Paul Phillips

Why deny him his chance? I think we should all get our shot at subverting the political process. Everyone's doing it!

(Reply) (Thread)

I know I'm going to regret firing this up, but I don't see how anyone can be been happy today. On the flip side I don't know how anyone could have been happy if Kerry won.

I've never been in so much pain in a voting booth in my life.

I'm almost violent in my independent status which undoubtedly causes this pain. It must be much easier (and healthier) for those who are strictly liberal or conservative.

When your choices are a republican who stands for almost none of the conservative issues that I believe in (and promotes all the ones I don't) and a democrat who has no passion for the liberal issues I believe in, it simply leads to a disappointing outcome.

p.s. Moore is a whack job, however Roger and Me was pretty damn funny

(Reply) (Thread)

You're not kidding. I clicked on Kerry, clicked off, clicked the write-in box, clicked Cancel, then went back to Kerry. And i still wasn't happy about it.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

I'm almost violent in my independent status which undoubtedly causes this pain. It must be much easier (and healthier) for those who are strictly liberal or conservative.

Those must be some fascinating people, who can be "strictly" described with a one-word ideology.

I used to care who won these things like I thought my caring meant something. Now it's just theater.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

but I don't see how anyone can be been happy today

Easy. Bet on the election, and win almost all your bets. That's how I did it! And by the time that wears off, it'll be a less immediate pain, and I can go back to the same continual grumbling as the last 4 years.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I think Bush has been bad for the country, and that's why I wanted Kerry to win.

I don't see how Michael Moore subverts the political process any more than Fox News, The Daily Show, Cross Fire, the NY Times, political ads, the debates, or any of the other components of the political process. I feel that, after the apparently conclusive election of George W Bush, Democracy has got to be the worst form of government, except for maybe all the alternatives.

I don't think that if Michael Moore was successful in convincing more people that invading Iraq on false pretenses without a real plan to win the peace was a mistake that should cost Bush re-election, that it would be a subversion of the political process. I feel that if the election was decided because of voting machine failure or tampering, that it would be a subversion of the political process.

What did Michael Moore do that attempted to subvert the political process?

(Reply) (Thread)

i'm glad bush won, mostly because i so love karl rove and it is wonderful to see him succeed (yet again) in his attempt to subvert the political process.

(Reply) (Thread)

ZING!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

awesome

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I agree with you Paul. Also, I love the fact that the following people and organizations are pissed off that Bush won:

5) The Communist Party

4) The Socialist Party

3) The trial lawyers

2) Saddam Hussein

1) Osama Bin Laden

(Reply) (Thread)

You forgot Hitler, Satan, and the Boogeyman.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

1) Osama Bin Laden

Was this sarcasm or ignorance?

/joe

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

For some bizarre reason I'm fascinated by your ordering of these people/organizations. Is there rhyme or reason to it?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

Had Kerry not picked this personal injury lawyer, John Edwards, he would be our next president. It was a boneheaded decision. Edwards cost him votes among swing voters.
Had he picked General Wesley Clark, this election would be a landslide victory for Kerry.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I was entertained by F911, mostly because I am a member of "the choir".

However, there was much of it I disagreed with. And there was much that I DID agree with, but didn't like the way it was presented.

But whether you think F911 was the gospel or just a bundle of blatant lies, you can't be a free-thinking person and not agree that what Fox News does is many, many times more insidious.

I also can't imagine that ANYone who cares about this country could think that having the GOP control all three branches of the government (as they soon will) can be a good thing.

I've always felt that hatred toward Michael Moore was really misplaced. If there were any integrity in journalism in this country, people like MM and Fox News would be left without a voice, or at least without an audience. Or maybe the general population is so dumb that it wouldn't make a bit of difference.

(Reply) (Thread) (Expand)

I also can't imagine that ANYone who cares about this country could think that having the GOP control all three branches of the government (as they soon will) can be a good thing.

Of course, if the Democrats controlled all three, it probably wouldn't even occur to me to be bothered or worried by it.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I also can't imagine that ANYone who cares about this country could think that having the GOP control all three branches of the government (as they soon will) can be a good thing.

You can't imagine? Millions of people presumably think this is a good thing. You don't think any of them care at all about the country?

People who hold different opinions from yours don't hold them because they're evil people out to hurt the country. They just have different opinions.

When you are blazingly certain of the correctness of your opinions, it becomes easy to view those who disagree as bad people; not just wrong but willfully wrong in the pursuit of some nefarious end. This mindset (which characterizes nearly all discourse) makes it pretty well impossible to achieve any sort of reasonable consensus. It also paints a very bleak picture of humanity.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

fox news sticks out because the rest of the media is so blatantly liberal it is funny. although i would agree that fox news does lean to the right (how much so is up for debate), it is nothing compared to the distortion machine that is michael moore in terms of "integrity ofjournalism."

on a side note, it was hilarious watching larry king on cnn...by the end of the coverage he was clearly pissed off by the results and for having to sit there for 8 hours (he actually said the second part out loud)

(Reply) (Thread)

Isn't that kind of... petty?

