[greenamp]

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by greenamp:

is right!!

Maybe he'll defect.

[stevesnj]

I thought Hitler was dead?!?!




Seig Heil !!

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by stevesnj:
I thought Hitler was dead?!?!




Seig Heil !!

Wow, only the 3rd post and a Hitler reference.
That was great speech, especially considering his party affiliation. Maybe he can fire up some Democrats and Republicans to work on the issues together.

[stevesnj]

Originally posted by placebo1969:
Wow, only the 3rd post and a Hitler reference.
That was great speech, especially considering his party affiliation. Maybe he can fire up some Democrats and Republicans to work on the issues together.

LOL...thats a laugh...seems like war is more important to this guy not anything else. Im not crazy about Kerry but with followers like this loony tunes guy...he will lock in my vote for Kerry for sure. Issues for the Republicans are only war and slander. What other party would want to work together with that one sided agenda?

[PacHead]

An absolutely crushing speech, and from a democrat nonetheless !

This is the beginning of the end. And as evidenced here already, the left will only get more desperate and hateful.

November is going to come as quite a shock for quite a few people. I'm liking it already.

[GlobalNomad]

First time I am posting in here.
All I have to say is wow.
He gave a great speech.

Thing that has ticked me off the most is people who are going to vote here in Australia. The news here is very anti Bush. Then again the news in the muslium country I used to live in was extremly anti American.

When that Fahrenheit 911 movie came out, it was so funny that people said they were going to base who they were voting for (in the australian elections) after watching that movie. Who ever basses there voting decisions of a movie is just sad.


---
Just some rambelings off the top of my head

[stevesnj]

Originally posted by PacHead:
An absolutely crushing speech, and from a democrat nonetheless !

This is the beginning of the end. And as evidenced here already, the left will only get more desperate and hateful.

Seems like the opposite to me...giving a speech like this makes the Rep. look like common bullies and this will turn off a lot of people...I was on the fence but I swung for Kerry after this insane guy gave this hateful speech.

[JohnSmith68]

"what're they gonna fight with? spitballs?!"

[greenamp]

Originally posted by PacHead:
An absolutely crushing speech, and from a democrat nonetheless !

This is the beginning of the end. And as evidenced here already, the left will only get more desperate and hateful.

November is going to come as quite a shock for quite a few people. I'm liking it already.

Yep. Next week he will be called a racist, a nazi, a sexist, possibly a pedophile, and possibly a closet homesexual.

edit: strike one, someone already pulled the nazi card.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by stevesnj:
Seems like the opposite to me...giving a speech like this makes the Rep. look like common bullies and this will turn off a lot of people...I was on the fence but I swung for Kerry after this insane guy gave this hateful speech.

Some might say you are the insane one. We are in the nation's most dangerous war ever, brought about by the most devestating attack ever. You vote for Kerry, if you think it will improve the economy or whatever. It won't matter much when there is another attack or you are dead. You obviously don't understand the seriousness of 9-11, others do. Your kind was around in WW2 also, but luckily, they didn't get their way.

[GlobalNomad]

Originally posted by JohnSmith68:
"what're they gonna fight with? spitballs?!"

Yes that was great.
And about the outsourceing of are natioanl defense.

---
I could ramble on but meh who would read it all?

[greenamp]

Originally posted by stevesnj:
Seems like the opposite to me...giving a speech like this makes the Rep. look like common bullies and this will turn off a lot of people...I was on the fence but I swung for Kerry after this insane guy gave this hateful speech.

Actually, that speech was geared for one purpose: gathering conservative southern democrats.

For that purpose it was/will be very effective.

[stevesnj]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Actually, that speech was geared for one purpose: gathering conservative southern democrats.

For that purpose it was/will be very effective.

Most likely...i will agree with you on this point.


