Here is a fantastic, funny example of 2004 politics and the fine and patriotic example Zell Miller gave us of what a conservative democrat is. These are real present-day democrats, but they don’t agree with the radical leftist socialist commie pinko direction their party has taken e.g., Billary and John Flip Flop Kerry. They are still registered democrats, but in this election, they won’t be voting with their party. Zell has made it clear where he stands, and he is working to pull his party back to where it should be, and there are thousands who are in the rank and file behind him.
But then, the Republican party should probably move out of the way, then, shouldn’t they? Because they’ve moved to the left, too! If JFK were to run today, he’d most assuredly have to run as a Republican.
You gotta love it-Thomas Sowell writes, “Never a shrinking violet, Ed Koch says that he disagrees with President Bush on virtually all domestic issues, but that the over-riding issue of our time is the war on terrorism — and that his own Democratic Party doesn’t have the “stomach” (Koch’s word) for the fight. Mayor Koch understands that if we don’t win the war on terrorism, nothing else is going to matter.”
Since 1972, when the far left took control of the Democratic Party, Congressional Democrats have regularly voted against military spending and against spending for the intelligence services. For nearly two decades, John Kerry has voted consistently against military preparedness and against money for the very intelligence agencies that he now so loudly criticizes.
When the Soviets put nuclear missiles in Eastern Europe, pointed at Western Europe, Ronald Reagan countered by putting American nuclear missiles in Western Europe, pointed at the Soviet Union. John Kerry advocated a “nuclear freeze” instead. In other words, freeze the Soviet advantage in place.
Some media pundits say that Senator Kerry’s poor showing in the polls is due to his having followed the wrong political strategy in this campaign. They say he put too much emphasis on his Vietnam war record.
But what else did he have to put emphasis on?
Can you run for office during a war on terrorism by citing a voting record that includes being anti-military for decades? Can you even rely on a Senate record in favor of welfare state spending, at a time when handing out goodies takes a back seat to national security?
What was left for Senator Kerry, except trying to resurrect Vietnam, with his own spin on it, and making big promises for the future? Moreover, with the media on his side — 12 to 1 inside the Beltway — he had little to fear from that quarter.
How could Kerry know that the Swiftboat men who served with him in Vietnam would suddenly emerge to challenge his version of what happened there? Or that two prominent members of his own party would become so disgusted with him that they would throw their support to Bush?
The media have made such a bugaboo about “negative” statements or “attacks” that you might think political campaigns are supposed to be nothing but happy talk. But which is worse, that some unpleasant facts come out during a campaign or that someone is allowed to lie his way into the White House, with all our lives in his hands, on the basis of image and spin?
http://democrats4bush.com/
