From one of their own horse's mouth!!

[Boomyal]

As expected, the Democrats have picked a reason for their loss (morals) and begun to fabricate their own definition of morals to show that they have them too. The following is a paragraph out of an article from the Washington Post that exposes the reason that most of us assumed. A reason that they have every reason to ignore.<br /><br />"Many Democrats have seized on exit polls showing that 22 percent of voters said "moral values" were most important to them as evidence of what brought Bush the victory. But Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin, in an analysis released yesterday, said he disagrees, noting that Bush had increased his support among nonregular churchgoers more than among churchgoers. "To focus on values misses the crucial point that this was the post-9/11 election, and the war on terror set the stage and the context for the choices many voters were making," Garin wrote."

 

[snapperbait]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Whatever.

 

[waterone1@aol.com]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

"Whatever"...sounds like something a seventeen year old would say, when caught with something....so very intelligent.

 

[JB]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

I don't think the Dems "lost". John Kerry got more votes than any "second place" candidate in our history.<br /><br />I think the Republicans won because we understand GW's plan. It is comprehensive and consistent. We believe that he will do what he said he will do and what he will do is crystal clear. That includes domestic concerns as well as the war.<br /><br />Too much of what Kerry offered was generalized and vague, and too much of it was anti-this and anti-that. I think it was a mistake to portray the "middle class" as downtrodden victims.<br /><br />That's just my opinion, of course, and I have been wrong before.

 

[dogsdad]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

I think the democrats lost this election the day they made Pelosi the minority leader in the House. They will continue to lose elections until they dump the ultra-left and make them start their own party. They are trying to include too wide a spectrum of thought in their coalitions, pure and simple.<br /><br />Until 1960s or so, I may well have chosen to be a democrat myself but I wasn't voting yet. I would have had to switch sides after Humphrey's defeat in 68, though...most certainly by the time that nutcase McGovern got the nomination in 72.<br /><br />The rise of marxism in America and the democrats' espousal of it are what have turned the tide towards the Republican side. The left has pushed too far and most Americans reject their ideas.<br /><br />Whether the democrats or Republicans are in power boils down to a simple economic principle, very much like supply and demand. If the democrats are only getting 49% of the vote, they need to move to the right. Their problem is they cling to the ultra-left and refuse to send them packing. If they would kick out that 10%, or whatever it is, they would likely gain more from the center than they would be giving up. But, it's the nature of the ultra-left to sieze power, and they will not let go the reins of the democratic party.<br /><br />So, their only option is to try and change the minds of America, and this is what we've seen going on in the mainstream press for a while. Too bad for them we have the Internet and the free flow of information. Their power monopoly is broken, but I don't see them giving up.<br /><br />Watch.<br /><br /><br />-dd-

 

[rolmops]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Boomyal,the elections are O V E R.<br />It is time for you to shake free and look for more useful things to do.Stop chewing your cud

 

[Boomyal]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Originally posted by rolmops:<br /> Boomyal,the elections are O V E R.<br />It is time for you to shake free and look for more useful things to do.Stop chewing your cud

Rolmops, you may as well admonish the Democratic Party. In case you hadn't noticed, the NEW campaign has already started, with the Dems, spinning away frenetically, trying to minimize the significance of their loss and find a newly colored hood of wool to pull over the eyes of the American public.

 

[SoulWinner]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Don't forget that 11 states had marriage amendments on the ballots, and that brought out Christian voters in droves.

