As disappointing as last November’s elections were for progressives nationwide, the 2004 election season wasn’t all gloom and doom. The emerging grassroots fundraising prowess of organizations like MoveOn promises to put progressive candidates and causes on a competitive — if not equal — financial footing, while the sudden and growing dominance of the progressive blogosphere shows signs of undermining the institutional advantage enjoyed by the right-wing media echo chamber. Together, both these developments bode well for our ability to clearly communicate the progressive message in future campaigns.
But when we look back a decade from now, I’m guessing that the day Progressive Majority set up shop in Washington state will stand out as the most significant recent development in state and local politics.
Some people may find it hard to get excited about the mundane task of recruiting, training and supporting new candidates for “down ballot” races, but these oft overlooked local offices are the minor leagues from which future political all-stars will arise. If we want to eventually take back Congress and shift the nation towards a progressive agenda, then we need to establish progressive majorities at the local level, throughout the state, where we can develop and nurture new leadership for the 21st century. This is PM’s nuts-and-bolts’ mission… and it is one it is executing exceedingly well.
In an email yesterday, PM’s Washington State Director, Dean Nielsen touts the organization’s impressive success in Tuesday’s primary. Out of over 100 recruitment meetings, PM winnowed their 2005 endorsements to 20 key races… and of the 9 candidates appearing on the primary ballot, 8 will move on to the general election.
Dave Somers for Snohomish County Council faced a spirited Democratic primary between himself and Steven Hobbs, a 33-year-old veteran who was supported by some of the more centrist Democratic leaders. Somers defeated Hobbs 64% to 35%.
Fred Chang for Port Orchard City Council was the largest vote getter in this three-way primary, garnering 48% against the former mayor and an incumbent.
Liz Loomis is in a tough race for re-election to the Snohomish City Council. While she received the most votes, 46%, in a three-way primary, she will be running against a fellow council member who gave up his safe seat to run against her.
Lawrence Molloy for Seattle Port Commission came in second place in the three way primary, even though he did not spend any money on voter contact, choosing instead to save it for the general election versus conservative Jack Creighton III, the son of the former Weyerhauser CEO.
Pete Coates, who heads the Seattle/King County Building and Construction Trades Council, lost his five way primary for Seattle Port Commission.
Rockey Marshall appears to have made it through his 7-way primary for Yakima City Council with nearly 20% of the vote. The most conservative candidate garnered nearly 43% of the vote; however, he was the only conservative in the race. Progressive Majority members played a key role in this race by funding Rockey’s GOTV program that appears to have put him over the top.
Michelle Sandoval, running for re-election to the Port Townsend City Council against two competitors, received 46% and will advance to the general.
Judy Woods will face off against conservative former State Rep. Suzette Cooke for Kent Mayor. She pulled more votes than two incumbent Kent City Council members, Bruce White and Les Thomas, who were also running for the seat.
Helen McGovern received a majority of the votes in her race for Lakewood City Council. She faces Lisa Ikeda, a member of a conservative anti-tax group, in the general election.
All these candidates need your support in the November election, as does PM for it’s tireless efforts to change the face of Washington politics, one candidate at a time.
“Progressive”: Communist Democrat
Famous “Progressives”: Joe Stalin, Hillary Clinton, Maxine Watres, Jesse Jackson, Fidel Castro, Dear Leader Kim, Sheila Jackson “Mars” Lee, Barb Boxer…………..[did I miss anyone?]
Liberals need a group named Progressive Majority so they can continue pretending that they are actually progressive and a majority.
We now know that the Republicans invested heavily in local races in the 70’s and 80’s and that it paid dividends for them decades later — particularly when it comes to electing state legislators, who are responsible for re-drawing House districts every ten years. The work that Progressive Majority is doing here in Washington and other states is important in reclaiming a solid progressive majority in the country. I’m excited to see that there’s an effective progressive organization focused on the real nuts-n-bolts of helping to elect good progressive candidates at the local level.
as ken points out, the current conservative majority was built over decades by focusing on winning local and state elections.
progressive majority is an important piece of a broader strategy to win the country back.
the sad irony of the last decade is that progressives made impressive inrouds with the majority of the country on the most pressing issues. poll after poll will tell you that a majority of the american people prefer democratic/progressive ideas on health care, social security, environment, and the economy.
and yet even though ideas resonated broadly with the american public we were losing local and state elections — and eventually both houses of congress.
this had a lot to do with an incredibly well organized and thoughfully executed plan by the conservative movement to win locally so they could win nationally.
having a network of local elected officials has many, many benefits. think Katherine Harris in 2000. think the republican majority in Texas and mid-decade redistricting. think Ken Blackwell in Ohio. think about the farm team of seasoned politicos the conservatives have to draw on.
if we’re going to give the majority of this country its progressive voice, we’ve got to start acting locally to win nationally.
