Democrats Respond to Bush's Re-Election
By Art Green
Writer of Conservative Eyes
In John Kerry's concession speech, he offered an olive branch to Republicans and George W. Bush.
We talked about the danger of division in our country, and the need — the desperate need — for unity, for finding the common ground, coming together. Today, I hope that we can begin the healing.
While I am very optimistic that we will unite behind the President and get some bi-partisan legislation done, I'm very worried that my optimism is not founded on the reality of their initial reactions of Democrats. They were initially surprised, then depressed, then it turned to anger.
Michael Moore wrote brilliantly on his website, a post entitled, "17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists":
Should Bush decide to show up to work and take this country down a very dark road, it is also just as likely that either of the following two scenarios will happen: a) Now that he doesn't ever need to pander to the Christian conservatives again to get elected, someone may whisper in his ear that he should spend these last four years building "a legacy" so that history will render a kinder verdict on him and thus he will not push for too aggressive a right-wing agenda; or b) He will become so cocky and arrogant — and thus, reckless — that he will commit a blunder of such major proportions that even his own party will have to remove him from office.
Oh, the old "I" word.
Furthermore, he posted a mosaic of President Bush consisting of US forces that were killed in action in Iraq.
Al Franken whined on his website:
You know I wouldn’t mind losing an election if it were an honest disagreement, based on facts, over values and policy. But that’s not what happened. A large majority of Bush supporters went to the polls believing things that were false. For example, any of the above. They believed lies about Kerry, and they believed lies about Iraq, and they believed lies about Bush.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - rex
What a pile of tosh.
'We need to come together and unite behind this President.'
George "You're either with us or against us!" Bush?
He's truly a uniter folks.....not a divider!
The division in America comes from having a president not wanting to represent all of his country.
Just those on his 'side'.
The divide, as the Maryland study shows, is between those that are intersted in truth + facts and those that believe myths + fantasies.
'We need to work together because we do have a common enemy.'
Fear and ignorance?
'We need to work together on the war on terror'
The majority of Americans know less than nothing about the war on terror, a slur against the memory of the victims of 9/11 in itself, and still labor under the mistaken belief that Al Qaeda is the "international terrorist network with thousands of members across more than 60 countries with sleeper cells in every one" that the likes of Rumsfeld and Bush tried to depict it as and refuse to admit to the huge gulf between 'terrorist' ambition and what they can actually ever hope to achieve.
Beware wolves bearing nukes!
'Democrats, as I have documented in the quotes, have just gotten more vitriolic and more livid'
Yeah! Anyone would think that this president ran on the fear + ignorance ticket, riding a campaign of nasty smear tactics and character assassination thereby leaving a bitter taste in democrat mouths that won't be washed away with yet more hollow promises of unity.
ps. A document is a few selected quotes?
'The ball is in their court.'
No it's in Bush's and he refuses to give it back.
'They have a chance to stop the hate'
Who wants to amnend the constitution based on discrimination again?
Oh I forgot, it's needed to protect something that isn't even under threat.
Beware gays with nukes and marriage proposals!
'Democrats, I'm asking you a simple favor. Stop partisan bickering and political posturing and make this a safer and more prosperous nation.'
They tried.
Bush won.
2 - rex
'intersted'
Interested.
'Who wants to amnend'
Amend!
There should really be an option to prev.........oh.........there is.
3 - Art Green
You're either with us or with the terrorist should not be a divisive statement.
Well, he is a Republican, you would expect him to lean more towards a Republican agenda. Do you expect him to run on a Republican ticket and push the liberal agenda?
"The divide, as the Maryland study shows, is between those that are intersted in truth + facts and those that believe myths + fantasies."
Heh.
Well, you I don't think I needed to post a book. "Lie, after lie, after lie" - Ted Kennedy. Kucinch saying that the President targeted civilians for assassination attempts. That the President "concocted a war in Texas for political gain." That Bush and Cheney are "cowards" and that God wanted Kerry. (Thanks Tom Harkin)
These are just some examples.
4 - Art Green
Are you referring to a typo or something?
5 - rex
'You're either with us or with the terrorist should not be a divisive statement.'
No it shouldn't, but he really is quite gifted in that regard.
Although I have to confess I can't remember if he made that comment, which actually seemed to be aimed more at America than any country or person outside of it, before or after he'd disbanded the global coalition against terror to turn Iraq into his own little proving ground.
Unfortunately he only managed to prove that Iraq had no WMDs and Saddam was hiding where we'd long suspected......in Iraq.
Oh, as well as proving that photos of elderly women forced to crawl around on their hands and knees at the end of a leash held by an American is a great way to completely destroy any grassroots support or goodwill among the international muslim community which is essential in fighting a 'war on terror' that includes muslim terrorists.