OUCH!!! Zell just revealed his hypocricy on CNN...it seems Pres Bush called the troops 'occupiers' and Chenny opposed alot or the same planes and weapons Kerry apposed...hmmm

[PacHead]

Some screechy voiced, horrible woman being interviewed on FOX gave Zells speech a zero. This shows that liberal wackos truely are living in their own perverted world. One that is about to come crashing down all around them. Pathetic fools.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Some screechy voiced, horrible woman being interviewed on FOX gave Zells speech a zero. This shows that liberal wackos truely are living in their own perverted world. One that is about to come crashing down all around them. Pathetic fools.

Yeah, Republicans were universally impressed with Miller's speech:

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/

[PacHead]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Yeah, Republicans were universally impressed with Miller's speech:

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/

Never heard of him. As far as I'm concerned, he's just another dude with a blog.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Yeah, Republicans were universally impressed with Miller's speech:

Not just Republicans.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Yeah, Republicans were universally impressed with Miller's speech:

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/

Didn't see the speech tonight. I can only imagine based on Sullivan's comments. If he did say a couple of those things he's flat out lying abut Kerry's positions. Anybody who saw and heard Kerry's DNC speech know it.

I did see Miller on Meet the Press a few weeks ago. It was an astonishing appearance. Time after time Tim Russert would pull up a clip of a Miller quote praising Kerry. Miller wouldn't respond, he'd ignore it and go on to some wild statement that was the exact opposite. It was shameless. At one point Miller said that if Kerry was President in the 80's the Soviet Union would still exist today. I don't know how he came to that bit of logic but I've never seen Russert react the way he did. They cut to a wide shot and his mouth was open and he was aghast. It was hilarious.

Zel Miller is definitely a piece of work.

[deedar]

Actually, I thought that his speech praising Bill Clinton and vilifying GHW Bush at the 92 Democratic convention was MUCH better, uhh, err, maybe I'm thinking of the speech on the senate floor three years ago praising the war hero, John Kerry - Sheesh - I don't know, just can't remember.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Yeah, Republicans were universally impressed with Miller's speech:

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/

Actually, I had read some more about who that guy is. Do you know who he is ? I wouldn't exactly call him your regular Republican. The dude seems to have enormous homosexual issues.

[Mithras]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Actually, I had read some more about who that guy is. Do you know who he is ? I wouldn't exactly call him your regular Republican. The dude seems to have enormous homosexual issues.

Like he is one? And is HIV positive? But endorsed Bush in 2000 anyway, and now regrets it... He's an influential guy with regular pieces in Newsweek, TNR< etc.

Anyway, as for Zell Miller, good riddance.

[typoon]

Originally posted by stevesnj:
LOL...thats a laugh...seems like war is more important to this guy not anything else. Im not crazy about Kerry but with followers like this loony tunes guy...he will lock in my vote for Kerry for sure. Issues for the Republicans are only war and slander. What other party would want to work together with that one sided agenda?

Slander? How? Secondly this "war" on terroism should be one of the most important things right now. Because nothing else really matters if we are dead.

Well Zell is a Democrat so considering the democrats have this "looney tunes guy" how could you vote for a democrat?

[davesimondotcom]

Originally posted by Mithras:
Anyway, as for Zell Miller, good riddance.

Such an tone of acceptance and tolerance of differing viewpoints you have in your post.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Actually, I had read some more about who that guy is. Do you know who he is ? I wouldn't exactly call him your regular Republican. The dude seems to have enormous homosexual issues.

Dude, Sullivan is gay. And a very influential blogger/writer.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Mithras:
Like he is one? And is HIV positive? But endorsed Bush in 2000 anyway, and now regrets it... He's an influential guy with regular pieces in Newsweek, TNR< etc.

Anyway, as for Zell Miller, good riddance.

Just trying to see if I can figure out the logical consistency of these two positions. Sullivan is admirable because he endorsed Bush in 2000, but now is endorsing the Democrats, but you reject Miller because he endorsed Bill Clinton but now endorses Bush. Other than your partisan beliefs, is there anything consistent about your positions on them?

