Stop alienating all republicans

[drummer55]

this is not helping!

stop calling them rethugs and other childish names. Instead reach out to them and find common ground to advance the fight against the neo-conservative agenda.

Most of my friends who call themselves conservatives are not happy campers with what is going on right now.

Take a stroll through the internet and find out how many true blue conservatives speak out against this neo-conservative non-republican administration

http://www.alternet.org/election04/20367/

[merwin]

1. The people that we're callin rethugs ARE the neocons, who do not

want to comprimse. Or, rather, their idea of comprimise is getting Dems to go along with what they're saying.

I'm sorry if good republicans got suckered by the neocons, but there is no common ground between neocons (the current ruling party) and the democrats.

[w4rma]

2. If they are conservative and speaking out against this neo-conservative

administration and Republican leadership, then why would they be insulted by insults at the political party that they now despise, themselves?

[thefloyd]

5. Well one thing

Democrats are for Balanced Budgets. Seems like what the traditional Republicans are wanting.

[w4rma]

8. Conservatives are for balanced budgets. And soon to be Democrats,

former Republicans, are also for balanced budgets.

[Telly Savalas]

59. It's been 48 years since a GOP president signed a balanced budget.

This "real conservatives are fiscal conservatives" myth needs to come to an end.

It's also interesting to note that when Ike signed this budget back in '57, we weren't in the black because of some adherence to "small government" principles, but rather because the top marginal income tax rate was something like 90%.

[w4rma]

72. The Democratic Party used to be known as the conservative Party

Republicans were the liberal party in President Hoover's day. But the economic positions of the two political parties have not changed hardly at all. It's the social policies that have switched. It's not a myth.

Look at the word "liberal" as it applies to economics. Liberalized economics means fewer regulations to prevent fraud and price gouging. That is the proper term for "liberal" as it applies to economics, but Democrats (who used to be known as conservative) and Republicans (who used to be known as liberal) have not changed hardly at all on economics. Democrats still support more regulations on buisness to keep the balance and Repugs still support less regulations on buisness to transfer power to their friends.

Think about that before you trash conservatives. Conservatives are not the enemy. They are the pool of folks who we need to convince to put their economic beliefs ahead of their social beliefs and join the Democratic Party.

[Telly Savalas]

120. Huh?

Herbert Hoover was not a liberal. Marxists like to use the term neoliberal to refer to the "liberalized" capitalism you speak of, but in modern political discourse in the U.S., almost everyone uses liberal to refer to those who believe in a well regulated economy as opposed to the laissez-faire approach of conservatives.

The people I listed were all conservatives, and people who support their ideologies are most definately our enemies.

Edited to add: when I say the people I listed, I'm referring to post #61 below.

[Jamastiene]

6. Nailed it

right on the head with that one. If they aren't guilty of being a neocon then the words won't affect them.

[Kipepeo]

15. Agreed

Conservatives who are displeased with this administration know exactly who the Rethugs are, and it's not them...it's the people stealing their party.

[maxudargo]

32. I don't know, this is sounding familiar in a creepy way

My grandfather used to defend his use of the word "nigger" by saying there are black people, and there are niggers. When he calls a black person a nigger, it's because they're not one of the "okay" black people. I didn't find it a very compelling argument. It was just his way of rationalizing his hateful language.

[Kipepeo]

36. Rethug is not based on someone's

ethnicity, gender or sexuality, or any kind of blind prejudice. It's not even based on a person's political persuasion, because not all registered Republicans are Rethugs. It's based on a person's opinions, their actions, their character. I don't see a racial slur as a valid comparison at all.

For people who feel that one can be too judgmental of others based on their actions or political persuasion...Well what the hell am I supposed to base my opinion of people on if not on their beliefs, actions, and character? ;) Sorry, but I don't consider being a bigot of bigots to be an offense. People *should* be judged on their character; that's what they offer the world (whether for the positive or the negative).

[maxudargo]

50. The issue isn't judging people, it's calling them insulting names

I'm not comparing "Rethug" to "nigger" in terms of moral magnitude, but, again, your arguments sound like something my grandfather would have said. "Not all blacks are niggers," just as "Not all registered Republicans are Rethugs." It just seems kind of creepy to me, the parallels in the logic.

I'm sure it's just me.

[Kipepeo]

51. No, It could be me, LOL

But I don't have any problem calling assholes bad names. Does it bother me that some conservatives might not realize that I mean Neo-cons? Maybe I guess, but not so much that it outweighs the positives of what I see as calling a spade a spade. Bush, for example, is a lying war-criminal Rethug, and I don't think calling him so is an overall negative, but an overall positive.

[steelyboo]

95. thats funny, Chris Rock said the same thing, but that was considered

insightful when he said it.

[Telly Savalas]

61. "Rethugs" stole the party from whom? Honorable Reaganites?

Those who supported the rational contrarian voice of Newt Gingrich in the '90's?

Nixonian Republicans who demanded integrity in their elected officials?

Goldwater supporters who sought sober moderation from government?

Those who backed Joseph McCarthy in his struggle to defend our nation from enemies within?

Backers of that great steward of the American Dream, Herbert Hoover?

Warren Harding?

Call me fucking batty, but in my eyes the Bush Administration is just a logical extension of a century of douchebaggery by the Republican Party.

[Guaranteed]

89. And why don't they speak a little louder?

And why the HELL did they vote for the piece of shit?

[Melodybe]

3. I agree there are so many things that appeal to the members of both partys

no draft
social security
opposing the new freedom commision
papertrail with electronic voting
media regulation
balanced budget

Now while I myself have enjoyed a laugh or twenty at the expense of the freepers, I don't think all republicans are like that. I live in Ms where I see so many voting against their best interests b/c they are over worked and don't have time to pay attention to politics.

I happily reach out to republicans b/c like most here I care about all folks, even the ones that disagree with me.

Once they finally figure out that Bush doesn't give a shit about them, the backlash will be beautiful.

[murielm99]

4. All republicans can stop alienating me.

They allowed their party to be taken over by thugs.

If they want to purge their party, fine. Then, they can reach out to us for a change. And they will have stopped alienating me.

I have no sympathy for people who have turned the "liberal" into a dirty word.

[Old and In the Way]

16. Amen, sister (or brother). You said it perfectly.

I like how people who are late to the party now want to tell us we should be compromising our principles to please them. No, I don't think so. They have a choice, join us, on our terms, or don't. These people had no problems supporting these same assholes when they conducted an 8 year Inquisition on Clinton and topped it off with a bullshit impeachment charge, get this, for lying about consensual sex. That was real funny back then, I'm sure....but now it's beginning to dawn on them that they're in the same boat we are. Now, it's not so funny.

No, I'm happy to have these people admit they were duped and join us on our terms...not theirs.

[mazzarro]

37. Thank You!

eom

[pbartch]

100. Republicans should stop alienating Democrats

Repugs are thugs, crooks, liars and cheats.

[ailsagirl]

116. You said it

There may be "normal" people amongst the repugs but they're going along with the neocon agenda so IMO they brought it upon themselves.

[kentuck]

7. That's their problem...

Nobody put a ring thru their noses and made them follow their esteemed leader. If they want to change, it is up to them - not us - in my opinion. We would welcome them in a heartbeat. But, if they are not man or woman enought to admit their mistakes, screw them. Why should we coddle them?

[mazzarro]

39. My sentiment exactly

eom

[driver8]

54. I agree...

I'm not going to coddle someone who voted this asshole into office. If they are so dissatisfied with what their party is doing -- speak up!! Otherwise, the hell with them.

[Lindacooks]

109. You got it!!

Being polite and turning the other cheek is what got this country into the mess it is today. We've got to fight hard and not give an inch to get this country back.
`
Republicans won't fight fair. They lie, cheat, steal, and name call all the time. And we're supposed to be the ones to play nice? I don't think so.

[CoffeeCat]

9. I've never viewed DU...

..as a venue for "reaching out to Republicans."

I come here to commiserate and to discuss current events. I was unaware of bridge-building activities.

I can only speak for myself, but my primary complaints are with the neocons. I'm here, complaining about them and discussing their radical, sickening agenda. It sounds like other "true blue conservatives"--as you called them--are also complaining on-line about the neo cons.

They're complaining. We're complaining too. I don't see the problem.

Maybe you could be that very bridge which joins DU and disaffected Republicans who loathe the neocon brigade as much as we do.

There just might be hope for the world, after all.

Let's all join hands and sing "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing."

