I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Loyalty oathes?? Weren't those the provence of communist countries??? Ya know countries like the old "Soviet Union", or mainland China, North Korea and Cuba?? Is this what we want to become?? God I hope not.
see, they got your name on a list and now look what's happened to you ;}
Funny how they seem so smart in the way they've advanced their agenda, and yet so stupid in the way they are handling it now.
I'd say the two greatest contributing factors to their success have been the complicity of the corporate media and the simple-mindedness of the general public.
It's like you gotta beat people over the head to get them to listen to sensible reasonable ideas.
"Yier Shi, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee in Washington, D.C., said today's rally was meant to reward and enthuse Bush-Cheney supporters, not to be a forum to preach to skeptics. "
Uh, isn't "preaching to skeptics" the purpose of having public campaign appearances?? As a Liberal Democrat, I'd like to take the opportunity to praise Karl Rove's latest abomination. There's nothing I'd enjoy more than to watch Bush/Cheney preaching to an ever-shrinking choir, until the point is reached when there is only one lone voice left. Karl, you're a fucking genius, dude! Just keep doing what you're doing.
Loyalty Oath related Program activies
YeeeeeeHaaaaaa
but then again, if aWol goes ape-shit or Chenron bites the head off a baby, it's probably a good thing that it's in front of the loyal base.
they do things this way because the rallies are meant primarily for TV consumption, which means they must be carefully stage-managed. They are as staged and phony as a Dennis Miller audience. Only I guess they don't pay you to show up but maybe that's coming soon.
So while they are carefully scripting their TV act, they are alienating the local voters. Now, presenting a good image to millions of people might outweigh the bad feelings several dozens of people might feel, caused by exercising such a gestapo-like control over their 'rallies', but if you do it enough, well, people DO talk and word-of-mouth can be pretty powerful.
The way I understand it, people were made to sign loyalty or they may have been called actually, support, pledges or they were not allowed tickets to the rally for Cheney. Also, contained in the pledge was a release for the campaign to use your name in any way it wished in connection with the campaign.
I'll look for the link to the ABQ Journal story.
As long as CNN, Lehrer, etc., are
eager to show aWol lying to the
people, they will be content to
restrict access.
Just saw the Manchurian Candidate this afternoon.
Maybe they plan to imbed a tracking device on each attendee to make sure that the pledge is kept.
Is this theory really that extreme given experience?
Until I find the story, this should entertain everyone:
"Bush camp solicits race of Star staffer [journalist]"
President Bush's re-election campaign insisted on knowing the race of an Arizona Daily Star journalist assigned to photograph Vice President Dick Cheney.
SNIP
Diaz [Cheney spokesperson] repeated that answer when asked if it is the practice of the White House to ask for racial information or if the photographer, Mamta Popat, was singled out because of her name. He referred those questions to the U.S. Secret Service, which did not respond to a call from the Star Friday afternoon.
Hayt [Popat's boss] declined to speculate on whether Popat was racially profiled, but said she is deeply concerned.
"One has to wonder what they were going to do with that information," Hayt said. "Because she has Indian ancestry, were they going to deny her access? I don't know."
SNIP
http://www.azstarnet.com/dailyst...ystar/
32301.php
------------------
Profiling, who, me?
I cannot believe that when the people asked why all this info was needed, a campaign worker told them "Secret Service stuff."
The same answer provided in that earlier story posted here about the Cheney people demanding to be told Mamta Popat's race. "Secret Service stuff."
Bush/Cheney truly don't have a clue what democracy means, but they'll find out.
So this is what it looks like when a campaign implodes.
Gotcha.
Is it just me, or do the Bush team really seem to be flailing right now?
genoasail, Atrios already took care of that story earlier today.
definitely flailing about. Look for increasing signs of desperation.
We're about 90 days out, folks. Being ahead in the polls in the spring don't mean squat. Being ahead in the polls now means something.
Don't get overconfident... but I think it's OK to feel good about the trends.
More years ago than I care to remember I attended a Gerald Ford rally at my college acampus in Ohio. Ford was a big disappointment, and used every rhetorical cliche imaginable (even a college junior could recognize this). But no one screened who entered. There were people who booed, but frankly it was no big deal. Most people were there to see the prez and were partisans and their enthusiasm ruled the day. It's pretty bad if the prez and vice prez have so little faith in their grass roots that they have to screen out everyone else.
We used to call this kind of stuff phoning it in. Now me, I always liked that in a job, but when you have to persuade other people to give you stuff, it doesn't work real well. See, for example, Tucson.
How's your head Dr. Duncan? Throat, larynx? Go have another nice lie down. I'm going to see if I have enough money left to buy one of those 'I am Atrios' t'shirts before they become hot items on E-bay, like the 'Can't Sleep - Clowns Will Eat Me' one that got so expensive.
I'm reminded of a "Laugh-In" sketch from the late '60s. Arte Johnson played this recurring Russian character. The guest star for that week says to the Russian, "In America, we have the freedom to stand in the middle of the street and yell out that President Nixon is an idiot!"
The Russian character answers, "My country is the same way. We also have the freedom to stand in the middle of the street and yell out that President Nixon is an idiot!"