 

[JasonJ]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

One problem the Dems had, especially the hollywood supporters among others, is that they harped on the religious extreme right. They expressed a view point that labelled the religious voters in a poor way, nothing more than brain washed wishful thinkers who think Jesus will make it all better. Hey, I am not religious, but I also do not feel a person is less intelligent or inferior because they choose to believe in God. The only time I ever take issue with religion is when it is used in a hypocritical way. Lets face it, a large majority of this country lives its lives based on the foundation of religion. Probably the biggest mistake I see the religious people make is the assumption that non-religious people do not live moral lives. Morality is not a religiuos thing, they are mutually exclusive. A person can be an athiest and still volunteer at soup kitchens, help the elderly, give to charity, be kind to others, etc. Some religious folk, such as the always infamous Catholic Preists who enjoy boys Micheal Jackson style do not exactly put a good light on religion. In my mind, the divide in this country is not political, its religious. The Bush campain was smart, and I will give them the credit they deserve. Like it or not, most religious people feel that morality and their faith are one and the same, and the Bush campain knew that. The other problem I saw was that the Kerry campain was trying to be too much like the republican campain. He was trying to play the God card and the Terror card like Bush did, but it did not work. The dems would have been better off establishing their own agenda and sticking to it rather than a watered down Bush agenda with a few changes here and there. In summary, If the dems want to get in office, they can't insult the religious people of this country by telling them they are stupid for having faith in an invisible diety and then expect their vote.

 

[woodrat]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

very well put , Jason J.

 

[12Footer]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Amen, Jason!! Very well put indeed!<br /> And it can be seen in the endless debates and aftermath talk-shows, still trying to figure out what happened.<br />Kerry said he was a Catholic. Well, so am I...A baptised Catholic.And I haven't been inside a Catholic church for 27years, and THEN, it was for a wedding.<br />That does not mean I'm not a Christian, or that Kerry is. It's a matter of faith.<br />See, in Kerry's world, abortion should be legal, and consenting adults of the same sex should be given the same benifits as everyone else. I share one of those beliefs. One, I have personal objection to. But I vote for the cnandidate who is opposed to abortion and gay marraige.<br />WHY?<br />The main difference between the democratic ideology and my own, has zip to do with the party I belong to, other than those canidates who follow God's path, other than thier own, seem to populate one party more than the other.Bush got his votes from individuals, many of whom, were like me. If the Democrat Party suddenly decided to pull away from killing babies,and endorsing gay marrage, they would loose over half of thier base! They would also GAIN a huge following, because of this sudden return to getting back on-course with God's path.<br /><br />Even Joe Lieberman, who is a devout Jew, and an honorable man, has to tow the party line with these sub-sects, lest he end-up where he did...Pulling-out of the race for president, because his party split big time over his stand on these issues.<br /><br />Sometimes, I personally wish the law had not been laid-down in God's book, against gay marrage and other issues! What possible harm can two same-sex people, living in love, harm me or anyone else? I'm not homosexual, but hold no aminosity for anyone who is. It's sometimes hard to follow the path I chose. But there is no "grey-arera" or "interpretaion" that changes anythiung. I found out my dog won't be going to heaven when it dies, nor my old friend, "Hoser", who passed-away in 1996.<br />I remember ,I told the little fur ball just before his eyes glazed over,and closed after his last breath, that "it'll be ok,buddy. I'll see you again someday". Well, it pains me that it wont happen. I'm not happy about it, but it's not my call.<br />Bush recieved many votes from those who's call was not thier own.

 

[dick]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Woh... go away for A few days and I come back to agree with 12 foot .....what was in those drinks?<br />Honestly well said JJ and 12. Glad to see this election thing didn't drag out for weeks.I personally hoped for a different outcome but in my case thats a opinion and not a vote.Some people believe church and state can work ,I personally do not.I think there should be a line between them ....A very thick line with a fence and guard dogs with security stationed every ten feet .If a elected official believes or not should have no bearing on how he decides to handle a issue.<br /> To many wars are started over religious issues and governments start wars ,not churches.<br />From the ruthless regime in Afghanistan that helped OBL to the genocidal governments Rwanda,IMO it only leads to trouble.<br />Up here a few years back I really like a candidate running for PM then wham in came the "R" factor and he turned many people off ,including me .So we voted (the country not me personally)a crocked ,lying, scandal riding party in, mind you the election is decided by Ontario east anyway.<br />I don't envy your system nor do I cherish ours but I'd hate to have a leader consult TV Evangelist on foreign policy.<br />I don't want anyone form the leader of my country to the some guy or guys knocking on my door to tell me who ,what ,where or how I should direct my faith or morals.<br />I hope there is more peace then war in the next 4 years but sadly I know I'm going to wrong on this.

