Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dean vs. GOP? Neither cares about America
worldnetdaily.com ^ | June 11, 2005 | Kyle Williams

Posted on 06/11/2005 2:42:31 AM PDT by ovrtaxt

Dean vs. GOP? Neither cares about America


Posted: June 11, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

The initial news this month about DNC Chairman Howard Dean was his pathetic job at raising money for the party. While the millions the Democrats raised weren't bad, they were a ways behind the GOP in the first quarter. The second and more controversial bit of news from the Dean camp was his now-infamous statement about the Republican Party: "The Republicans are not very friendly to different kinds of people. They're a pretty monolithic party. They all behave the same, and they all look the same. It's pretty much a white Christian party."

While Dean may not have all the money he'd have hoped for, he's now all over the press. Everyone is very upset about his statement, but is it just a lie? It's obvious that Dean didn't just pull this out of nowhere. In truth, the Republican Party is essentially made up of white elected officials. From state legislatures around the nation to the halls of Congress in Washington, the overwhelming majority of Republicans are white. That's not to say the GOP is racist. Racism is really a bad idea politically, which is what makes the whole conversation ridiculous. At this point in history, the race card has become boring and accusations of racism against mainstream political bodies are just smoke and mirrors. As far as the race part of Dean's statement goes, the critics are just using this as an opportunity to attack.

While the statement about race may have some legitimacy, what about Christianity and the GOP? As national evangelicals continuing to get more and more cozy with top Republican leaders, the lines are becoming blurred, and to those on the outside of Western Christianity, it all looks more like a religious wing of the Republican Party than anything else. As written about in this column on several occasions, the ideas of moralism are becoming synonymous with salvation, and so priorities become less humble and more politically driven. This is bad news for those who look at biblical Christianity as something other than the vision of Tim LaHaye.

Back to Dean's statement: What exactly is his goal? It seems that since he broke out onto the national scene, his talking point has been the same. His goal is to spread a particular stereotype onto Republicans – that they are all the same, they are unfriendly, they are conservative to the fringe and probably care more about corporate gain than whether your child lives tomorrow.

Howard Dean is attempting to cast this image that the Democratic Party cares. It's what Bill Clinton did before him and what Al Gore was terrible at doing. They continually repeat this mantra that every Republican was behind Enron, and if you don't watch out they'll snatch your money while driving by in a limousine. On the other hand, Democrats are there to help you out and give you a hand up. It's a war of perceptions.

I might like Dean if he would be as critical to the Democrats as he is to the GOP, but, after all, he is the chairman. The reality is neither party cares about us. While, yes, there are a few in the upper circle of politics that I'm sure truly do care about America, the majority of these politicians are greedy to the end of destruction. Political parties will never be the answer to a problem; they are the problem because of their need to sustain power. The route to principled government is found in selflessness, but you won't ever hear that from the ads that roll around every election cycle. Instead, they play to our greed and our lusts for more of what we don't have.

Howard Dean is another reminder of America's need to abandon the self-absorbed parties of Republicans and Democrats.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: boohoohoo; chairmandean; dnc; ghostwritten; gop; kylewilliams; worldnutdaily
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last
To: Alia
Doesn't that actually work in numerous aspects of life?
YES!
MSM put things out there because there are still sheep that follow, Howard Dean, because MSM wants to protect the DUMS, the ACLU discriminates, Ann Coulter and Michael Moore get attention, because they say what some people like to hear, drug dealers because they sweeten the pot, Jessie Jackson because if he didn't get the press the MSM would have to give him money (if they didn't already), and radical feminists because they support Hillary and her ambitions.
41 posted on 06/11/2005 7:01:30 AM PDT by southlake_hoosier (.... One Nation, Under God.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier

Let's review- Truman was POTUS from '48 to '52. He is within your "gauntleted" time frame. The Rosie and Penn reference was towards your humorous Mayor Daley query. You have disregarded my proffered list, out of lacking the knowledge- that you required of myself. Good luck with what ever it is you are doing. Get well done- then go back to school.


42 posted on 06/11/2005 7:21:25 AM PDT by Treader (Hillary's dark smile is reminiscent of Stalin's inhuman grin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier

Yes, I stepped on my tongue- Truman is outside of your time frame. My brain sucker is dying of starvation.


43 posted on 06/11/2005 7:26:40 AM PDT by Treader (Hillary's dark smile is reminiscent of Stalin's inhuman grin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: QwertyKPH

Time to bring up the term limits amendment to the Constitution yet again. It is the only chance to change that dynamic.