And that just goes to show that Rowan & Martin had a better understanding of politics the Bush & Cheney.
Sheesh!
Obtaining Cheney Rally Ticket Requires Signing Bush Endorsement
By Jeff Jones
Journal Staff Writer
Some would-be spectators hoping to attend Vice President Dick Cheney's rally in Rio Rancho this weekend walked out of a Republican campaign office miffed and ticketless Thursday after getting this news:
Unless you sign an endorsement for President George W. Bush, you're not getting any passes.
The Albuquerque Bush-Cheney Victory office in charge of doling out the tickets to Saturday's event was requiring the endorsement forms from people it could not verify as supporters.
---snip---
Ruben Pulido Jr., a spokesman for that campaign, said the Democratic Party has no screening requirements for those interested in seeing Kerry or Edwards.
When Kerry visited Albuquerque earlier this month, a contingent of Bush supporters were in the crowd. The Associated Press has reported that the group chanted "Viva Bush!" during the event. The AP added that Kerry urged the crowd to tolerate the Bush supporters.
Moses Mercado, head of the Kerry-Edwards campaign in New Mexico, was in Boston on Thursday for the Democratic National Convention. He challenged Republicans to open their event "to all New Mexicans."
http://www.abqjournal.com/elex/2...lex07-30-
04.htm
Loyalty oaths won't help the Bush campaign. But your not likely to see anything about it on national news programs. Email everyone you know with the info.
More problematic is the results of a Newsweek poll conducted just after the convention. About 51% of respondants stated they watched little to none of the convention at all.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5567.../site/newsweek/
From the Central Party Committee to Select the President (CPCSP):
RFID indentification devices will now be imbedded in all Party members' arms to allow the Party to control access to Important Party Functions (IPF) while keeping Undesirable Non-Party Elements (UN-PE) from disrupting Important Party Matters (IPM).
CPCSP Secretary For Important Party Matters (CPCSPFIPM)
Yeah? I went to a Clinton rally in '92 and all you had to do was show up. I guess Clinton was the one who started the registration-for-participation thing.
Heck, rallies required tickets under Clinton?
On election night '92, all the thousands of us who showed up had to do to see him at McAllen's airport in Texas was show up. Secret Service gave a look-see for weapons at the entrance, although wearing skin-tight clothes that showed off some skin got an ogle. :D The SS took all signs on sticks, but all hand-carried signs went through, even anti-Clinton signs. That was it for requirements to get in.
Shrub and Crashcart couldn't handle anything that...that...democratic. But then, they think the Constitution is toilet paper, not our country's most sacred document.
I had low friends in high places during the election in 1992, and I got to shake Clinton's hand. He's on Larry King right now, which is a repeat, I assume.
He just said something about growing up in an alcoholic home, and was Talkin' the Talk. I've heard him hint around on that subject before, and I'm a grateful alum of Al-Anon meetings. So I told him, as I stretched my hand through the fence and the people in front of me, as he shook it, I said a very curious thing that wrinkled his brow, and with good reason:
"I love you in a very special way."
That's a paraphrase from the Preamble or Ending that's read at most Al-Anon meetings. I was hoping he would recognize it, but he didn't seem to at that split second.
I only hope he didn't think I was hitting on him...apparently, the also-chagrined Secret Service guys didn't grab me and question me in an unlit metal room.
ha ha
The Big Dog. What a man.
To do a Gore rally in Lewiston, ME in 2000, you had to go to Simone's Hot Dogs just off of Lisbon St. and get a ticket.
No sticks, coolers, etc. as per above.
That was just about it.
Goddamned craven little vermin scum. They deserve nothing but kicking, contempt and spit. They hold the people in contempt and we should hold them in contempt.
Just like the fake rally when they were pulling Sadam's statue down. If they zoom the camera back you'll see a small crowd of planted people listening to Slant-mouth's speech.
Goddamned craven little vermin scum. They deserve nothing but kicking, contempt and spit. They hold the people in contempt and we should hold them in contempt.
Vinnie
Hate is ugly Vinnie.
I signed that loyalty oath a hundred times.
When does my name start appearing in newspaper ads?
To do a Gore rally in Lewiston, ME in 2000, you had to go to Simone's Hot Dogs just off of Lisbon St. and get a ticket.
No sticks, coolers, etc. as per above.
That was just about it.
Davis X. Machina
You know, maybe with hate sites like this the secret service is genuinely worried. I wouldn't be surprised to hear on the news that an Atrios junkie shot the pres. You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred. It doesn't have to be that way guys, a hate-free life is a good life.
Hey Anon, who the fuck has governed by hate and fear? Did you forget the eight ceaseless fucking years of hate directed at Clinton? You, sir, are a goddamned hypocrite!
More problematic is the results of a Newsweek poll conducted just after the convention. About 51% of respondants stated they watched little to none of the convention at all.
Damn, that's not problematic, that's great! Half of the people watching more than a little of the convention is much better than I would have expected.
And you too Shotta.
LJ & all:
I cheered at a Clinton rally in Chicago, 1996, Daley Plaza.
Metal detectors, bags were searched, manhole covers were welded down.