[CaliforniaPeggy]

10. On not alienating moderate Republicans:

I think you're onto something here. Last year, while surfing the net, I discovered the website RepublicansagainstBush. It was full of thoughtful writings about how unhappy these moderates were with Bush. I was astonished. I'd had NO IDEA that there were so many moderates. It heartened me. I believe these moderates continue to work against the current administration, and they will work in 2008 to nominate a moderate candidate. They bear watching! Thank you for your very well-taken points.

[LittleClarkie]

26. Oh yes, the Yahoo group "Republicans for Kerry" was quite active

Plus Tom Terrell's anotherrepubicanforkerry.com and the website www.republicansforkerry04.com (or org, can't remember)

We even had bumper stickers for them.

There are even a few folk around here.

True conservative, fiscally responsible, anti-war Republicans are not happy campers right now. And I do believe several of them voted Kerry.

[bunkerbuster1]

114. For the record, when I say "reThug", I am speaking of the elected folks

and those who work for them. Ordinary voters who are conned by these people into thinking Bush makes them more secure, or that Bush is more honest and decent, I would not call anything especially rude. Rather, I feel they need to be educated.

Some, of course, are beyond hope, but many are not.

[mazzarro]

40. Yea right!

And they still voted for the chimp - right? I do give a damn about the so-called moderates.

[American Tragedy]

11. I've embraced many Goldwater Republicans in the past four years

because at least one can reason with them, and they still value individual freedom. But I have no use for the religious right-wing.

[despairing optimist]

12. Uh-oh. Batten down the hatches. A hard rain's gonna fall.

I do agree with you that traditional conservatives, or paleocons, are caught between a rock and a hard place, much as progressives in the Democratic party have been until--this coming Saturday with the rise of Howard Dean, perhaps.

IMHO, Dean will, among other things, address the very issue you raise. I'm willing to bet that paleocons actually admire him and will want to work with him. This may sound strange, but I believe that Democrats and paleocons won't have to do most of the work because the neocons are doing it all for them: pushing them together as the neocons fly off somewhere into an alternate universe, thinking all the while that they have a commanding political and moral mandate to rule as they alone see fit.

I think neocons' arrogance is what puts off the old conservatives so much, besides the fear that comes from realizing that the government is in the hands of a truly driven faction. It goes against everything that conservatives stand for, which pretty much consists of shoring up what they know as a defense against what fate may throw their way. In other words, they struggle with uncertainty even as they embrace it, whereas the neocons are certain of everything even as they know nothing.

In this environment, there's definitely room for mutual understanding between Democrats and old-school conservatives.

[shance]

13. You bring up a good point Drummer.

Glad you posted.

It's difficult at times to say 'neocons' or another word, but you are right. There are Republicans who are as concerned as much everybody else here at DU. I used to be a Republican a good while back and I know there are many great people within the party.

I think the labels Republican and Democrat, liberal and conservative, whatever, are meant to divide us into different groups, when most of us want the same things. Who doesnt want a clean environment, or a good education, or affordable healthcare?

Some of the people in power are neither Republican or Democrats, they are just power abusers pure and simple. They are using the political system for their own financial and material gain, and there are some in both parties.

All Americans need to come together now, to confront what appears to be an extremist agenda that helps no one but a select few.

[punpirate]

14. If they voted for the fascists in power now...

... fuckin' twice, they deserve more than name-calling.

Many of these people you describe as reasonable still let party loyalty sway their votes. If all the real conservatives didn't vote for Bush, he wouldn't have won, period.

[kentuck]

18. I agree, punpirate....

They had a chance just three months ago to vote for a war hero over a lying chicken hawk and they blew it. Why should we expect anything better from them now? If they had one ounce of goodness in their bodies, they would be publically opposing George W Bush at this instant. I don't see it. I think it's pollyannish to think these folks have any rational bones in their bodies.

[Extend a Hand]

24. cheating fascists in power

I don't think B*sh really won (In 2000 or 2004)

I do believe that there are true conservative republicans that could be persuaded to vote for a moderate democratic platform...but I'm afraid that it won't matter-- because the fascists lead by K.R. are cheating.

[niceypoo]

65. We will never get the Conservative vote or the religious right vote

So stop pretending

[Guaranteed]

90. Exactly. Exactly. THEY DID THIS. nt

[Lexingtonian]

17. tell 'em to keep on growing up

They'll catch up with us at some point.

To be a conservative with integrity- a person who knows what is actually important to preserve and live- is to be a Democrat and a Liberal. To be an American Conservative is to want to live in the past, to be ultimately incompetent at sorting out the world, and be selfimportant and be a coward (despite all the loudness).

I don't know what you're calling 'neocon', but what you seem to be referring to is the oldest Republican article of faith, only now out in the open- keeping/returning the U.S. to a colonial era plutocracy with a 'Christian' patina.

Nice talk doesn't help. Yeah, they're insecure, but unless they grab themselves some guts and convictions they'll get bullied and cajoled back to the Dark Side anyway. We respect the ones that can get over themselves, we can't really respect the ones who don't.

[applegrove]

19. We need a name for the true believers. Patriot the Patsies?

We need a name for the true believers. Patriot the Patsies?

Same thing goes for the Christians or other religious types. They are not happy too - but if you use the wrong words we will scare them away(or be separated from them which is the corporate/Rove/Bush endgame).

Fact is we have more in common with Centrists and Christians in terms of values at this juncture. Let us keep the words clear. I nominate PATRIOT THE PATSY as a word to describe Bush & his true believers.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

22. Victims of a cult. Propaganda was perfected 80 years ago and did this.

(I still had this copied to paste from another thread.)

Yes. We MUST RE-HUMANIZE the Repubs and cross the divide intentionally created between us by divide-and-conquer fascism. This Red vs. Blue meme is part of the scam and must be rejected. But with KNOWLEDGE, not just warm fuzzies. Then we can eliminate rigged electronic voting and maybe elect some leaders for a change.

Here's how Repubs got 'like that':

Simply, Americans have been lied to and brainwashed for almost 100 years to make those Repubs think like that. Psychology became weaponized by the robber barons like John D. Rockefeller and used to
a) design public schools
b) sell lots of crap
c) sell politicians
d) control the mainstream media for a,b,c

Here are the details:

1) Kerry won. Electronic voting machines and voter suppression stole the election...again. Dems won the last four presidential elections.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm
(Diebold, Electronic Voting, And the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy)

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KEE501A.html
(The Strange Death of American Democracy)
Someone here at DU actually found the evidence of hacking in the Cuyahoga County vote totals. It's there for all the world to see but to no avail.

2) Basic psychology has been used as a weapon against the masses for almost 100 years to hide the truth from us from the day we are born.

http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/index_fr.html?content=articles/doors_of_perception.html
(Why Americans Will Believe Almost Anything)

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/rise_of_american_fascism.htm
(The Rise of American Fascism)

http://www.mackwhite.com/tv.html
(The TV Hive Mind)

http://www.tscm.com/CIA_PsyOps_Handbook.html
(1979 Army Manual 33-1 Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare)
This weapon has actually been used on the American people as though they were the enemy of the White House. They are.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0712-01.htm
(Trading on Fear)
Wars and cars have been sold to us with this basic tool.

3) Public schooling was designed by robber barons in the early 1900s with the intention of turning out obedient worker drones and cannon fodder who are afraid of each other and welcome a police-state.
It works.

http://4brevard.com/choice/Public_Education.htm
(The Shocking Origins of Public Schools by John Gatto)

http://www.sntp.net/education/education.htm
(How Psychiatry & Modern Psychology Subvert
Education, and Harm Children and Society)


4) The mainstream media has been completely controlled to create a fascist mentality that blindly follows the fuhrer for over 60 years now. That's three generations of brainwashing to get to this point where they STILL have to steal the election.

