25 reasons not to vote for a Democrat


By Hugh Hewitt
---
Posted: September 18, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com


Don't vote for even one Democrat this November. Not even your brother-in-law. Here are 25 reasons to turn them all down:

25. Bill Clinton's pardons, especially that of Mark Rich.

24. Democratic Sen. Paul Wellstone's cynical and hypocritical breach of his two-terms-and-out pledge.

23. The Democrats' refusal to abolish the death tax beyond 2010.

22. Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd's cranky and increasingly erratic and obstructionist chairmanship of the Senate's Appropriations Committee.

21. Democratic Senator (and chairman of the Judiciary Committee) Pat Leahy's loopy suggestion that the West Nile virus might be a biological attack.

20. The silence of the entire national Democratic leadership in the face of Democratic Congressman Cynthia McKinney's father's virulent anti-Semitism.

19. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's incredibly annoying "hushed" tone of public speaking.

18. Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe's millions of profits from sweetheart deals in now-bankrupt Global Crossing.

17. The Democratic Senate's blocking of welfare-reform extension, even though these "must work" provisions have been wildly successful for the past half-decade.

16. Democratic Sen. Ernest Hollings' (and chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee) demand that signs be put up in airports "in A-rab" declaring that there will be no more hijackings.

15. Democratic Sen. Joe Biden's demand before the Council on Foreign Relations last October that the war in Afghanistan be fought by American ground troops "man-a-mano."

14. The silence of the entire national Democratic leadership on the corruption of Gray Davis, whose coin-operated, pay-for-play tenure atop California has bankrupted the state even as his fund-raising machine has produced scandal after scandal.

13. Democratic Senator (and member of the Judiciary Committee) Chuck Schumer's argument that nominees' religious beliefs can be debated during confirmation hearings.

12. Loopy Pat Leahy's argument that President Bush's nomination of judges to fill existing vacancies on the courts equal the same threat to the independence of the Judiciary as was FDR's court-packing plan that would have added six new seats to the U.S. Supreme Court.

11. Al Gore's beard.

10. The three-week dalliance of Democrats with the idea that President Bush knew or should have known the 9-11 attacks were coming.

9. Hillary's eye-rolling during the president's address to the Joint Session of Congress after the 9-11 attacks.

8. The prospect of Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and his immediate moves to raise taxes.

7. The rejection by the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee of the judicial nominations of Charles Pickering and Priscilla Owen – on a party-line 10-9 vote, despite majority support in the Senate and the ABA's highest recommendation – because of pressure from extreme left-wing interest groups.

6. The refusal to allow the majority in the Senate, including Democrats, to authorize energy exploration in Alaska, even as we approach war in Iraq.

5. The Gore-Lieberman attempt to void absentee ballots from military servicemen overseas, and the refusal of even one senior Democrat to condemn the Gore-Lieberman strategy.

4. Joe Lieberman's delay of the bill establishing a Homeland Security Department in the face of domestic terror threats, even after the recent arrests in Buffalo, because of his insistence on protections for government-employee unions.

3. Democratic Senator (and chairman of the Senate Armed Service's Committee) Carl Levin's insistence that the United Nations vote for action on Iraq before the United States Congress considered supporting President Bush's use of force in Iraq.

2. Eighty-five-year-old Democratic Senator (and chairman of the Appropriations Committee) Robert Byrd's refusal to even consider a vote on using force in Iraq before the November elections.

1. The unbroken pattern of Democratic leadership to put the party's political interests ahead of the national interests.

The Democratic Party is no longer the party of FDR, JFK, Scoop Jackson or even the old Joe Lieberman. It is now a carnival of political appetites and dangerously unstable (Leahy), doddering (Hollings and Byrd), dumb (Biden), disingenuous (Levin), duplicitous (McAuliffe and Daschle), and corrupt (Davis) leaders without any restraint imposed by concern for the national interest.

Its real leadership remains the Clintons, who remain perpetually in search of affection and inevitably offensive in their public posturing. The interest groups that control the party – the snarling Nan Aron, the smarmy Ralph Neas, and the entrepreneurial Jesse Jackson – represent ideologies held widely only in Malibu.

In short, there is no longer a Democratic Party worthy of the name. Its supporters vote for its candidates in the face of logic and, indeed, despite the deepest instincts of self-preservation. In words from "The Who": Don't get fooled again.

http://www.worldnetdaily....E_ID=28975

What crap... So now political correctedness is such that Hillary Clinton can no longer roll her eyes? I think this list shows how PC is a very changing notion, and not at all the domain of leftists and liberals.

HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT 2004

Aerogram said:

Is that the only think that you can take exception to in that whole list? Cool! That guy must have done a good job then...

...and I think that Hillary Clinton's eye-rolling (if it happened) would have been very inappropriate, disrespectful and ignorant... just listen to what the man has to say without acting like a childish ass.

IceNine said:

Oh come on,Ice...I'm sure the congressional Republicans rolled their eyes at MANY of Clinton's speeches.

DavidEye said:

And... I think that is for shit as well...

Don't forget, I am NOT a Republican.

There is no reason to act like a childish ass during an important political meeting. If she really did that, she probably waited for a fucking telvision camera to be on her so that she could look really "defiant and cool" for the masses with her daring, rebellious eye-rolling exhibition.

*Hillary thinks to herself* "How can I look like a really tough, cool and defiant person while still looking like a pompous asshole? ...hmmm... I got it! I will wait for a television camera and I will roll my eyes!!! Pure genius! This will really appeal to the under-twelve voting demographic! I am a genius!!!"

IceNine said:

The only thing? Hardly... Only the most obvious PC aspect of that list. Disrespectful? I don't give a damn. It is precisely because the dems were so timid and cooperative that they lost. There was a whole lot to roll eyes about during that event. Post 9/11, dissent was made to look unpatriotic. I don't know how you can be a libertarian and not see the appalling pressures of political conformism in the US today.

IceNine said:

LMAO

Ice,you're too funny!!!

IceNine said:

For the record, rolling eyes isn't such a planned thing -- more like a moment of personal truth. There should be a whole lot more of eye rolling, given the overblown, fake and hypocritical nature of most conservative rethoric these days.
[This message was edited Thu Nov 7 5:27:51 PST 2002 by Aerogram]

Aerogram said:

I can certainly see MANY problems in American politics, but I hardly think that childish eye rolling is going to solve them.

:LOL:

IceNine said:

I don't think you've given eye-rolling a whole lot of thought if you simply call it "childish". Most of the time, when I do it, it is damn near involuntary. The last time it happened, I was being forced to listen to corporate drivel. When the person said the word "proactive" one time too many, I rolled my eyes, and justifiably so. The person who was hurling those clichés at me had only himself to blame. He concluded by quoting Napoleon, for gawd's sake!

Aerogram said:

:LOL:

Classic! Corporate jargon sucks... I hate meetings and I don't want to hear anyone ever say any of the following phrases or words again:

Win-win
Leverage
Synergy
Drill down
Etc.

Now, for Hillary:

I would argue that everything that Hillary Clinton does is a phony show that she thinks will net her some sort of political gain. What she doesn't understand is that her brand of smug, self-righteous condescension only makes her look like an arrogant asshole.

what a pointless piece of shit this is, i can't believe i wasted my time in actually reading it. Run along and give Osama some more weapons, get along i said. Good pig


i don't want 'special' treatment, just equal rights

jthad1129 said:

The same can be said for every single piece of liberal/Democrat propaganda... they are all pieces of shit according to half of the people in America.

The point that I have been trying to make with my recent posts is that about half of the people in America DO NOT agree with the Democrats at all, therefore smugly putting down all Republicans only makes Democrats/Liberals look bad... the same can be said for Republicans who put Democrats down all the time.

Ice,I know you're just trying to provide some "balance" since most of the people on this site (in America,anyway) seem to be Democrats/liberals.But,now that we know your thoughts about the Democratic Party,I'd like to know how you feel about the Republican Party.You seem to be a cool,non-religious,free-thinking person so I know you can't possibly agree with their restrictive,conservative views.

IceNine said:

Yeah but you put them BOTH(mostly dems) down so what does that say?And why talk up republicans?why not talk up your own party?
The playing field can still be level if divided into thirds?

DavidEye said:

I am absolutely 150% against all legislation that is influenced by religion in any way.

I believe that all people should have the freedom to live without the influence of religion in government intruding upon their freedoms.

I believe that there should be no laws restricting consensual sexual behavior between adults and that homosexuals should not be persecuted.

I believe that drugs should be legalized and that the "war on drugs" is just a catch phrase and an empty gesture.

I believe in freedom of choice for women in matters of abortion.

I will stop here...

I do not agree with a GREAT number of Republican views or policies and I believe that they can do great harm.

4LOVE said:

I have not put the Democrats down and said that the Republicans are great... I think that you will find that I have said that both parties are equally bad in my estimation. I only post things about Democrats because there is SO MUCH anti-Republican sentiment on here and I like to provide a counter-balance... I am a Libertarian and my views are NOT aligned with Republicans or Democrats.