But freeper-ish placards were allowed, no loyalty oaths.
Bush & Cheney are more akin to Kim Jong-il than Bill Clinton.
shotta,
Don't project your sickness on the peaceful, longhaired, hippie types here.
BTW, do you believe that Ted Kaczynski was a liberal, by chance?
Here's the text they had to sign:
The spelling error is the kicker.
"I, (full name) ... do herby (sic) endorse George W. Bush for reelection of the United States." It later adds that, "In signing the above endorsement you are consenting to use and release of your name by Bush-Cheney as an endorser of President Bush."
I'm starting to believe what some are saying. They really don't want to win. Screw things up... take the money and run.
The real Bush Doctrine.
We don't want to kill bush ... we want to see him tried for war crimes and sent to jail for illegally waging war based on lies.
but assasinating him would also be wrong, and I for one would be sure to mention that, if asked.
a hate-free life is a good life.
Try it for yourself before preaching it to others.
Hypocrite.
If the Kerry campaign can't use this to beat these idiots black & blue, then I dunno... "free speech zones" are horrible, but loyalty oaths? Christ on a short, short crutch!
.
All this is moot, alas. Kerry and Edwards are doing real rallies. Bush is doing Potemkin rallies. They're going to be edited to look the same on TV, and it's going to be the people 50 miles away from the rallies in those swing states that get to see the edited footage. The fuckers.
All we can hope is that word-of-mouth kicks in. Or if people start making noise about the Potemkin rallies, and the press -- the local press first, I'd assume -- gets hold of it, then it truly will backfire.
Donkey:
I don't doubt that things changed by '96. Look at the level of vitriol the Republicans were humping over with Clinton by then. I'm sure the concerns were really strong about a possible assassination attempt.
Go Cheney yourself Shotta, you troll asswipe.
You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred.
Signed that loyalty oath with blood, shotta? Oh dear. Never read 'Dr Faustus'?
Who was saying the other day something to the effect that the morally superior trolls are the most tiresome? Or was it the most entertaining, as in the biggest buffoons?
shotta
Many people want GWB to quit playing at being CIC and go back to Crawford. That does not mean that they hate him. Hating his policies does not mean that we hate the man. We may consider him a spoiled brat who has spent his life being bailed out of his failures. What we hate is the incredible costs, in both lives and dollars, that he has imposed on us and on our children and our grandchildren
This is all happening because Vice President Dick Cheney is a coward. He is afraid of the American people. He hid out in his taxpayers funded bomb shelter for two and a half years after 911 and then only came out to hit the fundraising trail. All his meetings are closed to the public. He had to determine the RACe of a newpaper photographer assigned t cover him. He's an authentic American coward.
You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred.
First, the correct phrase is, "out there, out of the mainstream."
And I agree with you that a hate-free life is a good life. Now, if we could just convince Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and Rick Santorum and Fred Phelps and Michael Savage and Richard T. Hines and Ann Coulter and Karl Rove and a few other folks that OUR way is the right way to live, we could make some solid bipartisan progress towards achieving equal rights for all Americans.
And as soon as that job was done, I could smash your fucking skull in with a tire iron and rape your corpse.
Just kidding, man...I love you!
ARE the incredible costs.
Time to go to bed.
Digby nails the idea that they really have no intention of winning this Fall:
"They come in to office, reward themselves and their rich friends, totally fuck up the country and then leave the mess for the Democrats to clean up. Then they use their time out of office assassinating the characters of the Democrats for fun and profit preparing the way for them to get back into office and fuck it all up again. These people are not interested in governing in a democratic system, which takes negotiation, compromise and patience. They are about power which requires far less complexity."
Phila, you are in RARE form tonight. Remind me never to piss you off!
Who was saying the other day something to the effect that the morally superior trolls are the most tiresome?
If it was "most tiresome," it was probably me. Or at least, that's how I feel about it.
Granted that NONE of 'em truly believe most of the stuff they post here, I find the faux morality to be more irritating than some of the other phony stances they take. But others do get a big laugh out of 'em, so who's to say.
And as soon as that job was done, I could smash your fucking skull in with a tire iron and rape your corpse.
Just kidding, man...I love you!
Philalethes
If the best you can do is trite irony then I pity you even more. I am serious about a hate-free life. You will never know how good it is to be free. But I wish you best and hope that one day the miracle happens for you.
I'd say it would be fun to see some covert civil disobedience, but even if 20 people got together and snuck in as Bushites, only to cause trouble during the speech, the incident would just be erased, with the help of the SCLM.
BTW, I had a scary thought. What if the networks, in response to criticisms about their DNC coverage, decide to turn a new leaf and show the RNC in its entirety, while plugging the coverage and encouraging people to watch.
Loyalty oaths are just never a good thing. Before you know it, people are writing books about you - you know, "Those Nazis, and that evil SS with their loyalty oath..."
http://www.funny.co.uk/comedy/pr...n-
19341945.html
Hmmm.....
Philalethes, you made me laugh hard enough to delurk for the first time ever, anywhere. Wow!
I guess their plan is to screw the personal touch and hope that positive local news coverage of their fake campaign rallies brings some more people aboard.
and if that doesn't work there is always Diebold, ESS, Sequoia, et al
"You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred."