Operation Mockingbird has had the CIA massaging and working in the ENTIRE MSM for over 50 years now! This is an old old story which is being minimized into the 'Few Bad Apples' technique of damage control due to the internet.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html
(Operation Mockingbird: The Subversion of the Free Press by the CIA)

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html
(The Origins of the Overclass)

>snip<

MOCKINGBIRD was extraordinarily successful. In no time, the agency had recruited at least 25 media organizations to disseminate CIA propaganda. At least 400 journalists would eventually join the CIA payroll, according to the CIA’s testimony before a stunned Church Committee in 1975. (The committee felt the true number was considerably higher.) The names of those recruited reads like a Who's Who of journalism:

* Philip and Katharine Graham (Publishers, Washington Post)
* William Paley (President, CBS)
* Henry Luce (Publisher, Time and Life magazine)
* Arthur Hays Sulzberger (Publisher, N.Y. Times)
* Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star)
* Hal Hendrix (Pulitzer Prize winner, Miami News)
* Barry Bingham Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal)
* James Copley (Copley News Services)
* Joseph Harrison (Editor, Christian Science Monitor)
* C.D. Jackson (Fortune)
* Walter Pincus (Reporter, Washington Post)
* ABC
* NBC
* Associated Press
* United Press International
* Reuters
* Hearst Newspapers
* Scripps-Howard
* Newsweek
* magazine Mutual Broadcasting System
* Miami Herald
* Old Saturday Evening Post
* New York Herald-Tribune

>snip<

That's why there was a blackout on election fraud again. TOTAL CONTROL.

Has anyone talked about Operation Vigilant Warrior? The NORAD exercises 'simulating' multiple hijacked planes crashed into buildings the morning of 9/11? No. TOTAL CONTROL.

http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html
(9/11 Wargames Before and During the Attacks)

The NYT just edited the transcript of Rice's damning tsunami remarks at her confirmation hearing out of the online transcript. Why? Someone at the NYT is helping out the neocons. TOTAL CONTROL.

Just before the Em-poor-er's Inaugu-urination recruiting speech TIME magazine ran a cover story about young men who still live at home with the shaming headline 'Why Won't They Grow Up?' This was intended to push them into the military. TOTAL CONTROL.

Does anyone think this is a coincidence? These MSM organs are STILL all part of the Mighty Wurlitzer of organized propaganda that shape the attitudes of Americans so they will drive around and buy crap or pick up a gun and kill on command. Americans have no idea what is going on and most of what they think they know is wrong.

This gives them the innocence of ignorance. Sad but true.

[applegrove]

34. Sorry guy - You lost the last election.

Not fair of the Republican/neocons to be so awful and manipulative that it makes it hard to imagine they outright won and election. But they did. They won. A man like Kerry who had waited his whole life to be President got outstripped by Rove (the monster). He would be screaming his head off if he thought he had a chance. The Dems were ready this time to fight it in the courts. They lost. Not by very much - and by many voters who held their noses and voted republican -but Republicans won.

And all of you Democrats in denial you want to find a secret way the election was stolen - well it is called denial. Because if you found a way they broke the law - you can put them in jail right away and your life will go back to normal. But this is unrealistic. The Bush team will be in power for 4 more years. There is no magic 'crime' you can catch them at and then immediately get rid of them. They won. They are in power.

Denial that though we know they are nasty and tricky liars - they won a democracy. The awfulness is too hard for you. So you pretend for a while that the awful truth is not as bad as it actually is. That it was as simple as a machine or a few bad apples. The awful truth that these pigs can convince a little over half of Americans to vote for them. The awful truth is that their lies are believable to many. The awful truth is that they are successful. The awful truth is that they got elected. Hitler got elected too.

The reality is that you have to accept they won the election and then, only then, you can move on. Move on to fight another day. Move on to get back to your life. Move on to not encourage others in getting over their denial (conspiracy theories). With ******** like the ones who are in power in Washington - you have to keep a clear mind. Accept that they are bad. Accept that despite being bad they won the election. Accept that to fight them you cannot get lazy and 'dream up' proof where there is none. That they are mean motherfuckers and will exploit any democrat for any tiny mistake they make. So you have to get tough and more accurate and judicious with our actions. And learn not to react in the heat of emotions they provoke in you.

The truth is that Diebold electronic voting machines have ways of connecting to other software. So does every new product out there. What do you think Bill Gates was up to when he made it hard to access Netscape from a Microsoft Program? He was being a sneaky, business person who was anticipating getting market share by some sneaky method, Gates wanted to make Explorer the top web interface. Think that these Diebold people may have anticipated getting access to voter's lists in the future (if it was not well enough protected by law) and how much money having a name and address for every person in America would have made them. Or perhaps they anticipated a day when the DMV would be connected to the electoral lists - through their machines and how much money that would make them. So absolutely no surprise that the machines could be connectable and manipulatable. That is how all software is built by industry. (to get more business some day).

Denial is the first stage of grieving a loss. You go through a great amount of loss when your country is taken over by monsters and voted into power (this last time) by your own people. That hurts. But it is only the first stage of grief.

1. Denial (conspiracy theory that things are not as bad as they are via diebold machines or some crime that will stop these neocons in their tracks - that will not happen)

2.Accept reality of loss (you have a few sociopaths, a few ideologues, a few utopians, many corporations, and even more vulnerable voters all drinking the same Kool-Aid and they got voted into power)

3. Experience and bear the pain or grief (cry - get over the denial and help others to heal too. Then you can really start to fight for another day while not alienating the people who did not go into denial - but you all have to cry and get angry and over it and accept reality first)

4. Adjust to a world in which the dead (leadership) is missing and (neocons are in power for now).

5. Withdraw and reinvest emotional energy. (Calm down for a bit after you have accepted the loss. Then once you have built up strength - go out fighting to win your country back - in the next election)

[JohnOneillsMemory]

43. Um. You either haven't learned the facts or YOU are in denial, pal.

I've done my homework. You haven't.
I know the facts. You don't.

They matter. As in 'know thy enemy' and the audience they have fooled with psychology and technical shenanigans.

Betting on a rigged machine is denial of reality. Deal with that.

Did you know that BBV machines counted backwards in Florida and Oklahoma?

Did you know that BBV machines arrived with thousands of votes for Bush** already in them?

Did you know that people saw their Kerry selection changed to Bush** right in front of their eyes?

Did you know that BBV machines arrived with a default vote for Bush** in case no presidential candidate was selected?

Did you know that many precints counted thousands more votes than there were registered voters?

Many thousands of black voters were denied their right to vote AGAIN, just like in 2000 when supposedly Bush** won by 537 votes. HA!

HERE'S EVIDENCE OF HACKING STICKY FINGERS IN OHIO ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES. READ THIS AND SEE IF YOU CAN FOLLOW IT. (This is from 'The Strange Death of American Democracy link above. Read the whole thing and then give me your macho 'get over it' speech, ok?)

>SNIP<

Another analysis that may have wide potential applicability has been published at the Democratic Underground website by a computer programmer who claims to have special expertise in the reverse-engineering of calculations, and who goes by the blogger cognomen of '59sunburst.' (Because this analysis has been anonymously published--and because, moreover, I have been unable to activate the author's link to a field of supporting data--I present it with due reservations, in the hope that those possessing programming expertise may be able to critically assess its validity.)

Finding it curious that in 46 Cuyahoga County precincts George Bush received the same number of votes in 2004 as in 2000, while only in 12 precincts did John Kerry receive the same number of votes that Al Gore did in 2000, '59sunburst' speculated that Bush's 2000 numbers in each precinct might somehow have been used "as a benchmark for altering the results of 2004"--with a putative hacker's goal being to ensure that Bush's 2000 level of support was either maintained or enhanced. '59sunburst' was able to develop a quite simple mathematical formula which made it possible "to calculate Kerry's and Bush's 2004 totals for over 400 precincts using Bush's 2000 numbers and a randomizing factor"; this formula, s/he claims, works both for the preliminary results published on November 8th and the final results published by Cuyahoga County's Board of Elections on November 30th.

After demonstrating, with figures from Cleveland precinct 1M, how the formula generates Bush's and Kerry's 2004 vote tallies for both the November 8th and the November 30th reports out of the Bush 2000 vote count and the number of votes cast in 2004, '59sunburst' anticipates the obvious objection: If you throw the right randomizing factor into such a calculation, "you can make anything come out the way you want it to."

True--but it appears that someone was indeed making things come out the way he wanted to on election night.

>>>>>>>>For, as it happens, Cleveland precinct 1N--the very next one on the list--requires the very same "randomizing factor" as precinct 1M (Factor: 0.0618) for the formula to work. The same phenomenon recurs repeatedly with other pairs (or triplets) of consecutively listed precincts: Cleveland 6G and 6H (Factor: 0.005), Cleveland 10D and 10E (Factor: 0.024), Cleveland Heights 3C and 3D (Factor: 0.0267), East Cleveland 2E and 2F (Factor: 0.0263), East Cleveland 2H and 3A (Factor: 0.0241), East Cleveland 3B, 3C, and 3D (Factor: 0.0158), and so on.<56><<<<<<<<<<<,

If the "randomizing factor" numbers were different in each precinct, or only randomly coincided, there would be no reason to suspect a hacker's presence.