Go here and you can read a little bit more about the Libertarian Party:

http://www.lp.org

I agree with just about 100% of the Libertarian platform and have been a member of the party for a number of years.

"24. Democratic Sen. Paul Wellstone's cynical and hypocritical breach of his two-terms-and-out pledge."

Too funny! Wellstone didn't have a cynical or hypocritical day in his entire life. Thanks for the laughs.

IceNine said:

Why do some people hate Hillary Clinton so much? I think a certain measure of bias is at play here. As clichéd as it has become, it is nonetheless TRUE that people resent her for having been a powerful woman who has championed liberal ideas and who is still out there seeking political power. If she would be a crypto-thatcherian power woman, she,d be a little less hated. That's because right-wing women with political weight are dismissive of traditional feminist/gender issues, and therefore not so threatening. Hillary Clinton is quite an admirable person for a politician, especially with all she had to put up with while in the White House. But conservatives have been busy bitchifying her. I think that is deplorable, given that what she represents ought to be represented on the political radar. Look at your female friends and how advanced their thinking is. I don't think that is represented in America today, and it's a genuine anomaly that is part of the backlash against liberal ideas that has been going on for over a decade.

IceNine said:

OK but i just wonder why you don't take that energy and use it to push your own party?I find i strange you would try to raise the level of republicans(which you dislike) on the org
and not promote the libertarian party(which you say you like) with the same fervor.

Robert Byrd kicks ASS!!!

4LOVE said:

I have tried talking about the Libertarian viewpoint, but nobody really wants to talk about that, they prefer to just bash Republicans or Democrats... usually Republicans.

What I am trying to do is get people to understand that their views are not superior to others and that they should step off of the soapbox and realize that the Republicans and the Democrats are no different in many ways and they function in an almost identical manner in office.

If you would like, I will be glad to post a giant amount of Libertarian ideas, but people won't really like it because I will not post sensationalist bashing of Republicans or Democrats, so most people will pass it by.

It is easier to say "Republicans are a bunch of stupid assholes" than it is to talk about issues and this is why I post what I do.

IceNine said:

Yeah but all you are doing is fueling their fire to vote dem even more.If you believe in something stick with it.
And as for me info is best when given in small doses.
A long post on the org RARELY gets read completely by me.
But i would like to learn more about the libertarian party.
So i will check the site from time to time.Maybe we get a three-way debate on the org.1 democrat,1 republican,1 libertarian and you guys put the info out there for all to see GRADUALLY

4LOVE said:

Groovy!

Here is an idea... ask me about Libertarian ideas on an issue and I will try to provide a simple answer... this could be good!

IceNine said:

Checkout " A New Position"

IceNine said:

see, this is why I just dont get your mission bub...when did people start slamming Republicans on this site? I think your basing your frustration on percieved biases and not reality...and thats why i am getting so annoyed by all these threads your starting...so annoyed that I have slowed down my daily visits to the org...

you complain that people dont want to read your libertarian threads...well, is this an admission that you only post for popularity? I create my Oddly Enough threads and get very lil responce...but once and awhile I get an orgnote from someone who was having a bad day and appreciated the laugh...Im not coming here to be the Org Homecoming Queen..Ice, I thought you were better then that...

IceNine said:

Here's a question.

Libertarians seem to embrace ideas that could be characterized as "liberal" by conservatives. Therefore, it would seem that the party that has the most to lose from the rise of a Libertarian party would be the democrats.

My question is :

Are you prepared to live through a long period of conservative dominance caused by fractured "liberal" or "moderate" forces?

I'm asking because here in Canada, we have the reverse problem. Too many parties represent conservative ideas and have no chance of forming a government, not even with a coalition. To that extent, there's been a Unite-the-Right movement for nearly ten years... and it's going nowhere. Life is good.

SkletonKee said:

I am just saying that the Libertarian threads will not do any good because most people don't care about them... since most people on here are either Democrats or Republicans, I post on that front...

If a TON of Republicans popped up posting anti-Democrat stuff, I would post the opposite.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that you cannot see the blatant anti-Republican sentiment on here? If it will make you happy, I will ONLY post Libertarian posts from now on... would that make you happy?

I don't care about "popularity" but I try not to post things on politics that I don't think people will care about in any way.

Maybe Herbthe4, Teller and myself can post some good Libertarian ideas for you guys.

Aerogram said:

"Let justice be served though the heaven's fall"

I vote my conscience and if that hurts Republicans, Democrats, Greens or whoever, I will still vote for what I believe. I would hope that the country would eventually wake up to the reality of what the Libertarian Party stands for and that they would vote Libertarian in time. Nobody will ever join the party if existing party members do not support the party.