I wouldn't say consumed with hatred. We are offended by stupidity (yours and others), we are appalled at the costs of that stupidity to our country both in the lives of our military personnel and innocent people stuck in the bombsights (read women and children) and we are baffled at the stupidity of mthe trolls such as yourself but we are not consumed by hatred.
Hell, if W was drowning, I would probably rescue him (assuming it didn't inconvenience me in any way).
You know, when you think about it, Bush is really quite corrupt.
Phila, you are in RARE form tonight. Remind me never to piss you off!
Silleigh
Oh, I feel the same way about lots of folks here...I'd hate to be on their bad side. There are more rhetorical terrors in Athenae's deployment of "fluffit," or pie's of "whelp," than in every post of every gutless troll on earth, combined.
I figure that even when we don't have unity of purpose, we at least have the threat of mutually assured destruction to keep us together.
It's probably needless to add that there's also more honest compassion, morality, patriotism, and love expressed around here than a faux-pietistic, secretly smirking hired-gun like "Shotta" could conceive of, were "Shotta" inclined to conceive of such things as living realities rather than cheap phrases.
Here's hoping your two-bit benediction boomerangs right back at ya, Shotta, and does some good where it's needed most.
Philalethes - You funny; you wicked; you smart.
AH. Now I get it. Shotta is a gen-u-ine fundie trolling for the big J. We can't know love because shotta's certain that no one here knows the big J. Only Big J followers (who happen to be Republicans, natch) know the real meaning of love.
Puh-leeze.
Preach it somewhere else, troll.
Philalethes, you made me laugh hard enough to delurk for the first time ever, anywhere. Wow!
Gretch
Wow yourself, and welcome! Glad to hear it...quite a compliment. Too bad it wasn't for a slightly more high-minded comment...but hey, whatever works!
Thanks for the kind words.
I stumbled over Clinton's first appearance in New York (in Bryant Park) after the comeback kid second place finish in New Hampshire in '92 on my way back from lunch.
It's the only thing I've ever been grateful to that particular job for.
You'll love this....not only did I see Clinton speak at Santa Barbara City College in 1996, we got tickets right up front. We had to go to the campaign headquarters for them...the person giving out tickets looked us up and down, reached into a drawer (not into the stack of tickets in front of him) and handed us specially stamped tickets that got us up close. Apparently they wanted "good looking" people up front. I thought it was pretty funny at the time....
Hmm. The only place I've seen that suggests ACT would do things at the Cheney-Loyalty Rally in NM was in the comments at your site.
Somebody reads your stuff, perhaps. So what's going down at future Cheney-Loyalty Rallys? I'm freakin' goin!
Apparently they wanted "good looking" people up front. I thought it was pretty funny at the time....
cls180
That's not necessarily a compliment ...
I love Clinton ... but his taste in -- uh ... "attractiveness" -- is a little suspect.
"Paranoia strikes deep/into your lives it will creep./It starts when you're always afraid/Step out of line the Man comes/To take you away."
True then. True now. The more out of control Bush & Co. realize they are, the more they will insist on exerting control.
It's becoming an interesting case study. That beam in their eye that makes them see a splinter in everyone else's. One wonders just how much true paranoiac behavior might be going on within the White House about now. Maybe none; maybe a lot. The signs are getting interesting, to say the least.
As for the poster preaching that this site is "hate-filled:" condemning people is not exactly providing an object lesson in how they should behave now, is it? Of course, "Shotta" was probably: a) insincere, or b) not coming back for a conversation. A drive-by posting, IOW. A hit 'n' run. Not much of a hit, though; just lots of run.
It's why it's easier to ignore such posts, than to respond to them.
Just want to add my evidence about Clinton rallies in 1996.
Mr. Kate and I went out to Luke Air Force Base in Arizona to see the Big Dawg. All you had to do was show up, and walk through metal detectors. I opened my big purse to a security guard who barely glanced at it.
No questions about what party affiliation, loyalty, signatures, racial profiling, etc. Nothing. Guess Clinton thought being a citizen was good enough.
"To do a Gore rally in Lewiston, ME in 2000, you had to go to Simone's Hot Dogs just off of Lisbon St. and get a ticket."
I worked that event (brought in the Maine Tribal Leaders), and you could also get tickets at the West End Market in Portland, or try to get into the gym (limited capacity) by just waiting in line.
In 1992, Clinton's Labor Day stop in Connecticut drew a crowd of 10K at 11pm at the hotel in Rocky Hill. No tickets needed.
Oh, and the crowds were huge, parking impossible, but nobody cared. The cheering deafening. This was in ARIZONA.
I guess that's something Bush/Cheney can only dream of.
Geez, Nads, did someone make fun of you in the third grade or something? You sure put me in MY place! You win! Yah!
I just read the Ron Reagan piece online at WWW.Esquire.com It is fabulous. The guy deserves a Pulizer. I admired him before, but wait until you read this critique on Bush.
cls180:
relax dude ... I guess I should have added just kidding at the end of the post, but in my head it was a joke!
...endorse George W. Bush for reelection of the United States....
hmmm, I wonder if the chimp wrote that part himself
I signed it. No problem.