********What gives the game away is the reappearance of the same numbers in successive precincts--an obvious economizing of effort on the part of a hacker whose sticky fingerprints on the Cuyahoga County returns are made visible by that very fact.********

The effects of this hacking appear to have been substantial: in the first pair of precincts discussed by '59sunburst' alone, Bush's tally rose from 2 votes in 2000 to 23 in 2004 (precinct 1M), and from 2 votes in 2000 to 32 in 2004 (precinct 1N).

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

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

[JohnOneillsMemory]

53. I do hear 'be pragmatic.' But letting a scam continue isn't helpful.

I posted the precinct results that prove hacking for you. Perfectly rational conclusion from empirical data.

I hear you say 'conspiracy theory' alot so I'll throw a (usually totally untrustworthy) mainstream media story which ran quietly and belatedly long after 9/11 out for you to see. I hope you really are reading those links and not just saying 'move on.'

I give you the Associated Press story from August 21, 2005:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2002/08/21/national1518EDT0686.DTL

Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building

JOHN J. LUMPKIN, Associated Press Writer

Wednesday, August 21, 2002
(08-21) 15:08 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence, one U.S. intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings. But the cause wasn't terrorism -- it was to be a simulated accident.

Officials at the Chantilly, Va.-based National Reconnaissance Office had scheduled an exercise that morning in which a small corporate jet would crash into one of the four towers at the agency's headquarters building after experiencing a mechanical failure.

The agency is about four miles from the runways of Washington Dulles International Airport.

Agency chiefs came up with the scenario to test employees' ability to respond to a disaster, said spokesman Art Haubold. No actual plane was to be involved -- to simulate the damage from the crash, some stairwells and exits were to be closed off, forcing employees to find other ways to evacuate the building.

"It was just an incredible coincidence that this happened to involve an aircraft crashing into our facility," Haubold said. "As soon as the real world events began, we canceled the exercise."

Terrorism was to play no role in the exercise, which had been planned for several months, he said.

Adding to the coincidence, American Airlines Flight 77 -- the Boeing 767 that was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon -- took off from Dulles at 8:10 a.m. on Sept. 11, 50 minutes before the exercise was to begin. It struck the Pentagon around 9:40 a.m., killing 64 aboard the plane and 125 on the ground.

The National Reconnaissance Office operates many of the nation's spy satellites. It draws its personnel from the military and the CIA.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, most of the 3,000 people who work at agency headquarters were sent home, save for some essential personnel, Haubold said.

An announcement for an upcoming homeland security conference in Chicago first noted the exercise.

In a promotion for speaker John Fulton, a CIA officer assigned as chief of NRO's strategic gaming division, the announcement says, "On the morning of September 11th 2001, Mr. Fulton and his team ... were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way that day."

>snip<

So, "a bizarre coincidence", "little did they know," hunh?
So many questions...

[Bridget Burke]

62. Calling someone a freeper is against the rules here.

However, you keep talking about "you Democrats"--you really should be Democratic or at least sympathetic to the cause to post here.

I've long noted the phenomenon of the newcomer who's joined to warn us off certain topics. The machines do need investigation. And your president allowed 9/11 to happen. Perhaps Bin Ladin was involved, but he couldn't have done it alone.

[EST]

87. Please find some sympathetic forum to post this crap on.

As a matter of principle, if nothing else. We stand for honesty and integrity and demand at least a bit of that from those around us.

[ailsagirl]

119. If you think the repugs won fair and square...

you're deep in denial. But then, the majority of Bush supporters have what PIPA termed "gross cognitive dissosance." Difficulty in tracking reality.

The repugs cheated in 2000 (it has been proven) and they cheated in 2004.

[specimenfred1984]

41. Excellent Post, Thank You

I've been a student of propaganda for just a couple of years now. One of my favorite books is "Taking the Risk Out of Democracy".

It's pretty amazing that most people don't even have a clue about what drives most, if not all, of their thinking.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

46. It's maddening. Psych 101 holds the whole damn mess together. ugh. n/t

[Skittles]

20. trouble is most of your friends STILL VOTED FOR THAT BASTARD

after all the mess he has caused the last four years (TEN IF YOU LIVED IN TEXAS) - they STILL voted for him. THEY CAN F*** THEMSELVES.

[ComerPerro]

21. Did you conservative friends vote for Bush?

because, if so, they have no right to complain about anything that is going on.

[kineneb]

23. when they stop alienating us!

Sheeeesh...I am feeling more and more put out by the neo-cons and their "conservative" dupes. It is time to stop being nice.

To use their language: We have turned the other cheek and got it whacked, too. Now it is time to enter the Temple and cast out those who buy and sell and the tables of the money lenders and sellers of doves.

[tabasco]

25. Anybody that voted for Bush after the last four years ...

is a fucking idiot. I hope some of the idiots realize the error of their ways and decide to be responsible citizens of this Nation, but until they do, AFAIC, they're still fucking idiots.

[Tactical Progressive]

27. I thought that way too, for years

then the real world finally overcame my fantasy of what I thought the real world was supposed to have been. At that point I, like so many others here, decided to stop pretending that it makes any sense to try reasoning with people dedicated to being unreasonable at any cost.

You'll come to that realization too after another, say, eight years of Republican lies and corruption. But we can't wait for you to figure that out, so you'll have to catch up.

Here's some help: Republicans never change, at least at a rate that makes it cost-effective to spend an ounce of energy trying to get them to do so. If they really, really want to change, they can do it without my molly-coddling them and treating them as if they have some valid viewpoints too. They don't. So they are welcome to try to change while I call them fucking evil assholes who don't have an ethical, moral or honest thought in their political heads.

Since they don't give a shit what I or anybody else says anyway, that shouldn't be an obstacle to them overcoming their Republicanism, any more than if I treated them as reasonable people instead of irrational, unrelenting enemies.

[LittleClarkie]

49. What about the Republicans for Kerry

There were a decent number of them. Do we go pffffftt to them too. Or accept that we have a few allies out there in the Moderate Republicans who both campaigned for and voted for Kerry. I used to print out the flyers I'd find on some of their sites and take them to Kerry HQ. There were enough of them for us to have bumperstickers out for them at HQ.

Not all Repubs are down with the Bush agenda. So are quite upset. Some aren't sure their votes counted either.

[Pallas180]

28. Why would somebody who

has posted here only 149 times tell us to stop pciking on
"conservatives"....huh?

duh.

[w4rma]

30. Neo-conservatives and the Republican leadership are the problem

Not really conservatives/paleocons.

[Tactical Progressive]

33. Don't kid yourself

with that bad-neo good-paleo wistfulness.

It is Republicans, not 'neo-cons' who have not only voted for, but promoted viciously, every single country-wrecking policy that BushCo puts out, from tax cuts for the wealthy to trillion-dollar wars built on lies to trying to dismantle Social Security.

Many people want to return to the nostalgia of the good Republican father figure. Those people are nowhere near Republican politics any more. Even that rumpled, kindly grandfather-looking Denny Hastert is a nasty bag of shit.

Wake up!

[w4rma]

73. My reply to in post #72 applies to your post, also. (nt)

[fujiyama]

29. Let them stop alienating themselves

They have a choice and that choice is pretty simple - Leave the fascist party.

[RealDems]

31. I'm tired of worrying about alienating them

I'm not here to build bridges. I'm here to raise a little hell. And I wish every Democrat felt the same way. If Republicans are unhappy with their leadership, they have a choice. It is not up to me to reach out to them. I wasn't always such a combative Democrat -- but years of getting screwed by the Republicans will do that to a person...

http://www.realdems.org

[LeftCoast]

35. awwww

Repubs >>>ONLY<<< control the Presidency, Congress and the Judiciary. Wouldn't want to hurt their feelings here on the DEMOCRATIC undergound.

Oh please, Mr. Republican don't hurt me. I won't insult you anymore. :eyes:

[LittleClarkie]

42. We're not talking about the ones who are into the Bush agenda

we mean the ones who are as unhappy as we are about what's going on in their party.

Is it asking too much to distinguish between the two. There is many a Moderate Republican, not to mention Fiscal Conservatives who are fairly up in arms over the Bush Co. We have common ground.

The Bush Co Repubs, on the other hand, can kiss my grits. Those are not the feelings that Drummer is talking about.

It about realizing that just as not all Blacks like watermelon, and not all Jewish folk like money, not all Republicans like Dubya.