Liberals like to use the excuse of being out-organized by conservatives. Have they ever considered the fact that a lot of their ideas have been proven wrong in the last fifty years??
Fascist is a label that fits on a Republican as naturally as Freddie Mercury’s leather Nazi hat and oily moustache fit on him.
OR even SCOTUS … Sandra Day was the AZ legislative floor leader before being appointed.
re 6: Enumerate, please, on any Republican policy that is designed to help any but the rich.
Progressive Majority is doing truly wonderful work – I Googled them and saw that their ED, Gloria Totten, just wrote an article for the Prospect. She’s right on the money – we need more leaders in the progressive community like her and Dean Nielsen.
look, rick, i think most of us progressive are pretty clear headed about the state of things.
i think most folks would grant that the Democratic party of the 80 and early 90s was out of touch. but this isn’t dissimilar to the republican party of the 50s, 60s and 70s (and increasingly where they’re headed again today). please remember that the Republican party spent the better part of a century out of power locally and congressionally. Republicans of mid-century were suffering from the same problems as Democrats of the turn of the century: 1) out moded ideas that were no longer solving people’s problems, 2) lack of investment in local organizing infrastructure and 3) divisions within a big tent party.
Republicans got their shit together in the mid-70s and sowed the seeds of the modern conservative movement over the course of the next two decades.
Progressives are learning from that experience, adapting, improving and preparing for the next big shift.
as Goldie says, we’ll look back a decade from now and see this year as the most significant recent development in state and local politics.
so, enjoy it while you’ve got it because the shift is coming.
re 9: Sorry, I forgot, any policies that help private enterprise, allows people to keep a little of their own money and rewards personal responsibility must only help “the rich”
My mistake. You are right, only “progressives” have the best interests of the proletariat in mind.
BREAKING NEWS — SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL KILLS MONORAIL
There will be no vote in November — the Monorail is dead. Long live the Monorail! Per King 5 News.
re 11: Please x-plain to us how the TVA is an idea whose time has passed?
re 12: Rick. What specific policy or policies are you talking about? Oh! I forgot! All you know is right wing blather— not facts…
re 12: Come to think of it, the TVA is just the sort of government action you are describing. Are you saying the New Deal is Republican?
12 & 15
Rick, what have Republicans done except put tax cuts and massive spending on the taxpayer’s credit card? Will you, your children, and grandchildren be better off because the GOP is borrowing trillions of dollars? We will all pay for it in the future. The interest on all that debt is not free.
Rabbit @ 13
THANK GOD
Help me here… Article in Times today says City of Seattle has to aks state legislature to dissolve SMP. Why is that? I thought it was totally inside Seattle.
No MTR, the SMP is “independent” of the city, the city has no authority over this boondoggle other than street permits.
I’m an unabashed liberal and a transit supporter, but I’ve been against the monorail from the get go because the funding is fucked up. That and the technology is completely unproven. (please don’t cite the various amusement park rides like Las Vegas.) City residents shouldn’t have to take sole financial responsibility for the costs of the transporation systems that make a city possible; cities are needed to fuel the economy of an entire region. (Pro 912 voters can kiss my ass.)
From the PI web site:
Councilman Nick Licata said he hopes a regional transit authority can be formed to pay for some other mass transportation project.
“I think it’s a sad day for not just the monorail supporters, but for all mass transit supporters in the city,” Licata told The Associated Press. “I would have loved to see the monorail succeed.”
Hey Nick! Get a clue, we _have_ a regional transit authority now you fucking moron!
(Sorry to hijack this thread, where’s my sandbox?)
I never thought of Progressives as being, well, “progressive.” I think they took that label to indicate their support for “progressive” taxation. That is, higher income earners pay higher rates than lower income earners.
What bothers me most about Progressives is this constant desire to “redistribute” wealth through the tax codes. I say let’s just have a flat tax that is simple to understand. There should really be no reason for tax attorneys, tax accountants and the whole tax preparation industry to exist. Let’s have those people engaged in meaningful work rather than simply having careers filling-out government forms. The Progressives aren’t too keen on this idea.
In my view, “progress” would be abolishing the current tax system in favor of a national sales tax. Just think: no more record keeping, no more government intrusion into one’s financial affairs, no more worrying about getting the forms filled-out and mailed off in time. Now that would truly be “progressive!”
Libertarian – Libs love progressive taxation because it’s a way of screwing successful people. They hate successful people because it reminds them of what miserable failures they are, and how they’ve wrecked their lives through their own bad choices. As Limbaugh says, “Liberalism is all about spreading misery equally”, so they want everyone to be as miserable as they are.