(Reply) (Thread)

Well, the voting is over and the lesser of two evils came out victor. I again didn't vote for the winner or the mainstream loser.

I'll give Bush credit for 'a clear vision' and just pray it is close to right.

Mr. Kerry was the personification of liberal activist. And I hate activist of any stripe.

My bigger complaint about Mr. Kerry was his attack on our servicemen when he returned from Vietnam. I am of the right age to have barely avoided serving in Vietnam although friends just slightly younger did. I won't argue the merits of that war but my friends were not the war criminals that Kerry served up in his blanket indictment of our troops. I can never forgive him that however noble he considered his goal.

Politics will never be a solution for the 'human condition' and we keep deluding ourselves otherwise. I wonder who's the biggest fool: the politicians or the people who vote with passion for them.

(Reply) (Thread)

I, like many of us, were once again able to see Kerry's testimony in front of the congressional committee some 30 years ago. I can understand why some vets could take their anger to the grave. But the man was 27 years old. He was articulate and standing up for something he believed in. Was he doing it to progress a political future.....don't know for sure. Maybe, could be....is the best I can come up with.

Were some of the things exagerations.....or more likely things he heard happen rather than eye witness.....probably. But I can forgive a 27 year old for making some errors in judgment. I think it's interesting and says a lot that McCain does not blast him.

It's hard for me to base my voting decisions on what a person did or said 30-years ago. While Kerry may have said some things that hurt vets, he was nonetheless involved. Bush on the other hand, at that very moment in time was most likely in a bar chasing hookers. (I know, I know, that's a little harsh, but go with the gist)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

If it wasn't so tragic, it would almost be hilarious that there are people out there naive enough to think that Bin Laden didn't want Bush to win this election.

How anyone can be happy that a hard right, Christian fundamentalist, war-mongering, freedom-hating, chauvinistic, anti-science ignoramus like Bush is in the Whitehouse, along with his similarly-minded, and probably even more dangerous, cronies is beyond me.

To give as the reason for being happy at this, literally world-changing, turn of events that a film-maker will be unhappy about it is beyond belief.

John Kerry would have been a very far from great president, and would probably not have lasted more than one term. But in just about every conceivable way he'd have been better than Bush.

For what it's worth, and I realise that for many people the answer will be 'not much', the majority of people in Britain (your strongest ally) are very upset about this. Reactions generally range from disappointed to distraught. Even among right-wingers in this country, polls before the election showed that Kerry was the favoured candidate.

What, then, the reaction is like in places like the Middle East is frightening to contemplate.

It's at times like this that you realise just how different Britain and the USA actually are, despite the many superficial similarities - I swear, someone like Bush would NEVER come close to a sniff of power in this country.

(Reply) (Thread) (Expand)

Bin Laden wanted the guy responsible for killing most of his organization and forcing him into hiding to remain in power? You obviously missed the message, but Bin Laden hated America before Bush became president. He declared war on America in I believe 1998. You may want to state reasons when you make "obvious statements of truth".

"hard right, Christian fundamentalist, war-mongering, freedom-hating, chauvinistic, anti-science ignoramus"

You're a bit prone to exaggeration I see.

As to your comments on world opinions of Bush, you're right, no one here cares unless it happens to help their candidate. Anyone who thinks this country should be put in line with European (or other international) political values should have a tough time calling themselves American. Afterall, I think I speak for most when I say we've for the most part rejected socialism. The disgusting economic policies I've heard the French have are enough to justify revolution in my mind.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

The real question, boys, is how much money did Amarillo Slim win when Bush won?

(Reply) (Thread)

Tony Blankey said some sane things about the then upcoming election.

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/tblankley.htm

(Reply) (Thread)

In the days and hours leading up to the election, Michael Moore posted several open letters on his website (http://www.michaelmoore.com) to his supporters encouraging them to get out and vote for Kerry. He also had a map showing various levels of voter fraud based on anecdotal evidence from people who had contacted him. Now that the election is over and Kerry lost, he’s removed everything from the front page of the site, leaving only a memorial collage of Bush. His response makes me wonder if he’s starting to consider the suicide bomb option from Team America...

(Reply) (Thread)

may have been Dewey-Truman. The one the Chicago Tribune got wrong.

Truman then shaped the post WWII world that we all lived under up to the Russian meltdown. He affected our lives to the good more than any modern president.

I have to wonder if Bush will be remembered in a similar manner. Trumans policy have been obsoleted and something new has to take their place.

As a small child I was actually drug to the local train depot by my grandmother and great aunt to see Mr. Truman stop; deliver a brief speach to a hundred or so people; then speed off.

Give em hell Harry--a president who's intellect was questioned constantly. One who coined the phrase "The buck stops here." and who was as critisized with even more vitrol. There are a lot of similarities here...

(Reply) (Thread)