Whos running against Bush?

I think they're following the Reagan commandment or some such.. thou shalt not criticize a fellow republican or some such. In the long run it's probably better for the 'party' if they don't splinter and implode by challenging him from within. If democrats could show that not even republicans believe their own leader they would surely lose the White House no matter who they eventually elected. Or at least I would imagine some sort of logic similar to this would be working. That and the certainty that anyone running against him that didn't win the nomination would have his career all be executed by the republican party.

With Bush's record on the economy, health care, education, the war, 9/11 and amending the constitution why are there not any Republicans running against him? Are they really like lemmings and just follow the leader? Or are they really seeing the world through rose colored glasses? If someone could fill me in on this I would be totaly greatful.

Hey sweet Greg,

By the discussions I've had with Repugnican friends, colleagues, not to mention occasional painful forays (yea a little S&M streak I've got going) into the talksy bloviating likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Medved et al. I'd say, yes, they are very much like lemmings and living pretty much in a perpetual state of self denial. What can we do for our misguided Bushy buds? Offer them a hug? Be there for them? Tell them that you care very much where they're headed and would love to show them an alternative? I've been trying all these and more. They're right about one thing, though. There is a Culture War, and they're losing (evolution is winning!) My heart goes out to all our [a href=http://www.logcabin.org/logcabin/talking_points.html]Log Cabin[/a] brothers. Seriously tho, It's a true rarity when either party runs alternatives against the incumbant, in this case, they'd be well to make an exception cause he's goin' down...

Kisses,

-R src=http://www.radioparadise.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_heartkiss.gif

EDIT:OK, don't say I don't go the extra mile. My over-the-shoulder critical Republican sympathizer bud just pointed out that I was referring to the traditionalists and the radical right within the party and should make that clear... Still, he's goin' down! Not that' Kerry's the Flaming Incarnation of Christ or anything, but I'll hold my nose and vote for 'im. Or if Cali's an assured Bush-free zone I'll cast my puny Libertarian protest vote as always. So ordered, so done my sweet.Sheesh

>It's a true rarity when

>either party runs alternatives against the incumbant, in this

>case, they'd be well to make an exception cause he's goin'

>down...

Is he definitely goin' down? What about Diebold and their easily-hackable touch-screen voting machines that have no paper trail for recounts? The Republican CEO of Diebold has promised to "deliver" Ohio to Bush.

More info:

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

http://www.blackboxvoting.com/

Take action:

http://www.angelfire.com/biz7/moneygarten/

Yea Rick,

Very nasty business, that... I'm quite the geek in my other life, I've been following along [a href=http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=diebold&op=stories&author=&tid=&section=&sort=1]here[/a], and I've been ranting to the apathetic and unconcerned about e-voting without an audit trail since 2000, I only hope if there is such monkey business, it'll blow up in their face like a misplaced WMD. Just what the ol Shrub needs, another questionable election.

Let's amend the previous to: He's goin' down if the american public has anything to do with it...

-R

If the electronic voting machines are that bad which I believe they are. Anything that does not leave a paper trail or is abel of being audited is not a good thing. Then why are the Democrats and others not all up in arms about this situation? After checking out Chomsky, Moore and a couple others I am becoming more and more dissatisfied with the government. The American people need to pull their heads out of their asses and wake up otherwise this country is going to the shits. Augggghhhhhh !!!!! Why can't I live in ignorant bliss again?

Hugs,

Greg

Greg Seattle Wa [email protected]

http://www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/gregseattle.html http://briefcase.yahoo.com/seaboy4hire

>Then why are

>the Democrats and others not all up in arms about this

>situation?

Well, Rep. Holt (D-NJ) introduced a bill (Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act HR 2239) in the House last May that would require a voter-verifiable paper ballot on every voting system. And in December, Bob Graham (D-FL) introduced a companion bill in the Senate (S 1980) which has the exact same wording.

