Political Crossfire Forums

[sublime]

This is an EARLY WARNING SHOT for Democrats FROM THE LA TIMES..........a tip, so to speak, to get this plan rolling.

You can expect more of this in the Liberal media.

As many of us know, it's the LIBERAL MEDIA that runs that party now.

They whip them up when they need to; calm them down when they think it's required.

They are Hollywood-owned. They know how to WORK THE CROWD.

Here's the story:

They are back in leadership of the Senate after 12 years! And they got there by nominating mostly new Moderate candidates. But they also got there with votes from their Special Interest Groups, mostly extremely Liberal.

So they will have conflicting demands on them leading up to the 2008 election. They need both sides to support them if they are to win in 08.

So What To Do????? :wink:

For instance, the ACLU wants them to repeal most of the Patriot Act and the terrorist wiretapping program………….you know………………………those things without which the Clinton Administration couldn’t “CONNECT THE DOTS!"

It is said that Bill Clinton was the right one to make some cutbacks on Welfare since, as a Democat, he had “credibility" on the issue of welfare.

Well the Democrats do not have credibility on National Security, and they will lose even more credibility if they act on the demands of voters…………particularly the members of MoveOn and Mr. George Soros. And loss of credibility on national security can hurt them in the 2008 election. They may believe that it was their anti-war stance that won them the election; but it isn't true.

The Pro-Abortion crowd will want them to get rid of the Bush Abstinence Program and turn that money into money for poor women’s abortions. Yeah. (Abstinence, don’t you know, would decrease the number of abortions needed and without ABORTIONS these people have no raison d’être (reason for existing) and would be out of their jobs as Lobbyists and distributors of federal money.)

Lobbyists for the American Civil Liberties Union are all but counting on Democrats to repeal the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act, the anti-terrorist law pushed by the White House that some critics call unconstitutional. They also want to end President Bush's domestic wiretapping program.


"We are not going to let them off the hook," said Caroline Fredrickson, the ACLU's legislative director, of the newly empowered Democratic leaders in Congress.

From the L(iberal) A(lways) Times:

“the Democratic Party's incoming congressional leaders have immediately found themselves in another difficult struggle — with their own supporters.

Some of the very activists who helped propel the Democrats to a majority in the House and Senate last week are claiming credit for the victories and demanding what they consider their due: a set of ambitious — and politically provocative — actions on gun control, abortion, national security and other issues that party leaders fear could alienate moderate voters and leave Democrats vulnerable to GOP attacks as big spenders or soft on terrorism.

"We will hold their feet to the fire and use all the tools we can to mobilize our members."

Similar vows are coming from lobbyists for abortion rights, who want to expand family-planning options for poor women and scale back Bush's focus on abstinence education, and from gun-control advocates, who hope to revive a lapsed ban on assault weapons. Labor unions, a core Democratic constituency, are demanding universal healthcare and laws discouraging corporations from seeking inexpensive labor overseas.

………………

Eli Pariser, executive director of the political action committee associated with the liberal activist group MoveOn.org, warned that Democratic leaders would be ill-advised to ignore the party's base.

"A huge number of people were involved in putting them over the top," Pariser said. "There's a huge group of people engaged and energized and ready to support Pelosi and company when they boldly lead — and to hold them to account if they stray."

Pressure on Democrats is especially acute to redirect U.S. policy in Iraq. Many Democrats say the issue was the most important one driving the party's victory."

........The party's winning formula this year, after all, required candidacies from cultural conservatives such as Rep.-elect Heath Shuler in western North Carolina and Sens.-elect Jon Tester in Montana and Jim Webb in Virginia.

A preview of the tussle that awaits Reid and Pelosi has been playing out on the Internet since election day, with liberal bloggers decrying party centrists as out of touch with the Democratic majority. The complaints have been serious enough to draw Reid's attention, prompting him to host a conference call after the election with more than a dozen of the country's most prominent liberal bloggers.

Reid himself has learned to navigate these issues in order to win election in largely rural Nevada. He calls himself pro-gun and, according to a spokesman, opposes abortion except in cases of rape and incest and when the woman's life is endangered.

In the Senate, matters are further complicated by the fact that at least five Democrats — nearly 10% of the caucus — are considering presidential bids in which they may need to win the liberal base to gain the nomination but then campaign to the center in a general election.

Republicans have already said they intend to take back power in 2008 by portraying Democrats as big-government tax raisers who would rather safeguard civil liberties than interrogate terrorists.

Conservatives, though splintered over Iraq, immigration and other issues, had succeeded in keeping power since 1994 in part by forging a coalition built on compromise and shared goals — a practice that Democrats have yet to perfect."


