Thursday, October 05, 2006

Ah, campaign season....

.... that time to reflect on how low human beings can go.

From 10 Zen Monkeys:

1. “My opponent parties with lingerie-clad Playboy bunnies! And then goes to church!” That's the National Republican Senatorial Committee, going after Tennessee Senate candidate Harold Ford.

2. “It was unbelievably demoralizing to be painted as a pampered slut!” The NRSC again, this time targeting Jim Webb in Virginia.

3. "(everything she says) depends on your area code.... she just tells you what you want to hear." NRSC ad against Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

ZM lists two others, but for my money they don't compare with these:

Brad Miller even spent your tax dollars to pay teenage girls to watch pornographic movies with probes connected to their genitalia.” An ad by Republican challenger Vernon Robinson in North Carolina.

For simple loopiness, there's this one, also by Robinson.

And then there'sthis one from Nebraska, which takes aim at Sen. Ben Nelson.

I cannot wait until Nov. 7, simply to make it stop.



Anonymous Maxtrue said...

Yeh, the muck is flying. Check out the Michigan Democratic ads. Republicans molest our children.

Let us say that for the next five weeks the Democrats rail against Foley, Iraq and Katrina in their "perfect storm" theory. As they demonize their opponents, the Republicans will try their best to hurl pathetic venom back. Where does this get anybody?

The real perfect storm is brewing and there is no national discussion about the criteria for pre-emption, prevention and intervention. Hundreds of thousands die in Congo and Sudan. The world does nothing.

Democracies are overthrown. Russia threatens its neighbors. China, who does little to stop NK, is alarming its neighbors, while Palestinians elect Hamas and Iran/Syria arm Hizb"Allah.

Chavez is determined to create a military coalition against the US.

Syria defies UN investigation and warns the West not to disrupt the traffic between Damascus and terrorism at the border.

Against the backdrop of declarations to wipe nations off the map, defeat Liberal Democracy, support a global Jihad against Christians, Jews, Hindus, a number of nations and groups race to possess what they think is a tool and an insurance policy for extremism and the retaliation that would otherwise follow; wmd.

While partisans throw crap at each other, reality moves on.

Sooner or later, it will come down to national self-interests. Perceptions and swiftism will have little effect on the real perfect storm. Despite the Republican meltdowns, there still exists the sense that the Democrats don't get it. Perhaps the Chomsky DNA has spliced itself into the Democratic Chromosomes.

Sorry for this redirected response Sean to your dispairing last posts, but I think I see something more dispairing that underlies the new ( and rarely spoken)Democratic Foreign Policy Line (remember Kerry saying, I will not allow Iran to get nuclear weapons"?).

So here goes some links to consider as the Parties knife it out. First, here is the opinion of some professionals who are involved (for big bucks) in the nuclear industry. Can you see the nexus of technology, capitalism and wishful thinking? Is it really a "reasonable" take on Iran’s nuclear ambitions and what we SHOULD do? So what is wrong with this? You decide.

Then there is a warning from VOA. Negroponte says four years to an Iranian bomb, but many say this is a conservative estimate. I think Bobby at Centerfield would agree. I won four straight with the Bears and I would bet that with Chinese, Russian and North Korean help, the Iranians won't be diverted after two more years.

The view that best underlies the Democratic position on Iran, despite Kerry declaring two years ago, “I will never let Iran get the bomb”, is echoed in the following: Yes, this will work -not.

Is Koppel on drugs? Are those thay say there is nothing WE can do, more sane than Bush? Doesn't this underline any claim to command our national security? Those that can't deal with Iran now, simply say, "a dirty bomb goes off in NYC and we will nuke Iran". We used this concept on Russia. How could we prove such wmd terrorism came from Iran? Maybe a wmd came from NK, or had come from Russia. Will we have to "prove" to the world, which party attacked us, before those advocating this position level Iran?

I can just picture a Democratic President ordering a nuclear strike on Iran because a dirty nuke went off in downtown LA. These same blowhards talk about the horror of Iraq while doing nothing about hundreds of thousand dead in the Congo or Darfur. Yes, slaughter the Iranians based on a guess about who hit us. This foreign policy view is a hundred times more foolish and brutal than the Republican view. It is whispered……because it is so stupid.

Is this what the Democrats are advocating? Perhaps too many Godfather movies. We should elect people with such views? It shows an utter disregard for the reality of terrorism and wmd and it proposes a strategy destined to slaughter millions of innocents and appears to be based on a complete ignorance of how our intelligence could trace wmd attacks. Such a policy would have the Brotherhood set up Iran. The Left would still claim Israel attacked us to get us to nuke Iran. I think you get my point.

By land, sea and air, terrorists and adversaries alike will soon be able to deliver terror without fingerprints. Chavez in South America, North Korea and militants in Indonesia, Iran’s proxies in the Middle East can all be operational platforms. So who will we hit when this happens? And how much destruction will this bring? Can you imagine the outcry?

Instead, Foley is the topic. And Republicans are even using the kitchen sink to balance the blowback for failure. Wonderful……

Hope that wasn't too long a rant....


10/05/2006 8:28 PM  
Anonymous Marc Schneider said...


I think you are becoming hysterical about this. First, while I am a Democrat, I agree that the Dems have failed to lay out a coherent approach to foreign policy generally or to dealing with terrorism.

But I think the administration's prescriptions have been a disaster. Terrorism is a threat, but I think it's an overreaction to see an apocalyptic scenario in which terrorists are depositing nukes anywhere they want with impunity. It's just not that easy. And even if it were, Bush's policy has, IMO, made things worse rather than better. I don't think the "Chomsky DNA" that you describe exists in the portion of the Democratic Party that is likely to be in power. Equating the nut end of the Democratic Party with those likely to hold power is no better than talking about Republicans molesting children.

What we need is not more hysteria brought about by an administration seduced by purple rhetoric about the "axis of evil" that accomplishes nothing, but a realistic evaluation of the best way to address terrorism. Your rant simply repeats the GOP mantra that any criticism of Bush is, ipso facto, evidence of hating America. And even if you are correct about Chavez (which I think is a pretty bizaare notion), I don't see how the GOP's policy is likely to make things any better.

10/10/2006 2:37 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home