[autorank]

38. Paleo Conservative Craig Paul Roberts' Kicks Bush Ass...Read it!

Paul Craig Roberts Syndicated Columns

OK, this guy is a paleo conservative with incredible positioning in the conservative hierarchy. I ask you, what DUer would deny these words (or would deny authoring them):
---------------------------
"After listening to his inaugural speech, anyone who thinks President Bush and his handlers are sane needs to visit a psychiatrist. The hubris-filled megalomaniac in the Oval Office has promised the world war without end.

Bush’s crazy talk has even upset rah-rah Republicans. One Republican called Bush’s speech "God-drenched." It has begun to dawn on the formerly Grand Old Party that a bloodless coup has occurred and that Republicans have lost their party to Jacobins, who cloak themselves under the term "neoconservatives."
----------------------------

How about this quotation (I'd love to have written it):
----------------------------
"Americans have been betrayed. Sooner or later Americans will realize that they have been led to defeat in a pointless war by political leaders who they inattentively trusted. They have been misinformed by a sycophantic corporate media too mindful of advertising revenues to risk reporting truths branded unpatriotic by the propagandistic slogan, "you are with us or against us."

What happens when Americans wake up to their betrayal? It is too late to be rescued from catastrophe in Iraq, but perhaps if Americans can understand how such a grand mistake was made they can avoid repeating it."
-----------------------------

Check out the articles on this site. It looks like DU on Sunday after we've gotten all worked up by Pumpkin Head and the rest of the news speak crew.

There is open, vicious opposition to Bush in the paleo conservative community. If Greens and Libertarians can link up for a common cause in Ohio, why can't we read the writing on the net from this conservative heavy hitter and see that lots of people think * is a clown.

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/all_columns.htm

(Check the titles out to get a flavor. All hostile to * and his policies, ALL of them.)

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS COLUMNS --

02/07/05 - More Bad News On The Jobs Front

01/31/05 - Abandoning Liberty, Gaining Insecurity

01/25/05 - Does Bush Mean It?

01/24/05 - War Without End—Bush Proclaims Jacobin Crusade

01/19/05 - Condi Rice Won’t Stop The Looming War In Iran

01/17/05 - How Americans Were Seduced by War

01/11/05 - Dear Ken: About That Cakewalk…

12/29/04 - Unbecoming Conduct

12/18/04 - At Christmas, Remember The Falsely-Imprisoned

12/15/04 - Christmas: The Greatest Gift For All

12/13/04 - U.S. Invasion Of Iran Draws Closer

12/07/04 - Iraq War’s Grave Toll

12/05/04 - Is The Bush Administration Certifiable?

11/29/04 - Bush Administration Facing Failure On Every Front

11/26/04 - What Became of Conservatives?

11/21/04 - Won’t Get Fooled Again?

11/18/04 - Neoconservatives Complete Capture Of Bush, Plan More “Virtuous Violence”

11/16/04 - Chinese Exchange Rate Peg Threatens World Economy

11/05/04 - An Election That Will Live In Infamy

11/05/04 - Job Numbers Mask ContinuingDe industrializationn

11/04/04 - A Mandate For “Moral Values”—But Nothing Else

11/01/04 - A Vote On The War—And Liberty

10/20/04 - From First World to Third World

10/15/04 - Three Books On The Brownshirting Of America

10/14/04 - The Socialists Have Bought In

10/10/04 - Economics: Science or Religion?

10/10/04 - To Escape From Blunder First Acknowledge Reality

10/05/04 - The (Home Front) Wars We Can’t Afford To Lose

09/28/04 - Dollar Diplomacy, Outsourcing, And The Iraq War

09/21/04 - CBS’ Forgeries—And George Bush’s

09/10/04 - John Kerry, Do Your Duty

09/07/04 - The Podhoretz Plan: A Shabby and Sinister Case for War

09/05/04 - Thinking About Jobs On Labor Day

08/24/04 - A Letter To Readers

08/23/04 - How The Right Went Wrong— Pat Buchanan’s New Blockbuster

08/22/04 - For War And The Draft, Vote Republican

08/22/04 - “One Thing Is Certain: Kerry Was There On That Boat In Viet Nam. Where Was George W. Bush?”

08/18/04 - The Sins of Clinton vs. Bush

08/16/04 - The Star Chamber is Back

08/12/04 - Foibles and Their Consequences

08/08/04 - All Quiet on the Jobs Front

08/04/04 - A Colossus With Weak Knees

07/28/04 - “Global Labor Arbitrage” Dismantling America

07/22/04 - Do The Democrats Want To Lose This Election?

07/22/04 - Today, The Present Danger Is Neoconservatism

07/19/04 - Bush Can’t Control U.S. Borders But Wants To Overthrow Iran Anyway

07/16/04 - Martha Stewart And George Bush: Punishing The Innocent, Excusing the Guilty

07/14/04 - An “Error” Made Tony Blair Do It

07/12/04 - Did “The Process” Make Bush Do It?

07/06/04 - Us Employment Growth Not Part Of Global Economy

06/28/04 - Role Reversal—Bush Boosts Government Power, Democrats Resist

06/22/04 - Bush Administration Attacks Attorney-Client Privilege—And “Rights Of Englishmen”

06/15/04 - Assessing the Assessments

06/14/04 - The Jobs That Aren’t

06/08/04 - Those Jobs Numbers: More Bad News For College Graduates

[mazzarro]

44. Talk is cheap!

They have to really do something to dismantle this juggernaut they helped create. Until they do, I do not give a f**king damn for their emotions regarding being called 'RETHUGS' by me AFAIC.

[LittleClarkie]

47. Dude's a Libertarian, looks like

He didn't help create squat. No more than the Greens or any other third party really.

I still marvel that the two got together in OH. Go GLIBS!

[autorank]

74. I agree that they have a lot to do. But these columns are quite scathing.

I'll take any criticism of * from any quarter at this point.

[LittleClarkie]

45. Whoa. Disgruntled Libertarian advocating Kerry vote

though he was none too happy about it.

Dig this just before the election:

"Considering the extraordinary ignorance and blind emotion at large in the US electorate, the election could easily turn on the libertarian vote. Principled men and women who are too pure to vote for either unworthy candidate can, by failing to hold Bush accountable, bring the experiment with liberty to an end.

The stakes are far too high for ideological self-indulgence"

Sounds like the same arguement against voting Nader.

He didn't think either Bush or Kerry were worthy, and indeed thought that both were too into the war, but at least Kerry didn't have the neocon agenda pushing him along.

Very interesting. If I look around and he's left off the anti-semitism I sometimes get from folk who appear to agree with us but who turn out to be batshit crazy, then I'd say we have another unhappy conservative against Bush.

One point in his favor, he endorsed a vote for Kerry. Not enthusiastically, but nonetheless...

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/041101_vote.htm

[suigeneris]

55. Funny line - batshit crazy

"Very interesting. If I look around and he's left off the anti-semitism I sometimes get from folk who appear to agree with us but who turn out to be batshit crazy, then I'd say we have another unhappy conservative against Bush."

Agreed. Libertarians don't like Bush or war but they only make common cause with liberals over the Bill of Rights. On every other issue they are so doctrinaire and Social Darwinist that I can rarely stand to talk with them.

She never did it for me but didn't most people get over Ayn Rand by the time they get out of college?

[suigeneris]

56. Oh, apropos the topic, yeah,

I guess I should lighten up on calling all Republicans thieves and murderers. There are probably two or three exceptions.

[rman]

52. so unlike the subject suggests, you're NOT talking about ALL conservatives

And what's with BLUE conservatives? Why aren't they dems?
What's next, Red progressives?

[CWebster]

57. Then, they can call them what they are too

I am sick of this tiptoeing around. It smacks of that "no criticism" of the president, which served to neuter opposition to the Bush junta. I say dispense with civility against those who would threaten to destroy all that is decent and good in this country and call them out for what they really are.

[Q]

58. Ah...the codewords abound...

...'reaching out to them' usually means finding THEIR ground and advancing THEIR agenda. You're talking about people who...for the most part...voted FOR that agenda. If they have buyer's remorse...they should come to us and apologize for believing and following fascists.

We've tried working with them for DECADES. They thought they were right and wanted power by any means necessary. They got their power and it came with a despot. If they were serious about admitting their mistake...they would join us and help remove him from office.

[EST]

86. Damn well said. Succinct and to the point.

[sellitman]

60. If they want respect they can register or vote Democratic

Otherwise they are deserve nothing but scorn.