It's very important that we contact our representatives and make sure they support and co-sponsor this legislation. Click here for more information and to see if your Rep. or Senator is backing this bill: http://www.verifiedvoting.org/fair_elections.asp

Welcome to Green

Heya Greg,

Yea stinks to lose your naivete doesn't it! Welcome to the wonderful world of the [a href=http://www.wie.org/_flash/sd.asp?hp=1]Green[/a] [a href=http://www.wie.org/j22/beck.asp?scr=1]Meme[/a].

Even tho the government has been in the shitcan for some time now (mmm, actually for most of recorded history), global culture has been advancing rapidly and it's a time of unprecendented opportunity for our personal (and interpersonal) development! Look inward, make that a better place and the rest will follow. We're walking a cultural & technological minefield here in the 21st century, but by improving our own personal awareness, we can better avoid stepping on the booby prize.

OK, sorry about the Mary Sunshine routine, when I meet up with young people who have awakened from the culture induced hypno-trance and see things as they are for the first time, I just get all smiley inside.

Hugs, src=http://www.radioparadise.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/sunny.gif

-R

EDIT:Changed subject to reflect the fact that this no longer concerns Bush's opponents

There are not any Republicans challenging Bush because in general they love him. This election will be decided by a small percent of the electorate deemed "sway voters". They are moderate Republicans, conservative Democrats and Independents who decide all close presidential elections. They will be swayed primarily by two factors (1)the state of the economy in November and (2) the state of "terror" in November. If prior to the election we get Bin Laden... Bush wins, if there are sustained reductions in unemployment... Bush wins, if a million demonstrators descend on NYC during the Republican convention as planned and there are resulting riots....Bush wins, if there is a major international or domestic terrorist attack late summer or early fall....Bush wins, if none of this happens and Kerry gets a new speech writer.... Kerry wins.

>if there is a major international or

>domestic terrorist attack late summer or early fall....Bush

>wins,

Why? Wouldn't that show that he isn't keeping the country safe?

>By the discussions I've had with Repugnican friends,

>colleagues, not to mention occasional painful forays (yea a

>little S&M streak I've got going) into the talksy bloviating

>likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Medved et al. I'd say, yes,

>they are very much like lemmings and living pretty much in

>a perpetual state of self denial.

This is such a good point. Democrats and liberals are so very self-aware and self-critical. I mean, look at all the Democrats and liberals criticizing John Kerry, expressing dissent on so many issues, praising George Bush when he deserves it. Yes, Democrats and liberals have such finely tuned critical faculties and and are so intellectually honest. It's very insightful of you to point out how Republicans support their candidate and aren't critical of him, because only Republicans, and not Democrats, do such a thing.

Yes, indeed. I remember all of those Democrats lining up to run against Bill Clinton when he sought re-election in 1996. That electrifying primary race really demonstrated the vibrancy and intellectual energy of the Democratic Party, and it was so very inspiring - almost as inspiring as the 2000 Democratic primary when the entire party except for one shlubby, wrinkled ex-Senator from New Jersey ceded the party's nomination to Al Gore. Yeah - Democrats are so spirited and critically judgmental of one another. You make such a good point.

As for the "Reagan 11th Commandmant," it is, unsurprisingly, totally distorted here. The last sitting President whom I recall having faced a primary challenge was a Republican named George Bush. That was in 1992, and it was a very spirited challenge mounted by Pat Buchanan - who, ironically, was called a fascist and told that he was evil for correctly and astutely proclaiming that the nation was engaged in a "culture war" - the same culture war which you and your brethern now admit you are waging and claim that you are winning ('They're right about one thing, though. There is a Culture War, and they're losing (evolutionis winning!)").

<My heart goes out to all our Log Cabin brothers.

Yes, it should. It would be so much easier for them if they had the comfort that comes from being a little gay drone who gets to wake up and say: "I'm a faggot; therefore, I spew liberal dogma." The ease - the comfort of the crowd - the relinquishing of the need to think - yes, it is truly sad that gay individuals who assert their individuality first and who refuse to sacrifice their intellectual autonomy at the alter of groupthink have to live without the comforts which are so very important to you. So your sympathy is both understandable and commendable.