44 posted on 06/11/2005 7:26:55 AM PDT by AFPhys ((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Both parties are disconnected from the people. The amount of money that is thrown at politicians has a tendency to do that. The travesty for both parties is the nomination of presidential candidates is done by the elites not the voters. When is the last time a voter in New York, California, or Illinois has went to primary to cast a vote for candidate whose nomination was truly in doutbt? I am leaving out a host of other heavily populated states that have been left out of the nominating process as well. The boys and girls who run the show have manipulated the process to disenfranchise as many voters as possible. Of course the media loves the present process, because the concentration of political power in a few states such as Iowa and New Hampshire allows them more influence

The process in the long run has been better exploited by the Republicans than Democrats but that may not be because Republicans are inherently smarter. The good old boys of the Republican Party have come from farther outside beltway and therefore more in touch with the people.

The Democrats repeated in 2004 the mistake that the Republicans made in 1996. They nominated a candidate just because he had been knocking around the Senate for a long time, not because he could connect with the people on the campaign trail. A kind of reward if you will for hanging around Washington holding office and not really making any enemies inside the Washington political elite.

The irony is that Howard Dean would have made a better candidate than Kerry. That does not mean that he could have beat Bush. He would have ran a better campaign. He would have at least had an issue. He had an articulable position on the war, he was against it in every way, shape and form. Anyone going to the polls to vote would have known the differences between the two candidates. As it turned out many voters may have seen the choice between a man wearing a cowboy hat and a man wearing a spandex wind surfing suit, a man with an intelligent wife with traditional values, and man whose wife was a cash cow and whose mouth was not connected to a thinking organ.

But the Democrats are a humanistic and pseudo caring party, and in their own way they felt sorry for the way the Teddy Kennedy and his boy Shrum, along with little Tommy Harkin had put the bum's rush on Dean to hand the spandex boy the nomination. So they thought they would feel better if they threw some crumbs Howie's way.

By doing so the Republicans get another huge gift, deserved or not.

45 posted on 06/11/2005 7:30:19 AM PDT by Biblebelter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Treader
Last I check the current year was 2005. So 50 years back would be 1955. So if Truman ended his term in 1952, how does that fall within the 50 years. Talk about needing school.

I knew the Rosie/Penn thing was in reference to the Daley thing, but I have no idea what it was supposed to mean. Daley talks around topics and avoids answers. Besides being in response to my comment, what does it mean. I'm curious.
46 posted on 06/11/2005 7:31:50 AM PDT by southlake_hoosier (.... One Nation, Under God.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier

Swing and a miss. You get right with my answer to your primary question, and then we will discuss insults.


47 posted on 06/11/2005 7:40:31 AM PDT by Treader (Hillary's dark smile is reminiscent of Stalin's inhuman grin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Treader

you didn't like my reply?


48 posted on 06/11/2005 7:45:11 AM PDT by southlake_hoosier (.... One Nation, Under God.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
As I look around at the conservatives, namely the GOP, I see a party that elects very qualified people of color to some pretty important jobs. The Democratic Party merely lets popular people of color get a little air time or ink, for instance Rev. Al Sharpton, a more than vocal mouth piece for the black base; and then the press lauds Barack Obama as the second coming. Barack may have more couth, than Rev. Sharpton, but he is just as much a “party” man regardless of the need for veracity at times...not a good thing for the DNC.

Being qualified means a lot to the Republican Party where as the DNC considers quantity over qualified.

49 posted on 06/11/2005 8:04:05 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
"So if you believe in Jesus you shouldn't run for office?"

Or vote?

This is the problem. By attempting to equate a political party with Evangelicals, the libs hope to bring the Republicans down. It is nothing more than a lie and a deliberate scare tactic which they hope will work with the morally relative secularists. In truth, conservative Christians do not want state sponsored religion. The founding fathers did not want a government for the people controlled by any one church. Nor did they deny God, but instead made it clear that man's first allegiance was to God and not to government.

But what is happening now, is that Christians are being denied their rights after 40 years of the socialist secularism that has weakened America and they are beginning to push back. Christianity may be the only thing that saves us. I should say it WILL be the only thing that saves us.

50 posted on 06/11/2005 8:32:18 AM PDT by sageb1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

Liberals, to see what we hear when Dean speaks, subsitute the word "Jew" for the term "white Christian"

exactly! if the situation was reversed, the left would hear it this way: (Freeper Frame)

"democrats are pretty much a Jewish party."