[July]

63. Or what?

I don't care how many of them speak out. Many of them also voted for Bush.

If they are concerned about the Bush administration, THEY should be reaching out to US. I don't see any "real conservatives" speaking out against demonization of Democrats and liberals. I don't see them asking the mainstream media to act like journalists instead of shills. I don't see them discrediting the smear boaters, Coulter, or Limbaugh.

"Republican" is a dirty word, as far as I'm concerned, and I don't care about their little feelings. Don't expect me to change my views when I have to put up with experiences like having a cousin I've had a good relationship with all my life sneak up behind me at a family party and whisper in my ear, "Kerry is a traitor." My cousin is someone I'm fond of, and he thinks it's A-OK to act like a jerk to me because of my political views. That, in a nutshell, is what Republicans of today are -- first-class bullying jerks. They're not interested in conversation, or in understanding our point of view, they're just having fun riling people up and mocking us. I have no respect for anyone who aligns himself with the Republican Party, which is hurting our country. They're thugs, and I'm going to call them that.

[Bridget Burke]

64. Actually, I don't use the names.

"Rethug" sounds a bit like "veggie"--a cutesie, unnecessary term. However, many here do. This is a Democratic board & people need to blow off steam--because they may ration use of those words in the real world.

If talking to a possible Republican, in a suitable situation (not at work, that is), I generally lead with a question. It often helps to step up the Texas accent a bit. Some people are educable & I'm willing to try.

Should I be worried that a wavering Bush supporter will be offended by what he reads here? So offended by the occasioanal rude word that he'll ignore the vast amounts of useful information?

No.

[leesa]

66. Yeah right. And then they vote for Bush. Sorry. they are mindless

goose-steppers who have set us on the path to destruction. Expect us to be nice to them?

[LittleClarkie]

82. Mindless? You mean like stereotyping people?

We're not talking about the fascist neocon bastards. We're saying that there are Republicans who are NOT down with the Bush agenda. Republicans who voted for Kerry in the last election. Just as not all DEMOCRATS are the same, neither are all REPUBLICANS the same. There were several Republicans on the next campaigning for Kerry. It was very heartening.

[sendero]

67. No....

... here at DU I will say whatever I want. Everything I say is more or less true - it might not describe every single Republican but it does describe their mindset.

Rush Limbaugh spent 10+ years SUCCESSFULLY making "liberal" a dirty word. I'm not going to be satisfied until we do the same thing to "conservative". I'm not interested in "winning hearts and minds". It won't work that way. What is going to work is the country is going to hell in a handbasket (you know, the way they always said it was under Clinton, but never did) and at some point in the future even the stupidest drooling Repuke will have to admit to themselves they made a mistake.

Sound vindictive? You better believe it is.

[GOPBasher]

68. You're right, though I'm guilty of this, too.

The people I call "rethugs" or whatever ARE the neocons and the theocrats. They are not the normal, old-style conservatives that I respect. Of course, someone seeing that on the internet would have no idea what I'm talking about, so they would think I hate ALL Republicans. So, you're right. I should stop, or I should make it clear that I'm not talking about all Republicans.

[MisterLiberal]

69. This is not the Republican Underground

This is the Democratic Underground.

We should be able to 'let our hair down' when we're here, so when I talk about Repukes, that's what I will use.

Alienating THEM? They are the aliens.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

70. Any Repub. who can't stand the heat, should leave the DU kitchen...

As a moderate Republican I feel that the current GOP power has created such a perverse, twisted caricature of what was once the Republican party, it deserves to be bashed.

That being said, as an individual, I try to post respectfully on DU knowing that I am forever a 'guest in your home' and have had very little personal bashing. I pledge to work with the Democrats to convince more moderate/liberal Republicans to support good Democratic candidates...It does work in Pennsylvania East and West...the center of my state is rural with the sparse population being of the Kool-aid drinking mentality (lost causes).

:toast:

[No Exit]

71. Listen, pal, THEY alienated ME--NOT the reverse!

Try going to any site where repukelicans hang out and pointing out the huge corruption of the Bush administration. They will call you every nasty name in the book!

I used to vote for repukelicans for president, for crying out loud! But Bush has forever alienated me from that filthy party. What's left in that party, at least, what's left in POWER in that party, is the scum of the earth. Sorry for these harsh words, but that's just the fact.

And they deserve everything they get.

[adigal]

75. If you voted for and support Bush

I don't care what you call yourself. If you voted for Bush, you are fiscally irresponsible and you have blood on your hands over Iraq - and wow!!! It's doing wonderfully well over there after the elections, no? Delay in counting the vote, lots of violence. Freedom is marching!!!

And where were these famous "moderate" republicans on the Rice vote and the Gonzales vote??? I don't believe in them - they are like the tooth fairy.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

76. Agreed...besides fiscally irrespons., how about socially regressive. nt

[semillama]

77. Old saying:

If you throw a stone into a pack of dogs, the one what squealed is the one you hit.

[livinginphotographs]

78. Why DU'ers respond to obvious flame-bait, I have no idea.

Seen the OP lately? I thought not....

This is just throwing a rock in a hornet's nest; stand back and watch the hornets buzz around angrily while you sit there and laugh at them.

Sometimes the OP is just too obvious.

[Deep13]

79. That was a good idea when we were still one country.

Right now the Rs are the enemy and have cast themselves in that position. If your R friends are disgusted with their party, we have plenty of room for them in the D party just left of center.:hi:

Really, it is that middle ground we are after, not those who still identify themselves as Rs.

Cooperating with the Rs nationally has placed us in the position we are in now. For people to wake up, they need to understand what these Rs are all about. That means posing in start contrats to the R policies rather than watering down the R policies in committee and then signing onto them.:kick:

[earth mom]

80. Sorry, but they attack us FIRST-every chance they get!

If the republicans that don't consider themselves neo cons cared a lick about honesty and integrity they would stand up and speak out against the neo cons. They're the ones who've allowed the neo cons to take over and now their feelings are getting hurt because we're standing up to them! HA HA! That's a laugh! IMO, we aren't fighting hard enough, strong enough or loud enough! Too many on the left aren't comfortable with the tactics the neo cons use. But you have to fight fire with fire-otherwise you lose. We can't allow ourselves to wimp out or we are surely doomed.

[drummer55]

81. an eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind

plus add in a few more qoutes from every religion in the world that basically says forgive others, do to them what you want done to you and a few other good tidbits.

thanks for all the responses and have a great and wonderous day!

[EST]

99. You must forgive

only when the offender gives up the horrible crap he's addicted to. The offender must ask and mean it.

Forgiving a serial murderer and child molester only gives permission to continue. People must be held accountable for their actions.

[saracat]

83. With what they proved during this election

and how they feel about the average person, every single Repuke can drop dead as far as I am concerned.ALL of them. I used to make exceptions. They voted to a person , all of them to okay torture. I will NEVER , EVER, support any reason to reach out to them. EVERY Senator who did , Daschle, Cleland , and Carnahan was betrayed by them. There is NO bipartisanship and they have no honor. I have dumped anyone I know is a republican. I feel that strongly about it. Done. Look at the evidence. There are NO MODERATE republicans. Look at Collins, Snowe, and Chaffee. They have gone into lockstep. Look at the budget. Forget about it. It is time to grow up and face the music. As was once said, "this is war to the Republicans.The Democrats view this as political discourse".Well. It is time for a reality check. This isn't politics as usual. They will NEVER vote with us, so why bother? Work on creating more Democrats. The country is in a shambles and the ground should be fertile for it.

[EST]

84. One of the rules that Jesus laid down was

That in order to qualify, you had to admit your past sins, ask forgiveness, make amends, and then ABANDON THE CRAP! Go and sin no more!Don't try to slide under the standard just because the vile gang you hang out with has decided to do even worse than your sense of bad taste allows for. Avoid even the very semblance of evil.

How much plainer can that be? The answer is a resounding NO. Change your colors, take down your flag and declare your wholehearted intentions to support the new order. No backsliding.

[Guaranteed]

92. DAMNED good post.

Spoken like a freaking general. :)

[EST]

96. Thanks.

I mean every word of it.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

85. Thanks for starting the thread...

I have been meaning to post an apology to the Republicans on the forum and out in the country for repeatedly using "Rethugs" in my postings.

I do mean to include under that umbrella only the thugs that are misusing power so shortsightedly that they are making a mockery of their own much-touted patriotism and religiosity. I therefore think they deserve the name-calling, even if it does sound childish. But I cannot bring myself to refer to them with any civilized title, rethug is really the most polite term I can use.