It seems to me that both of them are simply voting their consciences. If it is admirable for Sullivan to switch sides, why is it not admirable for Miller? Conversely, if it is terrible for Miller to switch sides, why not for Sullivan?

[djohnson]

Great speech. The best part was how he said Kerry would defend the US with spitballs. Getting a Democrat to speak out for Bush is a really good thing for the Bush Administration.

[BoomStick]

Being from Georgia I can certainly give a first hand review of Zell.

In his 8 years in office as governor, Georgia had fantastic economical growth. Hell, I even voted for him both times.

Zell switching sides speaks volumes for the incompetance and hatred coming from the left.

The terrorists would live in a dreamworld under Kerry with carte blanche to kill at leasure.

As for the northern trash who doesn't like Zell, you're stuck with the likes of hillary.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Just trying to see if I can figure out the logical consistency of these two positions. Sullivan is admirable because he endorsed Bush in 2000, but now is endorsing the Democrats, but you reject Miller because he endorsed Bill Clinton but now endorses Bush. Other than partisanship, is there anything consistent about this? It seems to me that both of them are simply voting their consciences.

Sullivan hasn't endorsed the Democrats, I think he simply saw Miller's speech for what it was. As far as I know he remains a Republican and is undecided about the election, but refuses to drink the KoolAid of either party, which is why I read him.

I don't expect anyone to adopt his view, I just thought it was worth pointing out that there are Republicans who were mightily offended by Miller's speech. David Gergen is another.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Sullivan hasn't endorsed the Democrats, I think he simply saw Miller's speech for what it was. As far as I know he remains a Republican and is undecided about the election, but refuses to drink the KoolAid of either party, which is why I read him.

Well, I have been reading Sullivan for years too. In fact, since before he had his blog. He has steadfastly maintained that he is not a Republican, despite obvious sympathies.

Based on his posts and articles of the last few months, I would rephrase your sentence above to read "Sullivan hasn't endorsed the Democrats" yet. He has clearly been edging that way.

But that is his right, of course. Just as it is Miller's right to call it as he sees it too.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Well, I have been reading Sullivan for years too. He has steadfastly maintained that he is not a Republican, despite obvious sympathies.

Based on his posts and articles of the last few months, I would rephrase your sentence above to read "Sullivan hasn't endorsed the Democrats" yet. He has clearly been edging that way.

But that is his right, of course. Just as it is Miller's right to call it as he sees it too.

Yes, he has certainly been focusing on Bush's shortcomings of late. Like myself, he sees it as a problem of competency as much as ideology. I don't always agree with him but he's always a good read.

And it's not that I don't think Miller's entitled to change sides, but the distortions and hypocrisy and vituperativeness of his speech was rather glaring, in the opinion of many (mirroring, of course, certain Democratic attack dogs).

[Spliffdaddy]

"vituperativeness"

*smacks zigzag upside the head*

You just had to cross the line, didn't you?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Yes, he has certainly been focusing on Bush's shortcomings of late. Like myself, he sees it as a problem of competency as much as ideology. I don't always agree with him but he's always a good read.

And it's not that I don't think Miller's entitled to change sides, but the distortions and hypocrisy and vituperativeness of his speech was rather glaring, in the opinion of many (mirroring, of course, certain Democratic attack dogs).

I haven't seen Miller's speech, thanks to a late Labor Law class. I'll listen to it once iTMS posts it, and reserve judgment until then. But I think he clearly has the right to be upset at his party, and I think a lot of the anger that has been directed at him over the last few years comes from the fact that the Democrats still haven't come to terms with the split between its dovish wing, and what used to be called Scoop Jackson Democrats -- a group that has been eclipsed in the organized Democratic Party, but which is still quite prevalent among ordinary Democrats.