>"I'm a faggot; therefore, I spew

That should be needlepointed on a pillow.

>>"I'm a faggot; therefore, I spew

>

>That should be needlepointed on a pillow.

How about tattooed onto your ass?

With Bush's record on the economy, health care, education, the war, 9/11 and amending the constitution why are there not any Republicans running against him? Are they really like lemmings and just follow the leader? Or are they really seeing the world through rose colored glasses? If someone could fill me in on this I would be totaly greatful.

Hugs,

Greg

Greg Seattle Wa [email protected]

http://www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/gregseattle.html http://briefcase.yahoo.com/seaboy4hire

>This is such a good point. Democrats and liberals are so very

>self-aware and self-critical. I mean, look at all the

>Democrats and liberals criticizing John Kerry, expressing

>dissent on so many issues, praising George Bush when he

>deserves it. Yes, Democrats and liberals have such finely

>tuned critical faculties and and are so intellectually honest.

> It's very insightful of you to point out how Republicans

>support their candidate and aren't critical of him, because

>only Republicans, and not Democrats, do such a thing.

Zell Miller, a Democrat, praises George Bush on a regular basis. So has former NYC mayor Ed Koch. Other Democrats DO praise George Bush WHEN he deserves it. The reason it happens so rarely is because Bush rarely does anything worth praising.

>Yes, indeed. I remember all of those Democrats lining up to

>run against Bill Clinton when he sought re-election in 1996.

>That electrifying primary race really demonstrated the

>vibrancy and intellectual energy of the Democratic Party, and

>it was so very inspiring - almost as inspiring as the 2000

>Democratic primary when the entire party except for one

>shlubby, wrinkled ex-Senator from New Jersey ceded the party's

>nomination to Al Gore. Yeah - Democrats are so spirited and

>critically judgmental of one another. You make such a good

>point.

And naturally, we have the Bush apologist invoking the Reborglican Clinton imperative. (Any criticism of Bush must be met with some sort of comment about Bill Clinton)

>As for the "Reagan 11th Commandmant," it is, unsurprisingly,

>totally distorted here. The last sitting President whom I

>recall having faced a primary challenge was a Republican named

>George Bush. That was in 1992, and it was a very spirited

>challenge mounted by Pat Buchanan - who, ironically, was

>called a fascist and told that he was evil for correctly and

>astutely proclaiming that the nation was engaged in a "culture

>war" - the same culture war which you and your brethern now

>admit you are waging and claim that you are winning ('They're

>right about one thing, though. There is a Culture War,

>and they're losing (evolutionis winning!)").

Reagan's 11th commandment was a good one and one that the Collective is putting to good use today. Support Bush at all costs and attack those who do not unmercifully.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040326/horsey.gif

As for Buchanan, he was as wrong then as you are now. Pat Buchanan labelled it a culture war, but he was actually referring to his doctrine of white supremacy. He once proposed a map diciding the United States into separate walled off areas: the largest for whites, followed by areas for blacks, Hispanics and Jews. The culture war that rages now is about religious fundamentalism versus religious freedom.

>Yes, it should. It would be so much easier for them if they

>had the comfort that comes from being a little gay drone who

>gets to wake up and say: "I'm a faggot; therefore, I spew

>liberal dogma." The ease - the comfort of the crowd - the

>relinquishing of the need to think - yes, it is truly sad that

>gay individuals who assert their individuality first and who

>refuse to sacrifice their intellectual autonomy at the alter

>of groupthink have to live without the comforts which are so

>very important to you. So your sympathy is both

>understandable and commendable.

Groupthink is a trademark tm[/font size] of the Reborglican Collective.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040326/donwright.gif

>>>"I'm a faggot; therefore, I spew

>>

>>That should be needlepointed on a pillow.

>

>How about tattooed onto your ass?

But then I couldn't be buried in a Jewish cemetery. :o