I apologise that I can't reply to any more of your post but it doesn't appear to make much sense.
6 - Hal Pawluk
There will be no unity until the Republicans realize that the "common ground" is not over there, behind Bush.
7 - andy marsh
hey Hal...The winner is not supposed to have to realize anything...it's the loser that is supposed to come to the table!!!
Understand...YOU LOST!!! You want an easy solution? Then come sit down and talk...the winner doesn't have to come to your table...you have to go to theirs!!!
8 - Hal Pawluk
Out of curiosity, Art, how much do you know about the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, PNAC and the other heavily-funded right wing "think tanks" and their objectives?
9 - Hal Pawluk
Andy, please put your head where the sun DO shine before commenting on anything I say, okay?
10 - andy marsh
what ever Hal...the dems still lost...please explain to me why the republicans HAVE to move first to heal this 'rift'?
Would the democrats have been as sporting?
11 - Hal Pawluk
No, andy, not "whatever." Your comment 7 was asinine.
People voted, and by a small margin of 2%, the Bush backers carried the day.
And it was Bush who said he wanted to find "common ground." It appears that you may need to look up the meaning of the term.
It was an election, not an invasion. The 49% are your neighbors, not a conquered populace.
Remember, this is America, not Iraq.
12 - andy marsh
so in your world...losers kiss up to winners...it doesn't matter what you call it...politics...sports...life...it all comes down to the same thing...you lost...
Like I said before when you called my comments asinine...YOU need to come to the center...the repubicans do not need to move left first...it's not an invasion...it's a republic...and the majority has spoken...and you F'ING lost...realize it...and move back towards the rest of the country...that way there may be a chance that some neutral ground can be found.
13 - Hal Pawluk
You still don't get democracy, do you, Andy? It's not tribal warfare.
Ah, well, it's bedtime, anyhow.
Good night.
14 - andy marsh
no...it's majority wins!
15 - bhw
It's actually not a democracy.
That said, this is still true:
"In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger!" -- James Madison
16 - RJ
"People voted, and by a small margin of 2%, the Bush backers carried the day."
3%...
3.5 million votes...
An outright majority of voters, the first time in 16 years...
You're still in denial. Sad...
17 - RJ
Oh, and:
4 additional Senate seats...
4-6 additional House seats...
Possibly one additional governorship...
18 - Lono
I was gonna join the President and work towards healing America's divisive wounds... but then I remember I am just a stupid ostrich sticking my head in the sand... and could never ever be an Eagle. Oh yeah, and the wolves are coming for me... so I kinda have that to deal with.
19 - Distorted Angel
what ever Hal...the dems still lost...please explain to me why the republicans HAVE to move first to heal this 'rift'?
It's called "leadership", Andy. If the President truly wants to be a uniter and not a divider (although he's already shown us how much of a uniter he really is), then it's incumbent upon him, as the President of everyone, even the ones who voted against him, to extend a hand to the other side. That's what leaders do.
20 - andy marsh
I understand extending a hand...but only to pull you back towards me...not so you can pull me towards you!
21 - Hal Pawluk
BHW: At first I was annoyed at your "It's actually not a democracy" because I know that and didn't feel it was necessary to draw the distinction between 'democracy' and a 'republic.'
Jefferson chimed in, too:Apparently they were unable to achieve a cure after all.But thankfully I didn't send you a snide
missilemissive because this thread is probably the right place and time to make the distinction.The framers were worried about "the excesses of the democracy." They knew that the power of a democracy was "unlimited and absolute," so they set up a representative government, with a constitution to protect The Minority from The Majority.
Madison, for instance, wrote:
Today, many on the right think we should suffer those excesses, and that we do indeed have an Elective Despotism.
They think that "The Ownership Society" means that Republicans own everyone else.
Jefferson wrote:The right is saying: What's wrong with that?
What do you think?
22 - andy marsh
so then tell me how this is supposed to work...2 people run...one wins and the winner is supposed to enact the losers platform? That doesn't make any sense to me!
23 - Distorted Angel
Andy, it's called compromise, as I'm sure you know. Extending your hand in order to pull me over to your side isn't what's it all about. It's about finding some common ground towards which we can both work without feeling as though we've entirely given up our principles.
24 - bhw
Hal, thanks for not sending the missive. 8-)
You and I are on the same page with this. We have a majority who believe in withholding rights from a minority. Worse, they base their position on a religious book.
Not good.
25 - Joe
Is that the same majority that was in states that went blue for the presidential race and still voted down gay marriage?
What's up with that?