And that, by the way, was Sullivan's most glaring idiocy: calling Miller a Dixiecrat, when he is really is just a conservative Democrat. Sullivan has a tendency to reflexively reflect the urban values of both Democrats and liberal urban Republicans. While I like quite a lot of what he has written over the years, he still doesn't quite understand a huge chunk of what makes this country tick. I think it has a lot to do with his admission that he doesn't drive a car. The guy needs to get out of Dupont Circle more often, and that doesn't mean just going to P'Town.

[daimoni]

.

[MindFad]

Originally posted by greenamp:

I know, can you believe the lying scum?

[greenamp]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Yes. Now all the Democratic Party members are going to vote for Bush and then we'll all go to heaven. I sure know I am.

You underestimate just how many conservative democrats there really are, especially in the south. That is exactly why a liberal like Kerry could never win on the Dem ticket.

Only moderate Dems like Bill Clinton stand a chance.

[MindFad]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Yes. Now all the Democratic Party members are going to vote for Bush and then we'll all go to heaven. I sure know I am.

I just got a new pair of shoes for the Rapture.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by MindFad:
I just got a new pair of shoes for the Rapture.

What kind?

I've been debating that myself. Do I wear black shoes to reflect a somber attitude, or a flashy pair to go out with a bang?

[MindFad]

Originally posted by greenamp:
What kind?

Hurley shoes. I must admit, I actually bought two pair. Hurley Selectors and the Hurley Freedoms. Blue with gold stripes or black, white, and red? It is a tough choice.

I've been debating that myself. Do I wear black shoes to reflect a somber attitude, or a flashy pair to go out with a bang?

I'd definitely go out with a bang. It's settled, then�black, white, and red! At least I'll be stylish if I go to hell!

[chris v]

If I get to Heaven, and it's chalk-full of stuffed-shirt, sanctimonious, right wing toupee-wearing, crackpots like Jerry Falwell, Pat Buchanan and John Ashcroft, I'm jumping off the nearest fcuking cloud.

[Zimphire]

I don't think you'll have to worry about that.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I don't think you'll have to worry about that.

[smacintush]

Originally posted by zigzag:
And it's not that I don't think Miller's entitled to change sides,

He's not changing anything. He's said that he was born a Democrat and he'll die a Democrat. He's also said that he was fooled by Clinton. Clinton was not who he thought he was. That was when he started to lose faith in his party.

That's what Zell says at least.

[smacintush]

Originally posted by chris v:
If I get to Heaven, and it's chalk-full of stuffed-shirt, sanctimonious, right wing toupee-wearing, crackpots like Jerry Falwell, Pat Buchanan and John Ashcroft, I'm jumping off the nearest fcuking cloud.

None of those men wear toupees.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by smacintush:
He's not changing anything. He's said that he was born a Democrat and he'll die a Democrat. He's also said that he was fooled by Clinton. Clinton was not who he thought he was. That was when he started to lose faith in his party.

That's what Zell says at least.

Clinton fooled a lot of people. Me included.

[KaBlooey]

Here's what Zel Miller said of Kerry in 2001:

"In his 16 years in the Senate, John Kerry has fought against government waste and worked hard to bring some accountability to Washington. Early in his Senate career in 1986, John signed on to the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Bill, and he fought for balanced budgets before it was considered politically correct for Democrats to do so. John has worked to strengthen our military, reform public education, boost the economy and protect the environment.�

Miller's speech last night was empty rhetoric designed to attract empty heads.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by KaBlooey:
Here's what Zel Miller said of Kerry in 2001:

***

Miller's speech was empty rhetoric designed to attract empty heads.

Then or now?

[JohnSmith68]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Clinton fooled a lot of people. Me included.

at least he didn't *you know what* on your clothes

[KaBlooey]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Then or now?

Last night. Fixed.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by KaBlooey:
Last night. Fixed.

So why wasn't it empty rhetoric when he was saying nice things about Kerry, but is emply rhetoric when he later changes his mind?

I wasn't pointing out that your post was unclear, I am asking whether your logic is clear.