So to all Republicans on the forum: my apologies.

To all Democrats on the forum: my apologies to you too for coarsening the dialogue and cheapening my own points in so doing. As I said, I am enraged, frustrated and helpless about the course my adoptive country is taking under the thug leadership...

Having summarily absolved the rank-and-file Republicans, I do have one question they need to answer though: How on earth??? (Not that I think any thug-voting people are around on this forum :-()

[otohara]

91. Well Said

OMG, I hadn't thought how we might be hurting our friends on the right. Now I feel bad.

[LittleClarkie]

93. It seems to me you are being militantly obtuse

The OP asked that we not lump ALL Republicans in one group. There is a certain faction that deserves all the derision we can muster. There are also other Republicans now who feel betrayed as the party they call home increasingly ignores their more moderate concerns. Some have given up and gone Independant, Dem, or perhaps Libertarian in a few cases.

We're not supposed to be the bigotry party. We're supposed to be able to see the individual and not stereotype all people into one group and then make assumptions about them. At least that's one of the things I THOUGHT we were about.

I mean, there were "Republicans for Kerry" stickers printed up for a reason, you know?

Some of those Republicans worked just as hard as many Democrats to oust Bush. All we're saying is not to paint an entire group with one broad brush.

Otherwise, it seems to me we're using the language of hatred prejudice. And we're supposed to be better than that. No need to destroy your own personal village to save it. Don't become the enemy.

[EST]

97. Bigotry, BIGOTRY?!!?

This ain't bigotry. Hating liars, thieves, bigots, murderers, hypocrites, misbegotten slaves of satan? This is not bigotry; this is war!

[LittleClarkie]

102. Just make sure you know who your enemy is before you start shooting

Kind of like the East Indian guy who got killed right after 9/11, just because you think someone looks like the enemy, he might not be.

Are you not listening?

REPUBLICANS FOR KERRY. MODERATE REPUBLICANS. also FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE, ANTI-WAR, KERRY VOTING REPUBICANS.

How would you like it if you were lumped in with the lunatic fringe of the Dem Party.

[EST]

104. I would have you know I'm a member of and have posted on

the Republicans for Kerry forum. I know EXACTLY who the enemy is.
The neocon thugs have now taken over the rethug party. The rnc is neothug echo chamber. If you can still call yourself a republican after all this, then you ARE the enemy! I am not registered as a democrat, but, right now, I would be enormously pleased to be lumped in with the lunatic fringe of the democrat party.
They can see the truth far, far better than some whining apologist for the fascist pigs who have destroyed the noble experiment.

This is not the time for some half-hearted, bipartisan (how sick of that term I am) sucky response the horrinle crimes that are being commited in the name of jesus and ineffective silent majority of what used to be the republican party.

The very name is a curse I refuse to assume that I should go easy on the mafia simply because there are some good guys there too. Throw off your shackles and stand up for what's right and moral. It should be a mortal insult to be called a republican, right now.

When this putrid bit of history is finally ended, my fondest hope is that the rethug label will at least be in the same league as NAZI and any normal sane person will run away screaming from any such appellation.

[otohara]

88. Oh Puhleaze - They Own Every Wing of Govt & Media

They should be extactic.

Sorry your friends aren't happy campers because liberals are using the internet to get expose them for the hypocrites and liars their leaders and the media is.

[Dark]

94. Did they actually VOTE against the neocons, though? n/t

[LittleClarkie]

98. Those are the folks we're talking about yes.

Kerry-voting Republicans who are trying to get their party back from the neocons. They exist. They are our allies.

[Technowitch]

101. Sorry, but they're the party of legalized, justified TORTURE

As far as I am concerned, anyone who remains a registered Republican after these revelations is complicit in crimes against humanity.

I am done trying to make nice with them.

[LittleClarkie]

103. Here's a link to show what I'm trying to say

http://atlblogs.com/moderaterepublican/

A moderate gay Republican with a blog and his eyes open.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/republicansforkerry04/?yguid=170973148
The yahoo group "Republicans for Kerry" is still kicking. They were supposed to morph into "Republicans for Integrity" but I see the original group is still more active with 700 members.

Here is an essay from their group that may help folks to understand what this movement with the Republican Party is all about and why they were Republicans for Kerry in the first place.

Moderate Republicanism: A Primer

Moderate Republicanism, Progressive being a component, is an esoteric ideology to many -- a philosophy difficult to define. Extremists and militant social Conservatives have succeeded in wrongly labeling Moderates as a recent political mutation. History documents otherwise. Between 1890 and 1950 the Moderate wing dominated the party. Moderate Republicanism traces its roots to men like U.S. Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts in the 1850s. The impact of Moderate Republicanism, however, didn't become apparent until shortly after the Civil War. The GOP emerged as the party of free enterprise. And by the late 1890's two distinct groups evolved -- Moderate and Conservative. The Moderate wing called on government to curtail unbridled capitalism that exploited men, women, and children in the textile mills. It also wanted environmental protections and the ending of corrupt patronage in government.These early reformers recognized that some societal problems could only be addressed by the national government. Moderate Republicans often see limited government as a useful tool that when operated carefully, like a piece of heavy machinery, can improve the quality of life for all Americans. Moderates and Conservatives fall under a broad philosophical framework of Republicanism. Although Conservatives are a legitimate branch of the GOP who have made many positive contributions, this wing of the party has allowed itself to be dominated by extremists and social moralists that marginalize Lincolnian principles. Moderate Republican orthodoxy includes:

A passion for civil liberties; A disdain for conformity and suspicion of authority; A belief that the Constitution is a living, breathing document with timeless values that must be made relevant in a modern age; A commitment to protect the environment and not engage in mindless exploitation of the nation's natural beauty. A spirited case must be made for reusable energy sources like solar power. Modern technology provides many options before the earth is harshly, brutally, and needlessly pillaged. A strong belief that diversity -- gender, racial, social, sexual, ethnic, and religious -- should be celebrated because it gives the United States moral strength. Diversity -- in the long-term, encourages respect, understanding, and a greater sense of community; A commitment to fiscal prudence and limited government; A recognition that government does have a basic social responsibility to help those in need; A belief that the nation does have international responsibilities; A belief that God and religion have a very important place in America -- at the dinner table and in churches, temples, and mosques. But it should never be used by politicians to advance a narrow moral agenda; A belief that the national government should be used in a limited manner to advance the common good; A commitment never to put party above country; and A responsibility to publicly criticize those who call themselves Republican when the situation merits. Moderate/Progressives have a duty to vote against the party line when it doesn't serve the greater good. Doing so doesn't make them less Republican; it demonstrates that they have the honor, political courage, and intellectual honesty to put nation above party.

Gov. Thomas E. Dewey, described as a "pay-as-you-go liberal" by one historian, summarized Moderate Republicanism:

"It is our solemn responsibility to show that government can have both a head and a heart; that it can be both progressive and solvent; and that it can serve the people without becoming their master."

While the name "Moderate" is misleading, there is nothing centrist or in the middle about this brand of Republicanism. Rather than being viewed as the "in between" choice, it should be recognized as one of three ideologies. The principles of Moderates are clear. They do not pick and choose among the opposing Liberal or Conservative ideologies to form their own.Moderate lawmakers are consensus builders. But then again the art of legislating is that of compromise, negotiation, and a recognition that other views have merit. This does not mean Moderates compromise core values, but rather they understand the complexities of passing intelligent legislation that benefits the greater good. They also engage in spirited debate among themselves which sometimes limits their strength as a coherent, national force. This passion for public policy discussion permits detractors to label them indecisive. Moderates sometimes forget that ideas alone don't win political battles; there must also be a coordinated strategy to win elections. And they must be willing to fight Conservatives on ideological grounds.And sometimes Moderates, not knowing their own political or ideological history, have referred to themselves as "in the middle." They have erroneously viewed themselves as a description rather than a legitimate ideology with a rich heritage.

