CNN/RNC warn that Democrats are too liberal, elitist and angry!

[JailBush]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/03/elec04.prez.gillespie/

RNC chairman: Democrats increasingly 'liberal, elitist, angry'
By contrast, Gillespie says Bush has a 'positive agenda'

Well, I have a positive agenda, too - ramming some paperwork up George W. Bush's ass.

[blm]

1. That's the storyline Rove wanted.

That's why they keep calling Dean the antiwar liberal when he is neither. They want his image to be the image of the whole Dem party. Shoot from the lip, angry Democrats.

[poskonig]

3. Is this a record?

Took only one post for a neutral thread to degenerate into Dean bashing this time.

[MrSoundAndVision]

7. Hey

Dean isn't ANTIWAR or LIBERAL, so that's actually not a Dean bash. I mean, if he said that Dean doesn't have a chance in hell in beating Bush because he's basically a committee and supported only by white middle-class men, then that would be some truth laced with a Dean bash. Well mostly the truth. Well then it is the truth laced with a speculation that Dean's appeal isn't going much further than the middle white class males he appeals too, much like himself really.

Just thought I'd help.

[frank frankly]

16. blm, this is unhelpful

c'mon, you can support Kerry best by SUPPORTING Kerry!

would you not vote for Dean if he's the nominee...?

[Scott Lee]

20. notice blm goes silent on that question

"Would you vote for Dean if he were the nominee?"

The silence should tell you everything about blm's motives.

[blm]

24. I've had my say many times about beating Bush as a priority.

Why do so many forget that? How many of those ABB threads do we have to post on before we're believed?


Do you ask that when the scummy posts against Kerry pop up?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Ed Gillespie.

I would like to turn him upside down, put my feet in his armpits and use him as a pogo stick.

I make no bones: I AM an Angry Democrat. A bleeding-heart liberal who, given the proper circumstances, will be happy to share the hemmorhaging.

[KG]

4. heh - some DUer's espousing that line of BS right here, today....

now we know where they get their talking points... :eyes:

[roughsatori]

12. I was going to post that I read those talking points HERE everyday

:puke:

[Q]

5. Get used to these 'talking points'...

...because you're going to hear them repeated over and over until the 2004 election.

- This 'message' is meant for the Bushie faithful: Democrats have no reason to be angry at 'honest, humble, God-fearing' Bush* and are motivated by blind hatred.

[aquart]

19. I hate with my eyes open.

They want to co-opt positive with their negative agenda?

All children left behind?

Unhealthy forests?

Polluted skies?

They use words that are the opposite of what they do. AND THAT HAS TO BE SAID.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. Let's see....

people who care about other people and using government for the greater good....yeah, that really sounds elitist to me. Angry? Not any more. I'm determined to rid the US of this parasite of an administration by lawful means-the 2004 election.

[killbotfactory]

8. What's Bush's positive agenda?

Telling us to unquestionably support him because we are at war with eurasia, and supporting a democrat will doom us to another 9/11?

[BeFree]

9. They ain't seen nothing yet

Some of us may be too Liberal
Few of us are elite
But every one of us is angry.

Maybe he was talking 'bout his boy?
* is too liberal for most Rwing'rs
Far too elite for a cowboy
and who goes to war if'n they ain't angry?

[peacetalksforall]

10. THEY want us all to be -

stupid, submissive, uninterested, blindly patriotic to war, death, dismemberment, concocted lies, and Israel, gullible, uneducated, too occupied, indifferent, apathetic to government crime, watching sports, MTV, survivor, Sex in the City, infommercials. They want us to salute our new hitler and kiss the robe and admire the crown that the supreme court presented them with. They don't want us to say ouch when they steal our pensions, poison our water,put us in jail without access to the law.

[DUreader]

11. Funny, these talking points are right here on DU tonight

what a strange coincidence

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=819883&mesg_id=819883

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[roughsatori]

21. The Republican apologists are out in force at DU lately

I don't think my post was deleted just because I suggested that anyone who is curious notice how many of the haters of the left share the same avatar. So I will repost that and leave the rest out. And see if I am the only one who has noticed the trend.

[ldoolin]

13. My thoughts...

The Repukes in 1964 nominated Barry Goldwater for President. This was back in an era when liberalism was practically the national consensus, and conservativism was associated by much of the public with know-nothings, Birchers, southern segregationists, and the Hoover/Coolidge/Harding economics that led us into the Great Depression.

Goldwater was considered too radical, too extreme right by conventional wisdom.

Today, the reich wing has taken over the government, media, and think tanks, with people and policies that are far to the right of anything Goldwater ever advocated.

The reich wing took the base they built during the Goldwater campaign and built on it. They raised money, built think tanks, launched a new conservative movement, pursued a "southern strategy" of race-baiting, united all the conservative forces in the Repuke party, found and identified constituency groups and wedge issues to win people over to the Repuke party and divide the old Democratic base. They succeeded beyond anyone's wildest dreams.

Our job is to learn from what the reich wing did, and beat them at their own game. That means getting angry, being unabashedly liberal, uniting the liberal/progressive forces in one party (the Democrats), and taking this country back. We are right now where the conservatives were in 1964. I fully hope we will win in 2004 but whether we do or don't, 2004 is just the beginning.

[cyclezealot]

15. End labeling/speak to the issues.

Wimps..Not sure how it started. Probably started because we let them get away with it...Think first wimp attacks came about because we let them label us 'soft on crime,' way back from the Nixon era.
Why do we let them get away with it...We feel the American ideal is really about justice. Is that anti-American..Don't think our original founders would think so..
Soft on crime has nothing with coddling criminals.. The streets are safer from proper law enforcement not short circuiting justice.
Yes, we let them get away with labeling us in regards to crime issues, by not responding to their charges and letting unfair labels stick..So if the American public lets the repugs label us as wimps, in part it is our fault for letting them get away with it..

[roguevalley]

17. dems tell CNN/RNC to get stuffed.

[aquart]

18. BushCo is positively stealing everything in sight.

And a whole bloody lot they will never let us see.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

22. What about the "angry" rednecks like Toby Keith???

So, it's O.K to bomb innocent Iraqi children to relieve your anger, but it's not right to be angry about Bush lying???


:wtf:

[GoldenOldie]

23. 2004 Mantra of the Republican Party

They used Gore is a "Liar" and they spewed venom on a daily basis with their competitor Senator McCain during the last Presidential campaing. Every whore throughout the media picked up on the mantra and repeated it 24/7. They continue to attack Gore as being the liar.

The RNC is frantically searching for just the right mantra to attack the Dems selection for 2004. It is driving them insane that there are 9 outstanding candidates for the Dems and they are unable to select which one of them to attack on any given day. It is truly funny how the whores of the media who are so openly whores of Bush, attempt to tell us which candidate has the best advantage of beating George W. Bush and now, the RNC and their media whores are trying out "the Dems cannot win because they are so full of 'Hatred' for George W. Bush."

Why can't we be honest and just say YES - we hate him for what he has done to our country and our democracy.

[Code_Name_D]

25. But at least we are no longer "whiners" right?

They ain't seen angree yet