Am I the only one who longs for those days when political opponents would refer to each other as "my worthy opponent" "my learned and esteemed colleague and opponent" or at least in a civil manner?
Mud, Mud, Mud. Get's tiresome.
Mud?
The man wrote the books and saw to it that they be published. How do you define mud?
No one pays attention to that anymore :( It would be considered a weakness these days not to attack your opponent.
Only now-- we have the internet and other New Media to widely expose this ugly reality. That is fortunate, a true blessing.
Grow a pair. This "mud" you define is NOTHING compared to this history of politics in America.
Of course, it does. But they wouldn't sling the slime if it didn't work.
In fact, "tiresome" is part of the strategy's objective. When political races get "tiresome" and people are being turned off, only the committed come out to vote. Negative campaigning is designed to suppress the other side's turnout of "leaners".
That said, mud begets mud. It's been long time since the Democrats were even remotely civil. I can't blame a Republican for responding in kind.
Politics isn't called a bloodsport for no reason....its rough and tumble.
I'm with you, it's pathetic and uninspiring.
"Am I the only one who longs for those days when political opponents would refer to each other as "my worthy opponent" "my learned and esteemed colleague and opponent" or at least in a civil manner?"
Have you heard about the speech alleged to have been given by George Smathers in the democratic primary in Florida in 1950?
Time Magazine reported that Smathers said: "Are you aware that Claude Pepper is known all over Washington as a shameless extrovert? Not only that, but this man is reliably reported to practice nepotism with his sister-in-law, and he has a sister who was once a thespian in wicked New York. Worst of all, it is an established fact that Mr. Pepper before his marriage habitually practiced celibacy."
While Smathers denied ever giving this speech, he did win the primary and served three terms in the Senate.
So writing about incestuous, homosexual, underage love scenes doesn't raise flags?
Yes I long for the days of "my worthy opponent" but in those days the opponents were generally worthy. Standards were higher. The concepts of being disgraced and hanging your head in shame were still alive. In the disgusting era of Studds, McGreevy, Foley, Clintoon, Frank, and now the demented "author" Webb (really, who thinks of such things?)politicians usually deserve what little mud does get thrown at them.
It's actually much more tame than it has been in the past. Do some research on election history in this country, it has always been ugly. As tiresome as it gets, the whole thing of civil politics is a talking point that both parties use and the media laps it up every year.
You mean the days when Jefferson's opponents accused him of fathering illegitimate children, and Alexander Hamilton accused Aaron Burr of incestuous relations with his daughter?
That was only while in the light. All other times the knives were always out. Read a little history of the political struggle between 1790 and 1800. Nothing in our time beats then.
It is amazing out of almost 600 post yall and a few I prob missed are the only ones that show some sense here
For the Record, I am not supporting Allen in any 08 primary bid but I hope and pray he gets elected to the Senate
Now, it is no disservice to perhaps point out that maybe just maybe using this in a Allen campaign ad or as a theme in the closing weeks is stupid
I keep hearing the word "porn" being used all the place. If people think that is a great theme may I suggest that many grandmas and grandpaws and other chruch going folks that read Romance novels or Stepehn King Books or James Bond books might not cotten to the idea they are being told they are reading porn
Can anyone actually say that the above quotes are sexually arousing. I read similar stuff off books I would get at Walmart as a 15 year old in various Horror/sci-fi and adventure stories. Trust me, at that age idiot boys are looking for anything thats is porn and the above aint it.
The point being I think making a major deal of this stuff is going to make us look like idiots.
As to the scene with the kid. I have to imagine he is basing that on something. One gets a sense when reading the whole paragraph that there is something going on here that is not sex.
In every single election that I can remember, people have been longing for the civility of discourse in the past. It's a myth. Have you ever seen how nasty the campaigning back in the 19th century used to be? Ever read Lincoln/Douglas debates? Nasty business.
How is this mud? Did he not write these novels? Too many are turned off by the truth and call it mud. Allen didn't make this stuff up Webb did. And there are few Democrats that are worthy of anything IMHO.
George Allen didn't start this. Jim Webb and his cohorts at the WashPo and other liberal media outlets did. And you know what? It worked. Allen dropped like a rock in the polls. Allen is simply returning fire, and now he's looking like he's going to win again. If you ask me, it about time Republicans fought back against this crap.
Agreed. But it will continue to be slung in ever greater quantities. Why? Simple. It works.