What they refuse to understand, is that by penalizing the producers, it kills the incentive for individuals to be successful, and undermines the entire system. Deep down, they believe in grouchoandharpoism, although when pressed, they deny it. The $0cia1iSt countries in Europe have proved the failure of their ideas again for the umpteenth time.
That’s why the libs fantasy of coming to power again will never happen. Their foolish ideas have been consigned to the trash heap of history.
@ 20
you fundamentally misunderstand the origins of the movement, Lib.
“progressives” don’t derive their name from some tax program, silly. the word is rooted in the populist movement of the early 20th century. the movement was first and foremost about reform. as in reforming the system to get the corrupting influence of money and cronyism out of government and returning government to its proper role of promoting the health and well being of the people.
and, in essence, that’s what we modern progressives are trying to do today. i think it’s pretty hard to argue that money and cronyism haven’t corrupted our modern government (think Halliburton, think Brownie) — and that government has lost it’s way in promoting the health and well being of the people (think Katrina, think unsolved Health Care Crisis).
we need a modern progressive movement. not because we want to redistribute wealth and employ CPAs but because government isn’t serving the wealthy and privileged and neglecting the neediest among us.
the sad thing is “progressive” used to be a nonpartisan label. there were good progressive Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt and Fighting Bob La Follette. but the Republican party has been twisted into an arm of the powerful rather than a party of the people.
i’m proud to be a reformer. i’m proud to be fighting for the people against the powerful. i’m proud to force government to promote the health and well being of the people. i’m proud to be a progressive.
that is: government is serving the wealthy and privileged and neglecting the neediest among us.
eagle @ 21 & 22:
That’s nice that you want to help poor folks. Can we still get a simpler tax system such as national sales tax versus the comlicated mess we have now?
That’s nice that you want to help poor folks. Can we still get a simpler tax system such as national sales tax versus the comlicated mess we have now?
The poor would get screwed by a national sales tax just like they currently do in Washington state. We have one of the most regressive tax systems in the country and the sales tax is the primary reason.
eagle @ 21
If you are truly interested in progress, then you’ll see that the “progressive” name has been stolen by rabid Lefties (and their backward ideas), just like “conservative” has been mangled by the Christian Right.
Just out of curiosity, what is the position of the “Progressive” movement re: small business — both on a state-level and national scale? Everything I see from the MorOn.org types seems to be “workers of the world, unite!” Where are you guys on good ol’ American know-how, risk-taking and the rewards that come from talent and effort?
On the subject of taxes – and at the risk of being labeled a “tax and spend liberal” – one of things that has disappointed me most about President Bush’s response to recent events has been his failure to ask Americans to sacrifice. With the war in Iraq, the war on terrorism and the aftermath of Katrina expected to cost the country tens of billions of dollars, it only seems reasonable that we should discuss and consider repealing the president’s tax cut.
President Bush pushed for tax cuts in 2001 by arguing then that the surplus was the “people’s money.” I’m willing to concede that that’s a reasonable argument in favor of tax cuts (though certainly an argument that I don’t agree with). Today, however, there is no surplus and the budget deficit is soaring. It seems to me that there should be a small sacrifice by a small portion of the country – and yes I’m referring to the infamous top 1 percent – to help fund the government’s necessary spending on Iraq, terrorism and Katrina.
In fact, I’d argue that it’s the patriotic thing to do.
Aexia @ 26:
Unfortuantely, the poor will always be with us.
Let’s simplify the tax laws and get the government out of our personal lives. I’m tired of all those forms and junk every year.
What is the trademark of the Progressives and most leftists is emotion. Their ideas feel good, and make for warm and fuzzy happiness. Universal health care sounds good, it makes the advocate for it a hero.
The problem is the same as with all socialist ideals – they don’t work. People are benevolent, but only to an extent. They want the benefit of their work. If they don’t see that benefit, they won’t work. This has been the result of every socialist experiment.
So, as an example: the government can mandate universal health care. Who is going to provide it? If doctors aren’t fairly compensated for their work, they won’t do it any more. Then you end up with third-world medical systems like they have in Russia.
I’ll take the capitalist, free market solution every time. I have faith in my fellow citizens as a whole to do the right thing. I have very little faith in govt bureaucrats to make effective decisions over my life. They will either be useless or corrupt, because they have no motivation to be anything else.
So, Progressives won’t be the movement of the next generation. Everyone wants what they promise, but no one wants to pay for it through taxation.
They need to back Jack Jolley for Position Four on the Port of Seattle if they want something who has a decent chance of winning. Pat Davis is getting less than 45% of the vote for re-election — meaning that over 55% of the people want change. Jack Jolley is a very strong candidates and he can pick up the votes that went to the other challengers in the general.