Me too. Whats the big deal.
Yeah, yeah....I know what you mean...the inflection in your head doesn't translate to letters on the page. I hate it when that happens.
BTW, Bill Clinton wasn't handing out the tickets. It was a college kid (with very good taste I might add....ha!)
I just read the Ron Reagan piece online at WWW.Esquire.com It is fabulous. The guy deserves a Pulizer
Ahem. Would you be saying that if he endorsed Bush? Let's get a grip please, we are still talking about vile Reagan spawn, you ignorant slut.
Ahem. Would you be saying that if he endorsed Bush? Let's get a grip please, we are still talking about vile Reagan spawn, you ignorant slut.
Ah, good to see that sweet reason has returned.
Bigotry is when you condemn an individual for their skin color. But condemning them for their parents is...different. Right?
I'm just trying to figure out how. I mean, it all comes down to genetic heritage....
BTW, Bill Clinton wasn't handing out the tickets. It was a college kid (with very good taste I might add....ha!)
cls180
yeah ... college kids know hot!!
Ahem. Would you be saying that if he endorsed Bush? Let's get a grip please, we are still talking about vile Reagan spawn, you ignorant slut.
Ron Reagan Jr. is actually a pretty decent chap so go Cheney yourself.
I'm starting to believe what some are saying. They really don't want to win. Screw things up... take the money and run.
Dayum, I was thinking the same thing myself recently. It's like these guys want to lose.
...Or know they're not going to lose under any circumstances.
Which scenario is scarier?
Re: Ron Reagan, Jr.
I seem to recall Ezekiel pretty much establishing that whole thing about sons not bearing the iniquity of fathers, and vice versa...
Hey!
Bush/Cheney '04 doesn't want supporters. They want enablers.
Ahem. Would you be saying that if he endorsed Bush?
No. Because in order to endorse Bush he would have to do all manner of illogical contortions to defend the indefensible. He would have to, in essence, lie, and attempt to make the lies in some grotesque way believable. Hence, it would be lousy writing.
Wasn't RR Jr. out of the family when he started dancing for a living anyway? More telling to me is Nancy's snub of the Republicans.
I don't care who's dealing in the truth. If it's the truth I can handle it. I don't understand why the Republicans don't get that...
LJ,
I was just being a smartass, of course. I can't really understand why the Rethugs have drawn this line in the sand over stem-cell research. I've been following the issue for a few years since a paralyzed student wrote a research paper on it for a course I was teaching. It seemed to me then, as it does now, to be an act of unspeakable cruelty to block this research. And it's costing them in the polls, but even so, this time has been lost, and that's unconscionable.
"Bush/Cheney truly don't have a clue what democracy means, but they'll find out."
Thanks, I enjoyed that.
They surely have some dirty shit up their sleeves.
"You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred"
The way things are going, hatred of Bush will be the mainstream.
And yes, I hate the man. Proudly and relentlessly. Y'see, unlike, oh, the right wing bigmouths, I've taken the time to educate myself about the men who founded this country and the things they went through to do it. And they didn't go through it so that Cheney could tell us to go fuck ourselves and Bill O'Reilly could yell at us to shut up. Or rather, they did -- but they also had in mind that we'd have the right (and they might even see it as the duty) to be able to tell fuckwads like Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld what miserable scumsucking shitheads they are.
They even called them that at the Constitutional Convention. Okay, not in those exact words. But they did spend a lot of time worrying about what would happen should the presidency fall into the hands of a man of "low character." And a drug-addled megalomaniac like Bush is exactly the sort of person they were referring to.
It was a hell of an achievement, that Constitution. Never in the history of mankind had a group of people sat down and deliberately hammered out a system of government. And I defy anyone to find any other point in history where you have a convergence of men like Washington, Franklin, Jefferson (on his good days), Hamilton, and Adams.
And now we have Bush and Co. tearing it all up. Why? So their friends, relatives and campaign contributors can line their pockets. Shameful, disgraceful, shortsighted -- and treasonous. Judas was content with 30 pieces of silver, but I guess you have to adjust for inflation...
So yeah, I hate them. And I pity them. They are in for the same rude awakening as anyone else throughout our history who made the mistake of underestimating the power and determination of ordinary Americans. Hitler derided us as a nation of shopkeepers -- but you'll recall he didn't stick around to let us ring up his bill.
So go ahead -- tell us we're out of the mainstream. But don't be too surprised when that mainstream sweeps you away.
Wasn't Kerry loudly heckled by an organized group of rethuglicans at a rally in Ohio about a week ago? I wonder if part of Bush/Cheney's paranoia about who shows up to their events is related to the fact that they are deathly afraid that the Rovian dirty campaign tricks that they fully intend to use against Kerry might also be used against them as well. Unlike Bush, who has no scruples whatsoever, I sincerely doubt Kerry would stoop to employing organized mobs of hecklers, however, the idea that a politician may actually behave honorably is probably something that is beyond the comprehension of the likes of George Bush and Karl Rove.
I'm just trying to figure out how. I mean, it all comes down to genetic heritage....
Robert M. Jeffers
It's the same knucklehead who's been gibbering here all night. Pay it no mind.