 

[woodrat]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Originally posted by Richard,fka ****:<br /> <br /> I'd hate to have a leader consult TV Evangelist on foreign policy.<br />

That's exactly what we have down here and have had for the last four years. A lot of folks are really happy about it, too.

 

[spratt]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Originally posted by woodrat:<br />

Originally posted by Richard,fka ****:<br /> <br /> I'd hate to have a leader consult TV Evangelist on foreign policy.<br />

That's exactly what we have down here and have had for the last four years. A lot of folks are really happy about it, too.

Sorry, WR, but that will take some explanation...I really don't know anyone in Office who "Consulted" a TV Evangelist for Foreign policy...do you? Of course, you could prove wihtout a doubt your response...

 

[12Footer]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

It does not matter. faith in God is back. And if a public official is to be influenced by forces we cannot see,or even explain, I would much rather that influence be a righteous one, instead of an evil one. If you do not understand this, you have three paths to choose from, and that's it.

 

[woodrat]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Originally posted by spratt:<br />

Originally posted by woodrat:<br />

Originally posted by Richard,fka ****:<br /> <br /> I'd hate to have a leader consult TV Evangelist on foreign policy.<br />

That's exactly what we have down here and have had for the last four years. A lot of folks are really happy about it, too.

Sorry, WR, but that will take some explanation...I really don't know anyone in Office who "Consulted" a TV Evangelist for Foreign policy...do you? Of course, you could prove wihtout a doubt your response...

Well, I was listening to a radio interview a few weeks back about some christians who made a christian pro-bush documentary movie, and at least in the interview, THEY claimed that the prez consulted big name evangelists on foreign policy. Don' t remember the name of the film or the name of the evangelists though.<br /><br />I mean, really, we're talking about an administration who wanted to code name the iraq war something "crusade". And then try and convince the muslim world it wasn't a war on THEM, per se.

 

[woodrat]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Originally posted by 12Footer:<br /> It does not matter. faith in God is back. And if a public official is to be influenced by forces we cannot see,or even explain, I would much rather that influence be a righteous one, instead of an evil one. If you do not understand this, you have three paths to choose from, and that's it.

Just because someone claims the mantle of "religion" doesn't necessarily make them "righteous". there have been pelnty of high profile religious figures in the last couple of decades who turned out to be not-so-righteous. Personally, I'm for the separation of church and state. You know, like it's laid out in the Constitution?

 

[LubeDude]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Maybe someone else touched on this, I didnt read in full all the posts, but I saw several Dems layely try and say that they "Need to reinvent there party".<br /><br />Well, Its nice to know that us Republicans can just stay the way we are and vote the way we believe without reinventing ourselves. We are who we are. The Dems are so lost and disilusioned, they dont know what or who they really are.

 

[hayhauler]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Funny, I remember Bill Clinton calling in a few tele-evangelists to "counsel" him after his problems. Never heard a word about it. A few people thought it disingenuous, but none said he shouldn't seek religous counsel.<br /><br />I'm not aware of GW seeking religous counsel in the area of foreign policy, but even if he did, what would be wrong with that? <br /><br />Is my memory seriously flawed? Or didn't Bill Clinton seek Rev. Jesse Jackson's assistance in mediating an issue or two. Never was heard a discouraging word. Shouldn't have been then, and shouldn't be now.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: From one of their own horse's mouth!!

Originally posted by woodrat:<br />

Personally, I'm for the separation of church and state. You know, like it's laid out in the Constitution?

That's what I like about you Liberals. You're very creative. Woodrat, show me, in the Constitution, where it says one word about 'seperation of church and state'! One of the biggest myths to cross the Liberal Lips.<br /><br />No, hayhauler, it's ok. They can just wave around a big Bible when it suits their purpose. Now believing in it and letting the Word influence you, well now, that is a different story.<br /><br />Well said, LubDude!