The people that are screaming back are the ones being called traitors.

They should ask those Repugs, "How is it possible to be a 'traitor' to 'treason'?"
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_scratch.gif

They should ask those Repugs, "How is it possible to be a 'traitor' to 'treason'?"
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_scratch.gif


Next time I see Senator Bob Casey Jr I'll pose that line of thought.

The people that are screaming back are the ones being called traitors.
see, i'm not sure they are. they keep apologizing, saying things like, "i support the troops but...", "i want victory too, but..." when i think they SHOULD be going, "did you just imply i was a traitor? you're the one dragging the country through the gutter because you're too stupid or too corrupt to tell the truth about why you started this war and you prioritize having complete lack of accountability over there over the health and welfare of the united states. up yours, buddy, YOU'RE the frickin' traitor."

they need a "sir, have you no shame" moment, cuz the repubs are hypnotized by their own reactionary hysteria. but i think they'll get in line if you spank em once.

they need a "sir, have you no shame" moment


The day McCarthy got his comeuppance.

Here's a question.

The Bush Administration wants democracy over in Iraq.  Has anyone ever asked the Iraqis if they want our form of Democracy?  I wonder if this isn't some arse backwards form of Imperialism.  Just a thought.

The day McCarthy got his comeuppance.
exactly. the funny thing is, after that happened mccarthy actually totally changed his act and tried to become a bleeding heart liberal. but it was too late, that one little moment totally undid him.

exactly. the funny thing is, after that happened mccarthy actually totally changed his act and tried to become a bleeding heart liberal. but it was too late, that one little moment totally undid him.



I think it showed once and for all how utterly ridiculous the communist witch hunt had become.  After that, nothing he said would ever be taken seriously again.  Which is how it should have been.  He was nothing more than a paranoid drunk. 


I wouldn't mind something like that happening to Bush.  Someone needs to tape his eyelids open and show him what's really going on around here, because I don't think he's aware of it anymore.

exactly. the funny thing is, after that happened mccarthy actually totally changed his act and tried to become a bleeding heart liberal. but it was too late, that one little moment totally undid him.

I generally (no pun intended) see Eisenhower in a positive light, so it's disappointing how long it took for the president to say enough's enough.  McCarthy might have carried on his reign of terror if he'd stuck to communist bogeymen and kept Roy Cohn on a short leash.  It was Cohn who instigated the infamous "Army-McCarthy hearings," which was McCarthy's undoing.

He spent his final years as a bleeding heart alright--a bleeding heart drunk!

Nowadays old Joe would have landed a cushy job as a FOX News commentator.
::)

I think it showed once and for all how utterly ridiculous the communist witch hunt had become.  After that, nothing he said would ever be taken seriously again.  Which is how it should have been.  He was nothing more than a paranoid drunk. 


I wouldn't mind something like that happening to Bush.  Someone needs to tape his eyelids open and show him what's really going on around here, because I don't think he's aware of it anymore.
and see? i usually LIKE paranoid drunks.

I generally (no pun intended) see Eisenhower in a positive light, so it's disappointing how long it took for the president to say enough's enough.  McCarthy might have carried on his reign of terror if he'd stuck to communist bogeymen and kept Roy Cohn on a short leash.  It was Cohn who instigated the infamous "Army-McCarthy hearings," which was McCarthy's undoing.

He spent his final years as a bleeding heart alright--a bleeding heart drunk!

Nowadays old Joe would have landed a cushy job as a FOX News commentator.
::)
yeah, joe's definitely sorry he didn't live to see the current political climate, he'da fit right in.

You orchestrate one witch-hunt, you might as well orchestrate more.  He'd love to weed out potential terrorists.  Strike up the blackball lists!

I went to hear Bernie Sanders speak a couple of months ago. He had a Q & A session afterwards. Someone asked him to make a pledge then and there to NOT support funding for the war-Bernie did not make the pledge (and rightly so).  If you vote to cut funding the war, it appears that you don't support the troops-A BIG NO-NO. However, we really can't afford to keep funding this war-not money-wise and definately not people-wise.