I can't really understand why the Rethugs have drawn this line in the sand over stem-cell research.
Because without catering to their lunatic fringe, they can't win. (In fact, they have a hard time winning even with it.)
You'll notice that Kerry has no need to throw bones to Earth First! or PETA or the Marinus Van Der Lubbe Firebombing Society. That's because Dems have a comfortable majority, even when the fringe people who embarass moderates stay away from the polls.
It's like these guys want to lose.
...Or know they're not going to lose under any circumstances.
I go back and forth on that all the time.
(Well...that, and LJ.)
Give 'em hell, Roddy McCorley!
Sorry if this has been mentioned before. But I think it's pretty clear that Chimpy & Cheney are counting on the "leftist" media to show hyper-rabid throngs of lemmings to the lower 48th percentile.
On TV, it's pretty easy making 500 looks like 5000, but tough to make 20000 look like 20000.
BTW: wasn't li'l Timmy McVeigh a librul, or just hate-free?
The seagull managment is in charge
1. Make a bunch of noise
2. Shit on everything
3. Leave
Results = fubar
You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred"
Not long ago, the GOP in Kentucky were handing out bumper stickers that said: "Kerry is bin Laden's Man. Bush is Mine."
the Republican party == the party of hatred
But I think it's pretty clear that Chimpy & Cheney are counting on the "leftist" media to show hyper-rabid throngs of lemmings to the lower 48th percentile.
When I read that the GOP was going to employ counter-protesters (a.k.a. thugs) in the streets of NYC during the convention, the first thought that came to mind was that they were going to be there for the specific purpose on inciting nasty incidents in an attempt to make the protestors look bad. I suspect that the unpleasant encounter between between Teresa Heinz and that Scaife shill that got the press in a tizzy
is likely a mini preview of the sort shit that the GOPers are going to pull in NYC.
Phila,
I know what you mean, but this seems like such a clear issue of medical ethics to me. I dunno.
About a year ago, when Santorum's issue was outlawing dildos, one of my brothers, who became a conservative Republican and Baptist in order to get married (well, laid), said *he* didn't get it. "He has the Christian vote, so why is he doing this?" To go further, to court the really radical guys, doesn't that alienate the center?
And stem-cell research isn't even like sex toys, really. It's way too important. (Not to say that the big O isn't important, but there are other ways to get there, not true for stem-cell research.)
It's wasteful and it pisses me off.
Tickets for Clinton? Never! Not in Chicago, at least!
I remember when Clinton/Gore came to Chicago in 92 -- it was about as big as the 85 Bears victory parade -- filled Daley plaza -- completely public and on the news. Outside of Woodstock I'd never seen so many people all in one place before. I remember we wanted Reagan gone so very much. Illinois was a swing state then (had a repub governor, etc., and a dem party in disarray).
How long ago it seems! ah, these brushes with fame!
but but but they have plenty of money for commercials.
and Laura Ingram and that fat idiot Rush and that stupid bitch Ann Coulter arent full of hate and bile ??????????????????
Fucking hypocrites !!!!
Phila,
I know what you mean, but this seems like such a clear issue of medical ethics to me. I dunno.
I see where you're coming from. I guess in terms of stem-cell, we might have to take the fallback position that these people are sociopaths to whom human misery is about as interesting as what goes on in an anthill...and that along with sociopathy goes a feeling of personal invulnerability. It's also possible that they simply don't believe in science...after all, the main thing that science produces, statistically, is error and failure. You're supposed to look PAST that, but maybe these guys don't. Maybe they say, "They've been working on this for five years, and there's nothing to show for it." Maybe they think scientists are doing the same thing they do with, say, Halliburton...just raiding the public coffers. And they don't like the competition. Anything's possible with these guys.
Still, I think the voting thing is key because it's so nearly allied (in their minds) to the abortion thing.
As for sex toys...here's my theory. They KNOW you can't keep people from getting and using sex toys. They also know that their constituency will support them even if they LIKE sex toys, simply to avoid taking a public stand IN FAVOR OF sex toys. Because the main difference here is that people on the right will say they'd NEVER, EVER do things that people on the left tend to be more comfortable with. Therefore, my guess is they're hoping some Dem will be fool enough to take a stand for dildos...and then tar him and the party with that image.
At least that's how it looks to me while writing off the cuff, drunk, without ever having given this matter thought before. However, since I'm always right about everything, I'm probably on firm ground here.
Jujitsu move for prospective attendees:
1) Sign loyalty pledge and attend rally
2) Have name appear in print as a Bush supporter
3) Have press conference announcing that after much deliberation/Bush's most recent action on something/latest bit of budget news, you've changed your mind and are now planning on voting for Kerry.
little dick cheney came to my town today to burble his gibberish. last time he stopped in nevada was election's eve 2000 when he promised that yucca mountain shouldn't even be an issue since he and the sock puppet were going to veto it anyway. needless to say, other than the odd fawning sort who finds breathing the same air as the head of w's vice presidential search committee to be thrilling stuff, most everyone just went about their business of waiting for the exorcist. 94 days away.