Lawrence Molloy is probably history for Position One. He is pulling less than 33% of the primary vote and John Creighton is pulling over 51%. The remaining 16% is going to a flight attendant who said she wasn’t happy with the way the Port of Seattle is being run and didn’t put hardly any resources into the race.
Biggest problem I have with Molloy — actions speak louder than words. Molloy (now) says he is against the port property tax, and actually voted against modest increases for 2004 and 2005. But when there was a 50% increase on the table for 2003, Molloy and three other commissioners voted for this whopping increase in November 2002. This was Molloy’s first vote on the port property tax — it had been increased nearly 10% for 2002, in a vote taken in late November 2001 (shortly after the election earlier that month, but before Molloy took office in January 2002).
His position is about as credible as John Kerry and John Edwards saying that they were opposed to the war in Iraq — he voted for it before he voted against it. When Molloy first ran in 2001, he didn’t say anything about the port property tax in his voter pamphlet statement.
A lot of ways I see the Molloy-Creighton race as a toss-up on the issues that I think are important (mostly being to eliminate the tax subsidy). Creighton says he will reduce the port’s tax burden, which is more than Molloy said when he first got elected.
Creighton also is trying to get a much broader appeal than Molloy. His voter pamphlet statement shows a fairly diverse group of endorsements — including several prominent Democrats, which is good for a Republican.
Molloy, on the other hand, shows an extremely narrow appeal in his voter pamphlet statement. He lists 20 endorsements, all of them from Democrats or liberal organizations. This makes Republicans and conservatives feel totally excluded, and causes independents and moderates to question whether he is too extreme for them.
Peter Coates made a similar mistake for Position 3. He lists 15 endorsements, 14 of them from Democrats or liberal organizations. One GOP state representative is listed, but not that many folks outside his district know who he is or that he is a Republican. Coates managed to come in fourth place, behind even Christopher Cain, a really nice fellow who didn’t have much money at all for his campaign.
I will predict that Lloyd Hara will win Position Three in November. Hara has broad backing from both Democrats and Republicans (and countless hundreds of individual endorsements) — that helped him make it through the primary, and it will help him again in November. Hara has impeccable financial experience, which is something the Port of Seattle desperately needs. (All other things being reasonably equal, it would be good to have some ethnic diversity on the port commission as well. Everyone elected for the past 95 years has been white.)
Both Hara and Rich Berkowitz (who he will be facing in the general) are voicing credible opposition to the port property tax. Hara’s opposition to the property tax seems to be slightly stronger, more credible, and more deeply held — but I am not taking anything away from Berkowitz’s position.
Berkowitz’s voter pamphlet endorsements will probably hurt him in November, as being perceived as too narrow. He lists several Democrat politicians and a number of liberal organizations. Not very helpful when going up against Hara — whose backers are much more bipartisan than Creighton’s.
Jack Jolley wrote an excellent voter pamphlet statement. He was smart not to list much in the way of endorsements. Jolley started out with a group of nearly all Democrats — folks who were motivated by being tired of business as usual and also not liking the property tax subsidy very much. He started to pick up some GOP supporters before the primary, and should pick up a lot more going into the general election.
But if Jolley had listed the most prominent endorsers he had back in early August, when his voter pamphlet statement was due, it would have been almost all Democrats. And that wouldn’t have looked good to a lot of voters. So he wisely focused his statement on his qualifications and his platform.
The general election will be tough for Jolley. Just because Pat Davis is only getting 44% in the primary, that doesn’t mean she can’t pull it off in November. But I believe that the 15% who voted for me, and the 12% who voted for Robert Walker were voting AGAINST Pat Davis and FOR change. People who were persuaded by our voter pamphlet statements should also agree strongly with Jolley’s statement.
And Jolley does have the strength to run a campaign that can defeat Pat Davis in November. He was a successful financial manager at Microsoft for 10 years (and presumably got some really good stock options, like most other employees did at the time). And the right kind of business connections would be useful at the Port of Seattle. Far better to have someone from Microsoft — one of our region’s most successful trade connected businesses — than someone like Pat Davis who has become the favorite of the shipping companies, cruise lines, and developers who benefit from the port property tax.
Richard Pope……..How pays YOUR salary?
Unfortuantely, the poor will always be with us.
True, but they needn’t be the *same* people, which is what a sales tax will ensure.
Let’s simplify the tax laws and get the government out of our personal lives. I’m tired of all those forms and junk every year.
A few problems with respect to a national sales tax:
1. The proponents make the intellectually dishonest argument that you’ll “take home all your paycheck” without paying higher prices. Even if you assume the latter ends up being true, the only way it can be is if employers lower wages to compensate. So you *will* be taking all of your paycheck… you’ll just be taking home less than you did before a national sales tax.