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-dems12nov12,0,4533842.story?page=2&track=mostviewed-homepage

Here's what they may do: In secret meetings promise these groups that if they will help them take both Congress and the Presidency...that is, if they fail to take all the hints they will get from the Lib press.

UPDATE: Now San Franciso gets in on the act...........cautioning Dems. :wink: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/11/12/financial/f100752S11.DTL

[00timh]

Pelosi and Reid do not care one bit about being moderates or having anything to do with them. As Pelosi has now backed Murtha for majority leader it is evident that the extreme left leadership of the party is already putting a strangle hold on the party and will move as much ultra liberal legislation through as they possibly can.

[Fiduciary]

The Dem Party has painted themselves into quite a corner:

They are acting as if their success was some referendum for change, which it wasn't.

They are acting like Americans now desire some Fringe-Wacko-Liberal agenda, which it CERTAINLY doesn't,

They were successful because their more conserative and moderate Candidates won and because People are PO's about Iraq.

THEREFORE, they are gonna fall flat on their face by runing roughshod with some lib agenda.

This WILL be fun to watch!!

[Chingu]

It is an amazing dilema isn't it?

However, they got into power by systematically misrepresenting their intentions and lying outright to their base and teh American people on just about every issue there is to lie about - so it will not surprise me in the least when they continue that track record and go on about their work totally disenfranchising the voter while cooing to them from every angle they can - all the while, the complicit media will be reporting how the already great economy is suddenly great and how things in Iraq are improving that were already improving and how there are less starving people and how Hurrican Katrina can be handled better next time and how the Bird Flu is being really taken care of and how embryonic Stem cell cloning has solved all disease if we just keep them in power for fifty more eyars and 10% of our income. The debt will be going down while spending is going up and the entire Middle East and the world will love us and send roses.

[sublime]

Chingu wrote: It is an amazing dilema isn't it?

However, they got into power by systematically misrepresenting their intentions and lying outright to their base and teh American people on just about every issue there is to lie about - so it will not surprise me in the least when they continue that track record and go on about their work totally disenfranchising the voter while cooing to them from every angle they can - all the while, the complicit media will be reporting how the already great economy is suddenly great and how things in Iraq are improving that were already improving and how there are less starving people and how Hurrican Katrina can be handled better next time and how the Bird Flu is being really taken care of and how embryonic Stem cell cloning has solved all disease if we just keep them in power for fifty more eyars and 10% of our income. The debt will be going down while spending is going up and the entire Middle East and the world will love us and send roses.

Exactly! :tu:

[Swampfox.f]

As bad as the Democrats are they are still light years better than the last congress we had. I have never seen a more destructive and utterly wasteful congress. All they did was spend and pass anti-freedom legislation while the neo-cons were trying to implement a totolitarian style government. Bush has no respect for law and calls for absolute power.


Almost every republican, and especially every neo-con in the administration and legislative branches deserve to be in jail.

[00timh]

This has the same feeling as 1992 when they paraded around as moderates and went ultra liberal as soon as Clinton took office. This year They pushed some moderate candidates and talked of ethics accountability and compromise. So far we have seen the most unethethical and most liberal being lined up for committee chairs and leadership positions.

[Richard Owl Mirror]

00timh wrote: Pelosi and Reid do not care one bit about being moderates or having anything to do with them. As Pelosi has now backed Murtha for majority leader it is evident that the extreme left leadership of the party is already putting a strangle hold on the party and will move as much ultra liberal legislation through as they possibly can.

You're calling Jack Murtha an extreme left leader ? :lol:

[Swampfox.f]

00timh wrote: This has the same feeling as 1992 when they paraded around as moderates and went ultra liberal as soon as Clinton took office. This year They pushed some moderate candidates and talked of ethics accountability and compromise. So far we have seen the most unethethical and most liberal being lined up for committee chairs and leadership positions.

Are you saying the republicans held to their deal with America? As I recall once Bush took office everything went out the door and the conservatives went liberal and followed Trotsky.

[Richard Owl Mirror]

Fiduciary wrote: The Dem Party has painted themselves into quite a corner:

They are acting as if their success was some referendum for change, which it wasn't.

They are acting like Americans now desire some Fringe-Wacko-Liberal agenda, which it CERTAINLY doesn't,

They were successful because their more conserative and moderate Candidates won and because People are PO's about Iraq.

THEREFORE, they are gonna fall flat on their face by runing roughshod with some lib agenda.

This WILL be fun to watch!!

Please outline for us all this so-called lib agenda.

[JoeBen81]

Fiduciary wrote:

They are acting like Americans now desire some Fringe-Wacko-Liberal agenda
Nice 3-point sterotype combo!