In the Twentieth Century Moderate and Progressives like U.S. Senator Jacob Javits were aggressive in their support of Civil Rights legislation. Conservative U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He would have supported the Act had an Affirmative Action provision been removed. Moderates insisted that only the federal government had the authority and political power to end the evils of segregation. Arts funding, programs for indigent children, and assistance to the elderly were also supported by Moderate Republicans.Such luminaries as Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower along with Republican presidential nominees Charles Evans Hughes, Wendell Wilkie, and Thomas E. Dewey have championed Moderate principles. Other legendary Moderates include Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, Gov. Earl Warren of California, Gov. William Scranton of Pennsylvania, Gov. George Norris of Nebraska, U.S. Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, U.S. Senator Bronson Cutting of New Mexico, and U.S. Attorney General Elliot Richardson. Moderates were the first internationalists. The nation, they contended, had a critical role to play in advancing democracy in the world. Conservatives by contrast were isolationist. In the 1940s and 1950s, U.S. Senator Robert Taft of Ohio, leader of the Conservative wing, was an isolationist. Conservatives now call for a strong national defense. In domestic policy, Moderate Republicanism has become part of main stream Conservatism. Moderates were successful in underscoring government's basic usefulness and its social responsibility to help people. No Conservative, for example, supports the elimination of Medicare. While everyone agrees that it needs to be overhauled -- no one thinks it should be abolished. Even on tax policy, Moderates were the recognized leaders for fiscally prudent government. In 1944 and 1948, Thomas E. Dewey and later Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956, tirelessly criticized the waste of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal programs. They set the Moderate standard that while government must be compassionate, it must also be fiscally responsible. In short, Conservatives do not have, as history demonstrates, a monopoly on fiscal common sense.Today, the Republican Party has become dogmatic with a tendency to reject intellectual dissent. Moderates have no one to blame but themselves for feeling less welcome in a party that they've contributed to for over a century. Moderates must be militant if they are to re-emerge as a voice of reason within the GOP. But to do so they must be aggressive in re-asserting their place, armed with an honorable history and the intellectual tenacity to offer thoughtful, pragmatic solutions to the pressing social and economic issues of the day.And to do so Moderates and Progressives must have a platform in keeping with their historic crusade for social justice, ntellectual honesty, and nation above party. Here are possible planks reflective of such values:

A sincere attempt to help, not ignore, the homeless, the working poor, and the hard-pressed working class; A strategy to halt urban sprawl while encouraging intelligent commercial development; A renewed commitment to civil liberties that includes an expansion of privacy protections regarding the Internet, health care, financial information, and other highly personal data; A real effort to limit the clout of powerful, highly financed special interests that have more influence over legislation and greater access to elected officials than the average citizens; A recognition that credit card companies engage in legalized loan sharking with interest rates that may exceed twenty percent. Such usurious rates have created a new class of Americans -- indentured-servants to the banking lords. Interest rates on credit cards must be regulated and brought down; A commitment to ongoing tax cuts that do not harm the most vulnerable in society; A commitment to affordable, quality health care that does not put profit above people; Support for ending the death penalty on the state and federal level. Republicans are some of the most vocal advocates of the death penalty. Oddly, a party that prides itself on limiting the authority of government is willing to give it the ultimate power -- the decision over life and death -- despite knowing that mistakes will be made. There are few things more un-Republican than support for the death penalty. If Republicans showed the same suspicion toward trusting government regarding the death penalty as they do on tax policy then all executions in this country would immediately stop; An aggressive effort to pay down the national debt which now exceeds $5.6 trillion; A renewed effort to end discrimination based on race, gender, religion, and sexual orientation; and A commitment to education that teaches and empowers the nation's youth to think, show compassion, be self-reliant, and contribute to the greater good.

Moderate Republicans have much work ahead. To achieve such noble Lincolnian goals, they must understand their rich history, be secure in a unique philosophical heritage, and most importantly, be unafraid to fight Conservative ideologues. They must work harder at presenting Moderate Republicanism as a legitimate, long-established Lincolnian ideology.

[EST]

105. And, to have any credibility at all,

They need to change their name.

There is no chance in hell they could ever take back their party from the fascists in charge. This entire definition sounds like the purist democrat or green party to me.

[LittleClarkie]

107. The party has changed several times already, it can change again

The party of Lincoln is nothing like the party of Goldwater is nothing like the party of now.

It's up to them if they plan to fight, or to form a different group with a different name. To break off is to marginalize oneself, and leave the faction you're battling against with the power. That doesn't sound too sweet either.

Rather like a "Dean or Green" person. Well, why wait for Dean. Why not just go Green. Because the Greens don't have that mucb power. So some try to stick with the Dem Party, hoping they can influence the agenda.

Right now, I would reckon some Republicans are just hoping the neocons are in the process of self-destructing, and as they fall out of power, the more moderate Repubs will hopefully be able to fill the vacuum. Or not. Some have already become independants or even Dems.

[Q]

106. But a vast majority of Republicans still support King George...

...and you're referring to a tiny minority of Republicans.

What's the purpose of this thread?

[LittleClarkie]

110. How tiny are they? I think they are more than you realize.

The purpose is just simply to point out that like any other group, the Republicans are not all down with King George and his agenda. Just to be aware that they are not all Rethugs, and that inclusive languages that lumps them all together as fascists as if they are in lock step with each other, is inaccurate.

We are not in lockstep. Would you want to be lumped with the DLC if you're not? Wouldn't you protest if someone called you a DLCer? Are you leaving the party or are you fighting to bring the party closer to what you think it should be? These are the same kinds of issues that Moderate Republicans face.

The point of this thread is illustrated by those who are posting "THEY'RE ALL FASCISTS! THEY SHOULD ALL GO TO JAIL!!! I HOPE THEY GET WIPED OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH!!!"

Great. I get that kind of language from the Republican lunatic fringe all the time. They want to erase us. They think we're all socialist unamerican freaks. If that is wrong and evil, then it's just as wrong and evil coming from our own side.

There are times when I wish the two lunatic fringes would just duke it out, and we moderates from both parties would just get the popcorn, set up a banner calling ourselves the Moderate Party, and watch the fun from lawn chairs in our little corner of the world.

[Q]

111. Or you could just join the Republican party...

...and everyone would be happy. Perhaps you haven't noticed...but there ARE no moderates left in the Republican party. They have either been pushed out or left in disgust. They have absolutely NO VOICE in their party.

The lunatic fringe? That sounds like a DLC smear against the left they love to hate. The so-called moderates would love it if the activists in the party would just 'shut up' about illegal wars and the Democratic leadership enabling Bush and his horrible anti-democratic policies.

The Republican fringe is in complete control of this country. The Democratic Moderates are rubber stamping his agenda and in fact are helping him neutralize his only opposition...which the DLC Moderates call the 'lunatic fringe'.

Please stop insulting those to the left of you by calling them lunatics for being against the most corrupt government in our history and those Dems who cooperate with them.

I'm more than happy to discuss the issues in a civil manner with any Republican willing to admit the truth about Bush despotism.

[greenohio]

108. We should stop alienating Dems first. /nt

[98geoduck]

112. Get RID of ALL Republicans in the North!!! Let am all join Gouliani in SC!

That includes Liebermann et al.

[ulysses]

113. "reach out to them"

Should we sing "Kum Ba Yah" as well?

Hey, I don't mind Republicans who oppose Bush and the neocon agenda, but I don't feel any great need to court them either. If they don't like what's going on, they can come talk to us.

[LittleClarkie]

115. Sure, as long as you don't shout "Repuke fascist" in their face

Courting, and being hostile if someone happens to still identify oneself as a Republican, albeit a Moderate one, are two different things. Neutrality might be good.

Not meaning you per se. It sounds like you're open to chatting with folks if they're open to you.

I wore a "Christians for Kerry" button around for a while during the campaign. Someone at Starbucks noticed it and struck up a conversation. He was a Republican who confided that he didn't know how the rest of his family was going to react when he told them he was voting for Kerry. He hoped there wouldn't be too much of a ruckus, but he just couldn't support what Bush was doing. He appreciated that there were indeed Christians out there for Kerry.

[ulysses]

118. I can talk with damned near anyone.

I used to have several very good friends who were either Republican or Libertarian - we had great political conversations/arguments.

I'm not interested in compromising even MORE of my own values in order for the party to attract them as voters, though.

[Quixote1818]

117. Fuck the Republican Bastards!

This is DU and a place to vent and say what we feel. Do you think they are being nice on their site? Yeah Right!

[LittleClarkie]

121. Shouldn't I get to know them first?

And, more importantly, I'll be wantin' dinner at the very least.

[John_H]

122. Right after they stop fucking their first-cousins. n/t

[tinfoilinfor2005]

123. Aw, poor babies...

I guess I should post an official apology for being angry at people who voted for a man who destroyed my precious country and is trying very hard to destroy every other country, as well as the entire planet. And who voted for him twice. Nah...as someone once said, "fool me once, shame on fooling me for that time until you fool me again." Or something like that.