2. The black market. Even if you pretend 23% will be enough(30%+ is more realistic), it will create a huge black market economy, especially for high ticket items. Either you will have to have a higher tax rate to compensate for the tax cheaters(which will undoubtedly fuel more evasion) or you will have to have some kind of enforcement agency. More about that.
3. No more IRS, huh? But how are you going to police people evading the sales tax? It’d require an even more invasive regulatory agency monitoring everyone’s big ticket purchases. At least with the IRS, it’s primarily all about how you’ve earned your money; The ICS (Internal Consumption Service) would have to track your purchases. Which is more intrusive?
re 30: Of course you’ll take the free market solution every time, because it requires no thought or planning on your part. Just memorizing a few slogans. Yep! we’ll just ignore all our problems and let the wonders of the invisible hand take care of things. Those invisible hands are beginning to look more and more like the liver-spotted hands of a lot of old wealthy men. Like our VP and former Pres., GHWB. Free market solutions are the intellectual equivalent of Creationism— which is to say, a lot of transparent BS for lazy minds — exactly like yours ,Janet, you stinky Republican whore…
@28
“President Bush’s … failure to ask Americans to sacrifice”
Hell, he doesn’t even ask the incompetents working for him to sacrifice their jobs.
@30
“the trademark of the Progressives and most leftists is emotion”
And Pukes like you are paragons of rationality?
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
screw-loose-y @ 34: “Janet, you stinky Republican whore…”
What the hell is your malfunction, lucy?
Janet posted a polite, well-reasoned opinion and you reply with that verbal vomit??!!
You didn’t even address the points in Janet’s post. Instead, you threw out talking points and insults. Looks like you’re the one unable to do anything beyond memorizing slogans.
Disagree if you want — it is your right — but grow up a
littlelot before putting fingers to keyboard.Roger @ 35
YIPPEE!!! Roger figured out how to use “cut and paste!” Goood boyyyyyy! Now, don’t forget to take your Aricept with your glass of warm milk tonight.
FROM THE (LOOPY) LEFT…, aka, the
To those in the know, this Saturday is “S24” (i.e., 24 September), when over one thousand leftwing groups will descend on Washington for a “war protest.” (Is it just us, or are these self-indulgent Angry Left minions being somewhat overshadowed by events in the hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast?)
A cameraman filming the first arriving buses caught something he’d missed before: He’d seen many of the protestors at hundreds of previous protests. “They’re professional protesters!” he surmised.
Indeed these events are well-scripted productions rather than the spontaneous uprisings, CBS reports. “S24” is being produced by United for Peace and Justice (UPJ) and International Act Now
to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER). ANSWER has close ties to the Marxist Workers World Party, Free Palestine Alliance, U.S.-Mexico Solidarity Foundation, Muslim Student Association of the U.S. and Canada, Code Pink, and, of course, MoveOn.
Other “notables” at the protest include Punks for Peace, Queer to the Left, September 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows and Historians Against the War.
Scholar John J. Tierney declares the nucleus of the protesters “ideologically very hard-core left;… anti-West, anti-capitalism and anti-American political culture. [They] cover a whole host of revolutionary causes, literally everywhere.”
Like I said, the left works from emotion. And insanity.
Wasn’t Roger Rabbit a government bureaucrat most of his life? Kind of proves my point. I sure wouldn’t want him in charge of my health care.
re 36: Get off your high horse nosewipe!
re 39: Give me ten REAL instances of the left working from emotion and insanity. That sounds very reminiscent of O’Reilley’s petulant remarks after getting his clock cleaned in debate by Phil Donahue. Check it out ,Janet, you conservative cunt. It’s all over the internet. Will you take your blinders off and see the truth for once in your adult life?
gutless, shiftless, brainless loosey-goosey @ 41: “Give me ten REAL instances of the left working from emotion and insanity.”
How about your last ten posts on HA?
As for your comment @ 40… Nosewipe?! Oooooohhh!! That is so weak and impotent (much like you) that it doesn’t even warrant the effort to reply beyond this sentence.
By the way, it is after 8:30 — past your bedtime.
re 42:Then why are you replying? Nosewipe! Where are the ten REAL instances of the left working from emotion and insanity? You can’t say because you forgothat you don’t know what you’re talking about, do you, Marky Boy? There’s only two things that have doubled in the past year: Dead American soldiers and Halliburton’s stock. Do you know that Halliburton is feeding our soldiers rotten food and filthy drinking water from the Euphrates River?
And you say you support our soldiers– and I say you’re a liar who sends other people’s children to a foreign country to die so Bush and all his cronies can become rich.