[Chingu]

It is also amazing when the Liberal Socialists get mad when you call them liberal socialists because they spend so much time trying to convince their base that they are not what they really are.

For those folks with learning and comprehension disabilities - liberal agendas include:

Raising Taxes so that they can control more and more of our personal lives, redistribute wealth - mainly to insititutions which allow them to control more of our personal lives and help them to retain power over the long haul - like unions and Social programs and continue the culture of dependency so that they can maintain enough poor and uneducated voters to bamboozle for votes in upcoming elections.

Withdrawing from Iraq: Has become a liberal whacko anti-war agenda from the far far left absed on disingenuous rhetoric because the left is unwilling to stand up for anything and believe America is more the problem than the solution unless - of course -they are in power.

Diplomacy over Enforcement is a liberal policy set which over time has accomplished next to nothing but is still touted by the socialist left as the end all be all of foreign relations. Unlike Reagans beneficial and productive "trust but Verify" strong diplomacy - the liberal left used the trust because we don't really want to do anything about it policy - and that's what they have and will cotinue to do while our enemies laugh, get stronger and probablty finally blow up the White House where - I hope at the time - Nanci Pelosi is residing should that occur with Murtha as Vice President.

Defunding Military Missions: i.e. John Kerry pinko-hippie style coward who voted for it before he voted against it after having voted for it and then refusing to fund it thus placing our military persoal at far greater risk. Well, not really because clearer heads prevailed then and his vote was basically meaningless.

Playing Kissy-face with every terrible dictator around teh world will certainly be high on their list of Priorities. you can cetainly expect us to try and emulate Hugo Chevez and probably hold tea partiess with him telling him how wonderful his socialist nationalist state run tyranny is. You can fully expect Manuel Ortega portraits to be put up in John Kerry's office and probably in Murthas and Pelosis as well. They can't get enough of the Marxist. They might not be quite as happy with him now that he's toned down his politics though.

[Fiduciary]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Fiduciary wrote: The Dem Party has painted themselves into quite a corner:

They are acting as if their success was some referendum for change, which it wasn't.

They are acting like Americans now desire some Fringe-Wacko-Liberal agenda, which it CERTAINLY doesn't,

They were successful because their more conserative and moderate Candidates won and because People are PO's about Iraq.

THEREFORE, they are gonna fall flat on their face by runing roughshod with some lib agenda.

This WILL be fun to watch!!

Please outline for us all this so-called lib agenda.

Just wait.

It's coming.

[slitedeviance]

Wow, there's some pretty open wounds on the Repulican side...

[Mr. Sunshine]

The real question is what is the conservative and moderate constituents of this country that sculpted the freshman class which gave them Congressional leadership going to do about it? Nothing. :-|

[Medius]

00timh wrote: Pelosi and Reid do not care one bit about being moderates or having anything to do with them. As Pelosi has now backed Murtha for majority leader it is evident that the extreme left leadership of the party is already putting a strangle hold on the party and will move as much ultra liberal legislation through as they possibly can.

I agree that this would be very dissapointing. I disagree with the DNC on their method of legislation. I will however say, that I would rather give up more money in taxes for idiotic social programs than to continue down the dangerous road Bush has created.

If the DNC does take this route, however, they'll lose their newfound majorities as the swing voters file in for some other solution. I doubt it will be the GOP. Of course, the result will be that either the DNC or GOP will win, just with much fewer votes.

That's my prediction, we shall see if it comes to pass. Regardless, I feel much better knowing that Bush will have a check in place against him.

[Fido]

What a suk example of democracy we have here. We have to try to navigate the river of life with a rudder that is stuck in the middle. Maybe the right has something to say some time. Maybe the left is the best in some circumstances. Maybe both left and right have something to recommend them; but when it is the center that elects that is where the candidates will be. It is not good for the country, and it does not fit with the reality we have before us.

The reason the argument is framed so much in terms of left and right is that the majority is not represented. Trying to govern from the middle is not satisfying anyone. It is giving cover to a constant erosion of our rights and standard of living. There is no limit to how much you can impoverish people before they will not blame the wrong guy for their misery. The right person to blame is themselves, and that would be justified if they had any real say in their government.

Our government is like God. So long as you believe in God or the government you can afford to act irresponsibly, and to give up responsibility. If people themselves had to vote on issues rather than voting on those who will vote on issues they might find they could not act precipitously, or with prejudice, or out of the pure selfish delight in seeing some else screwed. If people had to be accountable for their own condition they would consider their condition in voting. But life is a moving target.