From the article:
On that occasion, about a dozen Bush supporters wearing flip-flop beach sandals began chanting "Viva Bush" and waved their flip-flops over their heads. They contend Kerry has flip-flopped on the war.
Wow..loyal and smart. Can't they get these guys a bigger budget?
Someone may have asked this already but the obvious question is - what do they do you if you sign the pledge and then change your mind?
Do they drag downtown or somewhere and torture you? Say by making you listen to more Cheney speeches?
And BTW, the people who support these idiots have the freaking nerve to say Democrats and liberals aren't mainstream?
We should all soooo do this. (not that I'll ever have the chance, as they're not going to bother going up the street to navy-blue Montgomery Co.)
i was wondering about that texan. how can these pledges be considered binding in any way? i've tried to look at all the angles on this and i just can't find any point at all in doing this.
People are right - this is so ready to be exploited it's not funny.
I can see it now: a group of people hit the streets with "I signed a Cheney loyalty oath and all I got was this lousy t-shirt".
I trust sopmeone can do a lot better than that - this is ripe for backlash meterial.
One problem: who's minding the store while these two are running around the country raising money and votes?
Aren't we at war? Aren't these the two officials on the payroll, sworn to protect and defend the United States of America?
Or am I just a naive, idealistic citizen of the most corrupt nation on the earth?
when john nance gardner opined that the vice presidency wasn't woth a warm bucket of "spit" do you think he was presciently foreshadowing our current squatter? where does someone who voted against the clean air act & the headstart food program for schoolchildren fall on the great mandala anyway? but what's the dif, he won't be on the ticket once the 22% approval rating induced "chest pains" start.
oops, garner. not gardner. the piano has been drinking.
my necktie is asleep.
You'll notice that Kerry has no need to throw bones to Earth First! or PETA or the Marinus Van Der Lubbe Firebombing Society. That's because Dems have a comfortable majority, even when the fringe people who embarass moderates stay away from the polls.
Don't forget the free Mumia crowd. Although they do have some good points to make...
I go back and forth on that all the time.
(Well...that, and LJ.)
Dear... It's In and Out.
Does the loyalty oath include not outing undercover CIA Agents like Plame?
About a year ago, when Santorum's issue was outlawing dildos
I think Phila's mostly right about the fact that these idiots know they won't ever outlaw sex toys. BUT...
I find the "toy" of choice that they get all hepped about. What really ticks these Republicans off, and it ties back to abortion, is female sexuality. It really frightens them that they lose that pivotal control of women. Of course, I'm preaching to the choir about that topic here, but it's always what these issues come back to.
If find the toy of choice ironic. Sheesh. These stupid nails. They're way too long...
I know exactly what they are worried about, hecklers.
We should wave dildoes at Bush...
Elaine:
I have just the one we can wave...
Clinton toy
(No, it's not the same as the one I referenced the other day.)
But for those electrically inclined...
Electric Bill
If you really want to offend Chimpy and his fundie followers, why not wave "Baby Jesus Buttplugs" and "Virgin Mary Vibrators" at them? I found a link to them, unwittingly, while looking for t-shirts and/or bumper stickers to get a rise from my conservative family.
Chimp:
I know those as well. LOL
Divineinterventions.com.
Oops. Forgot the dash. Divine Interventions.
NOT SAFE FOR WORK. But great for laughs.
LJ,
I'm pleased to learn their products brought pleasure, whether the sense-of-humor or physical type, to others. What a multifaceted conversation piece! I just might have to buy one.
I did a search and found nothing regarding Santorum's views on dildos. I found a quote about William Pryor's feelings about the delightful devices, but nothing about Santorum.
Chimp:
Um... I recommend the Jackhammer. Very highly.
And to think... I was hating Bush before it was cool.
The Republicans hated Little Bush before it was cool. Before he was anointed a person running against him in the primaries, we think Dole, said, "why are we supposed to be happy about him, because he's not a drunk anymore?"
I went to a Clinton-Gore rally @ U Florida, and the main lawn was jammed w/ people but no loyalty oaths (UF did require a loyalty oath for you to teach there however). Among the huge crowd was a Repugnican "Draft Dodger Duck". Apparently that issue is dead since the Supremes help appoint a nearly total draft dodging administration (How did Powell & Atmitage sneak through the draft dodging requirement for the bush admin?)
& the smart Ron Reagan said of bush that his major accomplishment was that bush was no longer an obnoxious drunk. Good new Reagan article in Esquire. (Reagan said elsewhere that his Dad crapped bigger ones than bush.)
What a coincidence. Just yesterday as I was listening to NPR while driving the family home from a day trip, it occurred to me that... well... if the Bushies only invited the party faithful to their rallies... wouldn't that defeat the purpose of political rallies, to win over the undecided? The only other answer of course is the one you bring out: they see them only as stages for 'reality television' bits... when I was in the news biz we called them 'actualities'...
A.
"You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred."
I didn't realise there were dittoheads in the room!
A.
For what it's worth, I worked as an usher at a Clinton and Wellstone rally at a large stadium in 1996. As I recall, signs were not allowed, and freely available tickets may have been required because of the limited seating.