Gutless, witless, shiftless, brainless lucy @ 43
Again, you’re going off on confused rants without knowing of what or whom you speak.
My point stands. Your last ten HA posts are textbook examples of leftwing emotion and insanity.
Progressive my ASS!
The assholes you list here are anti-growth bottom-feeders who believe in big, bigger and even bigger government….NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT COSTS!
Progressive implies progressing TOWARD something.
These assholes collectively wouldn’t make a pimple on a good old-fashioned TRUMAN DEMOCRATS ass!!!
Fuck you Goldy and all these other collective LEFTIST PINHEADED fuckers!
oh yeah…have a nice evening!
Marky Mark and the Fightin’ Honkies: You all agreed that the left (as Bill O’Reilly sneered just a few days ago) operates entirely off emotion and insanity. I asked for a measley 10 examples and all you can do is criticise MY comments. I have news for you . I’m not the left. I am a fake character that comments on HA.
Where are the 10 examples of the left operating from emotion and insanity. I’m still waiting. And you know what? Your failure to come up with squat is being noticed by many of the young people who read things like HA in an attempt to develop their own political philosophy.
Again, Marky-Mark, Janet Monostat, and Cynical: Where are your answers?
I’ll take that challenge, ballsless looney
Liberals play on feelings and fear.
1. Goldy is a prime example – vote 912 down or OH MY GOD! the viaduct will crumble: FEAR
2. Conservatives on the court – OH MY GOD! they will do away with your private “right” to kill your baby: FEAR
3. Health care – Oh MY GOD! No one will live healthy lives if the liberals don’t nationalize healthcare: FEAR
4. Public displays of Christian artifacts -OH MY GOD! they are forcing religion on the country: FEAR
5. Tax breaks for the rich: ENVY
6. The poor, the blacks, were left behind in Katrina: HATRED
7. Voter ID will disenfranchise the ‘poor’: FEAR
8. Affirmative Action: FEAR (you can’t get ahead without US)
9. Global warming: FEAR (OH MY GOD! you are killing the earth) OH MY GOD! you’re causing hurricanes
10. The Patriot Act, Homeland Security: FEAR
11. Gun Control: FEAR
12. Welfare (you can’t make it without us) FEAR, ENVY
13. The DRAFT is coming!! FEAR
14. Judge Pickering: would “roll back the clock” on civil rights, a favorite scare-tactic of the Race Industry: FEAR
15. Moveon.org, the Sierra Club: President Bush is poisoning pregnant women and their unborn child with mercury found in fish.
->Clinton: “I feel your pain”
->Clinton2 “Vast Right wing conspiracy
->Kerry (during campaign)” warning people about a “January surprise” where the Bush adminstration would try to privatize social security.
->Kerry (campaigning in Ohio, Iowa and Florida) telling people that a vote for Bush will lead to their teenage sons being drafted. There is a “great potential of a draft” to replenish U.S. forces in Iraq if President Bush wins a second term, Democratic challenger John Kerry said Friday on a campaign stop in Iowa.
->Al Gore: After eight years with a Democrat in the White House, Gore ran a campaign focused not on how he would improve things but rather a “people vs. the powerful” campaign, trying to tell us that only his election stood between us and a harsh fate.
->Al Gore: In a speech delivered in Ohio, Gore said, “The next president will nominate…perhaps four justices to the Supreme Court. One extra vote on the wrong side would change the outcome, and a woman’s right to choose would be taken away.”
->Air America: Their arguments are aimed at scaring people about the nature of their opponents. The dominating message is “support us, or the Republicans and their corrupt backers will do you ill . . . . Support us or what little you have in the way of freedom and even your livelihood will be taken away . . . . Our opponents policies are really aimed at destroying your most cherished government programs; support us or you’ll be eating cat food. You can’t accomplish anything against the powerful forces arrayed against you, but we can protect you.”
->Ted Kennedy: In a speech prepared for delivery at George Washington University, Kennedy said that by shifting attention from Osama bin Laden to Iraq, Bush has increased the danger of a ”nuclear 9/11.”
“The war in Iraq has made the mushroom cloud more likely, not less likely,” he said in the remarks released late Sunday.
->John Kerry: Republicans may try to keep black voters from casting their ballots to help President Bush win in November. “We are not going to stand by and allow another million African American votes to go uncounted in this election,” the Democratic presidential nominee told the Congressional Black Caucus.
“We are not going to stand by and allow acts of voter suppression, and we’re hearing those things again in this election.”
->Barbara Boxer: Five thousand women a year will die if President Bush nominates a pro-life judge to the Supreme Court
Had enough ballsless looney, or shall I go on?