Governing is hitting is a moving target, and a river is a moving target, and the living needs of a living people is a moving target. You cannot hit it without adjusting your aim. Majority rule that plays to such practically small majorities out of huge numbers voting will never save us, or save this country. We have lost the advantage of democracy because we have a democracy in name only. I think you might find that for very good reasons those who vote left and right both feel this country is in trouble.

When politician only feel they have to capture the middle to have government that is all they will serve. It is the unserviced, and the disregarded at either end of the political continuum who will shake up the political world when they find common ground. That common ground is recognition of the inability of government to serve all the people. No amount of hate, or hopes, or dreams or desires will make this monolith work for us. Let's trash it.

[mODULAR mAN]

00timh wrote: Pelosi and Reid do not care one bit about being moderates or having anything to do with them. As Pelosi has now backed Murtha for majority leader it is evident that the extreme left leadership of the party is already putting a strangle hold on the party and will move as much ultra liberal legislation through as they possibly can.

Murtha is extreme left now? :roll: (Did you know he has a 100% from the NRA and only a 26% on his "Big Spender" rating.) You guys are insane. No wonder you lost the election. Anything Left of David Duke is extreme, I suppose.

I hate to break it to you, if you think Murtha is extreme left, you better get to a country that moves further away from your ideals and cloaer to those of the American people.

[sublime]

Swampfox.f wrote: As bad as the Democrats are they are still light years better than the last congress we had. I have never seen a more destructive and utterly wasteful congress. All they did was spend and pass anti-freedom legislation while the neo-cons were trying to implement a totolitarian style government. Bush has no respect for law and calls for absolute power.


Almost every republican, and especially every neo-con in the administration and legislative branches deserve to be in jail.

Posts like this are simply wind......how about step it down a level and give us some details. What part of the spending was wasteful? I'm not arguing there was no waste, but suspicious of what a Liberal considers a waste when in fact the Dem leadership and much of their base simply wants spending to occur on different things than do the Republicans.

And to call important terrorist tracking programs "anti-freedom" is just silly. Most Americans understand these programs are precisely what would have allowed us to the connect the dots in tracking al Queda prior to 9/11.

And what exact charges would put any of the so-called "neo-cons" in jail and who are these people exctly? Since most of the group now called "neo-cons" are not in positions to actually act on any of t his, what charges do you plan to bring against Francis Fukuyama, Bill Bennett, and others who were simply exercising the freedom of speech by signing the famous 1998 letter to Bill Clinton which apparently got them all labeled as neo-cons?

Would Prof. Fukuyama get a "Get Out of Jail Free" pass because he has now criticized the war, even though he did once recommend the removal of Saddam?

Please tell us more. We are interested in the intellectual exercise you went through to arrive at these conclusions. :lol:

[Richard Owl Mirror]

Chingu wrote: It is also amazing when the Liberal Socialists get mad when you call them liberal socialists because they spend so much time trying to convince their base that they are not what they really are.

For those folks with learning and comprehension disabilities - liberal agendas include:

Raising Taxes so that they can control more and more of our personal lives, redistribute wealth - mainly to insititutions which allow them to control more of our personal lives and help them to retain power over the long haul - like unions and Social programs and continue the culture of dependency so that they can maintain enough poor and uneducated voters to bamboozle for votes in upcoming elections.

Withdrawing from Iraq: Has become a liberal whacko anti-war agenda from the far far left absed on disingenuous rhetoric because the left is unwilling to stand up for anything and believe America is more the problem than the solution unless - of course -they are in power.

Diplomacy over Enforcement is a liberal policy set which over time has accomplished next to nothing but is still touted by the socialist left as the end all be all of foreign relations. Unlike Reagans beneficial and productive "trust but Verify" strong diplomacy - the liberal left used the trust because we don't really want to do anything about it policy - and that's what they have and will cotinue to do while our enemies laugh, get stronger and probablty finally blow up the White House where - I hope at the time - Nanci Pelosi is residing should that occur with Murtha as Vice President.

Defunding Military Missions: i.e. John Kerry pinko-hippie style coward who voted for it before he voted against it after having voted for it and then refusing to fund it thus placing our military persoal at far greater risk. Well, not really because clearer heads prevailed then and his vote was basically meaningless.

Playing Kissy-face with every terrible dictator around teh world will certainly be high on their list of Priorities. you can cetainly expect us to try and emulate Hugo Chevez and probably hold tea partiess with him telling him how wonderful his socialist nationalist state run tyranny is. You can fully expect Manuel Ortega portraits to be put up in John Kerry's office and probably in Murthas and Pelosis as well. They can't get enough of the Marxist. They might not be quite as happy with him now that he's toned down his politics though.

And naturally you can back up each point outlined above with FACTS and QUOTES from Democratic Leaders, right?