Vietnam service, etc. I then asked him if he knew about his anti-Vietnam war stance. He said he did not, but that his parents (lifelong Dem voters like himself) hated Jane Fonda and everything she stood for. I then forwarded him the NewsMax expose of Kerr's Vietnam stance, his anti-war book, his rallies with Fonda and Ramsey Clark, and his statement to the US Senate in 1971. After reading all that, he said he was disgusted, and would forward it to his mother. He conceded that if Kerry were to be the nominee, he would vote for Bush.
* The problem is that these Dem voters are blissfully unaware of the voting records of their candidates and representatives. All they go by are finely crafted campaign statements issued during the last few weeks before the election where they pay homage to FDR, Truman and JFK. As a result, these dopey Dem voters (like my friends and their parents) continue voting for these candidates thinking they are voting for FDR/JFK-like candidates.
We need to educate these people and keep them as well informed as we Freepers are about the real day to day legislative agenda of the Rat Party. We need to highlight how they continue to vote against the best interest of these conservative, patriotic Democrats (like my friends) and how they continue to display hypocrisy by constantly changing their stance on major issues.
How do we do this?
"Should we discuss YOUR second personna over at LP?" - Louie "I have at least 2 screenames" Gonzalez.
By all means, it's the same as it is here "AAABEST". That's the only one I've ever had here in 5 + years and they only one I have there.
By all means....discuss.
Sharpton for PREZ!!!
Keep walking lockstep with partyline, accepting the leftward drift. Just as 1963 JFK was more conservative than 2003 Bush, the 2003 Hillary Clinton be more conservative than the George H. W. J. A. B. C. Bush of 2043.
"By the way, when lacking a proper response to charges leveled at them, the Clinton's invariably responded by using personal attacks. I see you use similar tactics. I must have it home with my analysys of you "do-nothing conservatives". Is it Daschle or Sharpton for you this year? By the way, if you don't like my being here, take it up with management. But you don't have the balls to do that, do you? " - Louie "multi-personna" Gonzalez.
You're not making any sense Louie. I never said I had a problem with you being here (just telling the truth) and I don't like any of the politicos you mentioned above. I also never ask the mods to ban anyone unless they're bringing the forum down, never for personal reasons. I didn't even personally attack you, unless you call disclosing what you say you weren't trying to hide a personal attack. IOW, you're going g00-g00 on me again.
Then you wonder why I call you "Screwy Louie".
Want to talk about hypocrites?
Get yourself to a mirror.
Regards;
LG
"I thought so."
I have not heard any candidate at all plausibly address the problem of outsourcing jobs and the dismal employment situation this outsourcing is creating in this country. Not one. Unfortunately, that includes GW Bush. I think this is going to be a big issue by next year. I wish Bush were at least looking hard at it. I don't see now that he is.
I just said elsewhere, "Stop worrying about Bush II repeating Bush I. Start worrying about Bush II repeating Herbert Hoover."
Hoover's loss to Roosevelt in '32 was not so big numerically as Roosevelt's later thumping of Alf Landon, or Johnson's of Goldwater, or Reagan's of Mondale. But it was huge and historic for the enormous coattails FDR dragged in that election. It made the Republicans a minority party for so long, they still haven't lost the mindset.
I desperately hope that doesn't happen to us again. That's why I'm screaming for Republicans, not Democrats, to get the White House's attention this year, not next year. We're looking at the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression.
You don't get people's attention by telling them you're signed up, no matta no matta. In fact, I'd be foolish to ignore a candidate who actually had what looked like the best way to avoid a looming disaster. Even if I were so foolish, I doubt the bulk of the voters would be. The good news (or bad news?) is there is so far no such candidate. There's still time for him to be Bush.
I don't see the relevance of the question. If anyone does run, it's up to me to identify which candidate best fits my beliefs and support him. I'm not going to mindlessly support GW Bush in the primary simply because he is President.
Regards;
DD
Finally, a man who understands the system.
That's the time to send your message home, then comes the time to stop Democrats at all costs.
Quoting Joe Hadenuf is impressive, but do you have anything to offer except regurgitation of your cohorts?
OK, something to sink our teeth into here.
I don't think that the government has any business telling industry that they can't outsource jobs, having said that, I also recognize the dangers involved in sending jobs overseas.
As a solution, and middle ground, I've always thought that we should incentivize the outsourcing of jobs to countries in order to gain benefits beyond low wages.
I think that the Feds should offer incentives to companies that outsource, or even build facilities, in our hemisphere. If we are going to outsource jobs, let's outsource them to Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, etc. so they can stay home and make money. I'd rather outsource ten million jobs to countries in our hemisphere, than have ten million illegals coming here looking for work.
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.