The liberals, the self-elevated progressives have nothing new to offer, they have no ideas, no solutions. So instead they promote a generalized message of fear rather than of hopeful expectations, aimed at scaring voters rather than inspiring them.
“ Such messages have often worked on Continental Europe, whose politics Democrats admire and often try to emulate. But this has rarely, if ever, been a winning message in America, which has always been a nation of optimists. “
I answered your challenge ballsless -wait for it to get out of FILTER HELL, which I suspect held it because it was so long.
HCYBPTBAA @ 48 – Wow. That’s one of the best posts I’ve ever seen on HA.
Guaranteed Lucy’s “reply” will include the words “fascist neo-con”, and zero content as usual.
Exactly, Mark. The insanity part of his/her/its challenge is self evident.
The insanity part of his/her/its challenge is self evident.
The hypocrisy of ASS is absolute.
Let’s take a trip into feelings and fear:
1. A vote for Kerry is a vote for al Qaeda: FEAR
2. Liberals on the court – OH MY GOD! – they might protect individual freedoms: FEAR of losing control over the personal lives of others.
3. Anti-environmentalism: APATHY
4. Civil rights, “the blacks” might have equality in a liberal society: BIGOTRY
5. Science is out to destroy religion: IRRATIONAL, IGNORANT FEAR
6. Hollywood is poisoning our culture: FEAR, from a so-called “conservative” America that consumes entertainment (movies, TV, porn, everything) at the same or higher rates than anyone else.
7. Liberals stand for big government: FEAR, in a hypocritical sort of way.
8. Opposition to gay marriage, more civil rights: FEAR, BIGOTRY
9. Welfare – OH MY GOD! – we’d actually have to follow Jesus’ teachings: HATRED
10. Saddam’s going to nuke us: FEAR
11. Tax cuts for the rich: GREED
12. Official PR policy of dishonesty at the Bush administration: FEAR of truth.
13. Assault on intellectuals and professors: FEAR of the educated.
14. Liberal media myth: FEAR of public accountability.
15. Chickenhawks: FEAR of combat.
->”Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.” – GW Bush, October 2002
->”We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud” – Condoleeza Rice, CNN Late Edition, October 2002
->”Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.” – George W. Bush, Speech to UN General Assembly 9/12/2002
->”Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons — the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.” – George W. Bush, Radio Address 10/5/2002
->”The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas.” – George W. Bush, Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002
->”We’ve also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas.” – George W. Bush, Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002
->”Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.” – George W. Bush, State of the Union Address 1/28/2003
->”The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq.” – George W. Bush, Nov. 23, 2002
->”No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.”
– Donald Rumsfeld, testimony to Congress, Sept. 19, 2002
->”Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.”
– George W. Bush, address to the U.S., March 17, 2003
->”What we know from UN inspectors over the course of the last decade is that Saddam Hussein possesses thousands of chemical warheads, that he possesses hundreds of liters of very dangerous toxins that can kill millions of people.”
– White House spokesman Dan Bartlett, CNN interview, Jan. 26, 2003
But why stop at the Iraq war when there’s 9/11 to exploit? After all, fear was the official campaign strategy of the RNC last year.
President Bush’s reelection campaign will begin running ads in key battleground states around the country tomorrow that focus on the president’s leadership on the economy and on the war on terrorism, and feature firefighters and footage from the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....4Mar3.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feat...../story.jpg
Be afraid of the big bad wolf:
Vote for us or your children will die. It is a compelling message and President George Bush has no qualms about delivering it as he heads into the final week of this election in a neck-and-neck race with John Kerry.
Mr Bush may dance around the words, but there can be no doubt about their subliminal meaning.
Campaigning in Florida over the weekend, he warned his supporters: “The choice in this election cannot be clearer. You cannot lead our nation to the decisive victory on which the security of every American family depends if you do not see the true dangers of the post-September 11 world.”
Weakness, Mr Bush says repeatedly, will hound the US if Senator Kerry is elected next Tuesday. Anyone who votes for him, by extension, is throwing their family to the wolves.
Just in case any swinging voter has failed to grasp his warning, the Bush campaign team has begun airing a scary political ad.
It is perfectly timed, one week before Halloween, to crank up the fear factor several notches.
The opening scene is a moonlit night in a dark forest where a pack of hungry wolves is eyeing the camera. A female announcer gravely intones:
“In an increasingly dangerous world … Even after the first terrorist attacks on America … John Kerry and the liberals in Congress voted to slash America’s intelligence operations … Cuts so deep they would have weakened America’s defences … And weakness attracts those who are waiting to do America harm.”
On cue, wolves start skulking towards camera, growling ominously, waiting to pounce.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles.....94228.html
Or when all else fails it’s time for the real boogeyman: gay marriage and separation of church and state.
http://www.steveclemons.com/GO.....age001.jpg
Ooooh, the RNC brings out the big FEAR this time!