The same year, I went to a Labor Day rally in a city park featuring Gore. To get into the area closer to the stage, one had to go through a mild security check. Signs were allowed. Also, there was a lonely protestor waving the flag upside-down not too far from the main stage; I'm sure the Secret Service kept their collective eye on him, but he was not relegated to a "free speech zone."
Sounds like Bush/Cheney '04 have taken up the "fortified hamlet" strategy the US Armed Forces are using in Iraq.
It's pretty bad if the prez and vice prez have so little faith in their grass roots that they have to screen out everyone else.
I think Rich really hit it on the nail here.
Oath? Was it this one?
"In the presence of this blood banner, which represents our Führer, I swear to devote all my energies and my strength to the savior of our country, Adolf Hitler. I am willing and ready to give up my life for him, so help me God."
Here's a link to an actual image of the Loyalty Oath that appeared in the print edition, but not the on-line edition of the abqjournal
http://users.plateautel.net/
cede...loyaltyoath.jpg
Thanks for posting that, claude.
I don't see anything that would make me think you can't have a change of heart after the rally... which would be especially entertaining if it were public and your name was used in an ad afterwards.
Yier Shi, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee in Washington, D.C., said today's rally was meant to reward and enthuse Bush-Cheney supporters, not to be a forum to preach to skeptics.
Well, as long as they believe they are right. They can believe whatever they want.
It the term is "choir", not skeptics.
"You guys are not only out of the mainstream, you are absolutely consumed with hatred."
Stop projecting, silly troll!
Don't you go and get fooled into this new Republican trick.
Would the Rethugs be so stupid as to demand you sign a pledge for Bush to be President if you want to go to a meeting of theirs?
Obviously what they are going to do, once they gather huge amounts of pledge-signers, is simply change the name at the top from George Bush to Ralph Nader.
They can then submit the lists of signatories so as to enable Nadir to enter the ballot in battleground states
"how the hell are Bush/Cheney going to campaign seriously given the extreme private nature of all of their events and the extreme security associated with them?"
That's the wrong question. The right question is, "How the hell are Bush/Cheney EXPECTING TO WIN THE ELECTION given the extreme private nature of all of their events and the extreme security associated with them?" They don't need to persuade more people to vote for them, they only need (a)lots of Democrats prevented from voting, as in Tennessee in 2000, and/or (b) more votes counted for them, thanks to the spiffy new technology in Florida, Maryland, and other states.
Doesn't this oath business give Kerry a too-good-to-be-true response for any hecklers (in waffle costumes, flip-flops, or whatever other silly contrivance they come up with)?
Bring them to the crowd's attention: "Obviously, unlike some presidential candidates, WE don't require loyalty oaths for our appearances; we respect the 1st Amendment and we welcome everybody's views . . .etc etc."
'I'd say the two greatest contributing factors to their success have been the complicity of the corporate media and the simple-mindedness of the general public.'
These factors are intimately related to each other, and to a profound insularity, born of the ignorance bred by a prosperous isolation and a dangerous, faith-based national narrative. Too many people have never read a book; they don't know enough independently to weigh, judge, balance. And that's well before we start worrying about rapturous fundies.
Other countries suffer the same things to varying degrees, but they don't affect the rest of thee world near as much.
With great power comes great responsibility. Shirk it and you wear the consequences, eventually.
How times have changed...
In 1980, in Ft. Worth I sat on a fence at the stockyards and listened to Carter...no tickets.
In 1984, at UTA, I sat on the grass in the middle of the campus and listened to Geraldine Ferraro get heckled by young Rethugs...no tickets.
And yesterday, a mile from my house, and 1/2 mile from Rio Rancho Mid-High School where we were kept behind "crime scene" tape, I flipped Cheney off as he drove by in his motorcade...
Felt good though.
Just watched a chimp appearance before an adoring invited (and probably very small -- the camera doesn't show it) crowd on C-SPAN, and this occurred to me:
Can we all insist, demand, ask over and over again, then insist again that all coverage of the campaign tell how many people were at each candidate's rally of the day?
It would take persistence, and I doubt that truly accurate figures would ever appear, but it does seem to me that a good way to counteract Bush's stage-managed invited-audience photo-ops is to show that they are small events compared to broad-based popular support for Kerry.
Please: ask HOW MANY WERE THERE?
I have a hell of a lot less respect for Clinton than I used to. Thanks, Ate!
A Bush-licker weblog I know was wining up a storm about this: "Why can't these people understand this is a private event where they aren't wanted!"
I posted a reply: "Bush isn't gonna win by preaching to the choir, because it isn't big enough. He needs....the undecideds! That's right, the very people he's offending with these loyalty oaths are the ones who will end up putting John Kerry in the White House. So long, suckers!"
I was still undecided when I attended a Clinton rally in SF in '92. No tickets, no security beyond heavy police and SS presence. Just a street corner (24th & Mission). He worked the crowdline, and I shook his hand. That day went a long way towards deciding my vote for him.
There isn't a loyalty oath on earth that I would sign, let alone one swearing fealty to Lord Bush. Guess I'll be denied the opportunity to make that kind of contact with him.
As will many hundreds, if not thousands, of undecided voters. And they'll tell two friends...and they'll tell two friends...
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