Cat

I generally (no pun intended) see Eisenhower in a positive light


You have risen in my esteem.

The fact of the matter is this, the majority of the Republican party does not support the President any more.
What people seem to forget is this - When we first went to war, the vast majority of congress supported the Presidents actions. Then, the people furthest away from him started to see what was going on and said "Yo, this ain't cool." it's kind of like an onion, we're about 2/3rds of the way in to the onion with the administration at the center.. he's basically alienated half of his own party.

A perfect for instance - John Danforth, former Senator from Missouri (and a man I have tremendous respect and admiration for!) made the point that the current incarnation of the controling interest in the republican party is not the Republican Party at all. I think I've made this point as well. The Republican Party is on the whole a conservative (with a small c) party, but the current administration is essentially a reactionary splinter group.

Another point by John Danforth (an ordained Episcopal priest) - ""By a series of recent initiatives, our party has been transformed into the political arm of conservative Christians..."

The loudest voice is always heard, no matter how small it is.

I've rambled, but I'm getting very tired of the continuous bashing of every republican known to man simply because the current President 'pretends' to be a part of that party.  ;)


I went to hear Bernie Sanders speak a couple of months ago. He had a Q & A session afterwards. Someone asked him to make a pledge then and there to NOT support funding for the war-Bernie did not make the pledge (and rightly so).  If you vote to cut funding the war, it appears that you don't support the troops-A BIG NO-NO. However, we really can't afford to keep funding this war-not money-wise and definately not people-wise.


Well, if we hadn't have been the first nation in the history of civilisation to cut taxes at the same time as declaring war, we may have been able to.  ;D

^

Thank you Davey, but it doesn't look to me like Dubya is just "pretending" to be in the Republican party.  Either that or the rest of the GOP was "pretending" along with him for six years. 

The Republican party that Eisenhower belonged to got consumed by fundamentalist fanatics and neo-fascists.  Ronald Reagan was the latter who sold well with the former.  The pendulum may be swinging back after the atrocity known as Dubya. 
If the Republican party was still what it was in 1955, I still wouldn't vote Republican.  I wasn't even born in the 1950s, but if I'd been a voter, I would have been a Stevenson man.  Nonetheless, some of the things Eisenhower said about defense spending sound straight from the lips of Dennis Kucinich.  The Right doesn't like to address that because General Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in WWII.  What are you gonna do, call Ike a commie pinko beatnik draft-dodger?
:D

^

Thank you Davey, but it doesn't look to me like Dubya is just "pretending" to be in the Republican party.  Either that or the rest of the GOP was "pretending" along with him for six years. 

The Republican party that Eisenhower belonged to got consumed by fundamentalist fanatics and neo-fascists.  Ronald Reagan was the latter who sold well with the former.  The pendulum may be swinging back after the atrocity known as Dubya. 
If the Republican party was still what it was in 1955, I still wouldn't vote Republican.  I wasn't even born in the 1950s, but if I'd been a voter, I would have been a Stevenson man.  Nonetheless, some of the things Eisenhower said about defense spending sound straight from the lips of Dennis Kucinich.  The Right doesn't like to address that because General Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in WWII.  What are you gonna do, call Ike a commie pinko beatnik draft-dodger?
:D


You are right when you talk about the massive shifs in the Republican Party.
The whole party has strayed, but the majority of Republicans are still far closer to the Eisenhower model (the consumate leader IMO) than the Bush model.
Essentially, the Bush administration is a business run model propped up by the sway the christian right has over a lot of ignorant folk, west of the mississippi and south of the mason dixon line.

The pendulum is certainly swinging back. As I pointed out before, even those who did support George have distanced themselves from him.
The real principals of conservativism will hopefully make a comeback and allow us to remove some of this crippling debt!