In fact, self-righteous and self-serving conservatives have nothing to offer except hindrance to humanity’s march towards social and economic equality. So instead they promote a message of dishonesty and intolerance, aimed at scaring and misleading voters rather than improving their lives.
“As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.”
Clearly our pal Dave has some attention deficit issues and his Mommy didn’t dose him up with his Ritalin.
Pay attention Dave, I’ll try to make this easy for you to grasp…
The point, Dave, wasn’t the liberal fear mongering or their pronouncements based on their feelings.
The point, Dave, was once again proving the ballsless looney jerk wrong.
You’re not my pal, ASS, and I really don’t care what you think the point was. Let there be no doubt that fearmongering and pronouncements based on feelings are not limited to liberals or Democrats.
My point was to preempt any such argument in case you or any of your fellow wingnut ideologues were stupid enough to use it.
HCYBPTBAA – Sure is whole lotta silence from Loocy now isn’t there? “She” folded like house of cards in the face of facts.
You’re not my pal, ASS, and I really don’t care what you think the point was. Let there be no doubt that fearmongering and pronouncements based on feelings are not limited to liberals or Democrats. -Comment by LiberalDave— 9/24/05 @ 6:13 pm
Bluster and bullshit, pal.
The difference between the progressives (snicker) is their fearmongering is ALL THEY HAVE.
Example:
They scared the socks of old granny about social security, but never bothered to propose a solution to the growing problem.
They bitch and moan about vouchers and charter schools, but never bother to propose a solution to the failing public schools.
They whine about jobs and poverty and homelessness, but never bother to propose a way for folks to rise above them.
The impotent party of obstruction and no ideas.
Damned crappy FILTER
DaveNeedingLiberation: ProudAss is a member of the Internet Search and Destroy Assinine Liberal Rants. He destroys little pissants like you and Lucite every day. But Dave, from your rants above: You are stuck on Stupid.
Let’s be clear, pudd. ASS has never “destroyed” me and neither have any of the rest of you.
Well the post never made it ouf of FILTER HELL, so let’s try to reconstruct….
Bullshit and bluster, pal.
The difference is progressives ONLY fearmonger and play on emotions…
They bitch and moan about vouchers and charter schools, but never bother to propose ways to fix failing public schools and the embarassingly poorly educated children it produces.
They cry and whine about inequities of the poor, the homeless, thedisenfranchised but never bother to offer those folks away out of their situation.
They dither and dawdle and wring their hands about energy and the environment but never bother to offer even one concrete solution… or even suggestion.
All we get are WORDS, WORDS, WORDS… buzz words, catchy phrases, PC rhetoric, sound bites.
They are a group without one single forward thinking, dare I say progressive idea.
They talk, talk, talk, confound, confuse, obstruct and say NO!…. but hey, they are REALLY good at that.
The difference is progressives ONLY fearmonger and play on emotions…
This is simply an absurd statement to make, even by your standards. Not surprisingly, everything that follows it is either untrue or hypocritical on its face. I find this especially funny:
All we get are WORDS, WORDS, WORDS… buzz words, catchy phrases, PC rhetoric, sound bites.
You mean like this?
“Compassionate Conservative”
“The Nanny State”
“Death Tax”
“Unrestricted Abortion On Demand”
“War On Terrorism” aka “The Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism”
“Tax and Spend Liberal”
“Big Government” (unless it’s your people expanding it, naturally)
“We’re gonna fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.”
“The War President” aka “The Peace President” (depending on the latest polls)
“Finger Pointing” aka “Blame Game, Blame Game, Blame Game”
“Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.”
“Wrong Choice Crowd”
“Litmus Test”
“Cut and Run”
“Flip-flopper”
“The Evil Doers”
Did I miss any? Oh yeah.
“HowCanYouBePROUDtobeAnASS”
You’re a joke, ASS – and a funny one at that – but you’re certainly not my pal.
Yep, pal you did a pretty darn good job of collecting liberal buzzwords…. and it only took you 6 hours!
Yep, pal you did a pretty darn good job of collecting liberal buzz words… and it only took you 6 hours!
Damn, damn, damn Goldy and his crappy lousy cheap filter…
Yep, pal….
… you did a darn good job…
…you did a good job….
…of collecting….
….liberal buzz words…
…and it only….
…took you 6 hours.
I see, the crappy filter will allow DAMN, but dissallows D*RN… of perhaps it disallows the word J*B(the word that means work)
Interesting criteria
…and it only….
…took you 6 hours.
Actually it only took me five minutes. I have better things to do than hang around here all day long like you do, ASS.