"i hate democrat-Jews and everything they stand for."

"democrat-Jews have never made an honest living in their lives."

"democrat-Jews are brain dead."

"democrat-Jews are evil."

Wow, when you think of it that way, Howard Dean seems like a modern day Nazi. the only difference is the particular group being targeted.


51 posted on 06/11/2005 8:51:32 AM PDT by GOPJ (Deep Throat(s) -- top level FBI officials playing cub reporters for fools.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

Well .. just take a look at the Clinton cabinet (especially the high profile positions) and measure it against the Bush cabinet (high profile positions).

The Republicans were made up of a much more DIVERSE group of people than the ALL WHITE MEN group in Clinton's camp. While Clinton had 2 women (AG and SS_ - THEY WERE BOTH WHITE.

This is why Dean's statement is just divisive and wrong.


52 posted on 06/11/2005 10:03:50 AM PDT by CyberAnt (President Bush: "America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

Our job is to reshape the GOP from within, rather than wishing that a more conservative party, to the right of the Republican party will magically arise.

The Gop foundation is pretty sound and the soil beneath the foundation is generally stable and the structure itself has more sound timbers than those weakened by termites and rot. This old house is restorable and remodelable, and the mortage is nearly paid off-we damn near own it, free and clear of debt.

Why should we start all over from scratch, someplace else and allow the crack pots of the left and the half cracked RINOS of the right,to turn our old residense into a crack house?????


53 posted on 06/11/2005 10:39:55 AM PDT by F.J. Mitchell (From their slimy left bank puddle, the froggy Dems still croak" Duh........ We da mainstream, we da)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

Whoever wrote this (and I seriously doubt that it was really a 15-yr old) is merely mounting a weak defense of dean by criticizing Republicans using the same untruths the RATS always use, they're Christian extremists, they're only for the rich, etc. Naturally, anybody who bashes politicians in general will get lots of agreement. Who doesn't think pols are self-absorbed hacks who don't care about the taxpayers who elected them? Simplistic is right.


54 posted on 06/11/2005 11:02:55 AM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

"While this is a bit simplistic ..." And how old is Kyle? Simplistic is an understatement.


55 posted on 06/11/2005 11:15:01 AM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
So if you believe in Jesus you shouldn't run for office?

No. You shouldn't vote. There are certain beliefs that you aren't allowed to have and still remain a member of society. /s

56 posted on 06/11/2005 4:13:25 PM PDT by nosofar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Treader
Men do not mature until the mid-30 to mid 40 range, and that is still a dice roll on the average.

Yikes! That's actually a very scary statement you've made! I'm not saying it isn't true; what's so scary about it is that it is the truth in so many cases re: both men and women in America today.

It never used to be this way. I'm old enough to remember a different America: one where people did not live in a state of perpetual adolesence. Men acted like grown men and women acted like grown women by the time they reached their early 20's. Even teenagers acted more like responsible adults back then than most adults do now. Perhaps, that's our real problem.

We can blame the politicians all we want, but until the vast majority of Americans grow up and start acting like the adults they're supposed to be, our nation will never pull out of this tailspin. [I'm not taking a jab at anyone here, BTW. In my experience, I've found FReepers to be grown ups (even the youngest FR members I've met here are more mature than some of the 30-40 somethings I've met while out and about in the world).]

57 posted on 06/11/2005 5:26:27 PM PDT by schmelvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Kyle is 15.

You can click on the link to the article to see a photo of him, then scroll down past the end of the article to read his bio.


58 posted on 06/11/2005 5:32:52 PM PDT by schmelvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier

You challenged me to "...name a President in the last 50 years that did not have a well educated, well protected, well connected upbringing?"... I named 8 POTUS in the last 55 years that meet that requirement- even though you could not think of ONE... and then you denigrated my self- acknowledged error - after I fully admitted such. You were not "dancing around the facts" there, were ya, punk? So, I offered 8 POTUS in the last 55 yrs, instead of 50yrs! What is your point, mister? You did not refute my list, and still have not done so. You know asked for ONE, and I presented you with SEVEN, by your stupid term of 50 yrs. Since you "...know the last fifty years..." then Defend your post's implied POV of elitist classism against the unwashed masses, little man!


59 posted on 06/13/2005 12:29:28 AM PDT by Treader (Hillary's dark smile is reminiscent of Stalin's inhuman grin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson