The Republican party will try to destroy the Democratic nominee

[Q]

- After seeing all the threads complaining about how the Right Wing is trashing their candidates...it's clear that many haven't been paying attention over the last decade or so.

- The Bushies and the Republican party have well-paid teams of propagandists and 'image-breakers' with the single purpose of smearing and character assassinating the leadership of the Democratic party. This has been the case since the neocons and RWing Fundies took over the party in the 80s.

- Granted...politics has always been a dirty game...but the New Republican party has taken dirty tricks and smearing to the next level. To give you an idea of just how far they'll go...they impeached a Democratic president for getting a blow job in the WH and with the help of their media characterized Gore as a 'pathological liar'.

- They've been doing this for quite some time and that they're doing it again should come as no surprise.

[rucky]

1. I just noticed your sig line, Q

"Democrats are fearful of being branded "class warriors" in a war the other side started and is determined to win. I don't get why conceding your opponent's premises and fighting on his turf isn't the sure-fire prescription for irrelevance and ultimately obsolescence."
-Bill Moyers

That sums it up, don't it.

[mzmolly]

113. Yes it does, and it's one of the primary reasons I support Dean...

:)

[Ninga]

2. Look for the trashing to start

in March, with no let up until election day. *'s war chest is heaving with dough, he is rubbing his hands together with glee thinking he will make chopped liver out of our guy with all of his TV spots.

[ComerPerro]

4. Shit, its already started

The media and the Republicans are already taking broad shots at all of our candidates, and are taking very direct shots at some.

[kentuck]

12. Absolutely !

They mean to tear down them all before the nomination. But they tend ot not criticize those they think don't have a chance. You will hear them criticize Dean, Clark, and Kerry moreso than Braun, Sharpton, or Kucinich. They are doing it already. They believe in getting a headstart...

[Q]

71. But...they're holding back their 'good stuff'...

...for the nominee. They're just taking pot shots at the contenders.

- Once the Democratic party chooses who they want to run for president...expect all hell to break lose. They'll have their smear teams working around the clock to dig up dirt back to when the nominee was a teenager.

[terrya]

3. The Democratic nominee had better form a "war room"

Like Clinton did in 1992. A group that will hit, and hit hard, at the Republicans slime.

The "war room" thing is just a thought. But it worked pretty well for Clinton.

[aldian159]

31. Great movie and good idea

n/t

[Guaranteed]

5. Well Bush has got another thing coming.

We've got three years of blood, corruption, and incompetence to smear him with. Fine with me if he wants to play like that. You think we're afraid? Bring it on, BITCH.

[Q]

6. But consider this...

...Bush* had a lifetime of blood, corruption and incompetence before the 2000 campaign...and the media covered it up.

- What makes you think they're going to 'rat' on him now?

[Guaranteed]

7. Our candidate's going to drive it home.

And the media, whether they like it or not, has to listen to what our candidate says.

[Q]

8. The media will listen...but will they report it?

- Keep in mind that Bush* has been in office three years now and has committed 'bad acts' that would have meant the impeachment of any other president.

- The media will once again 'protect' Bush* while participating in the smearing of the Democratic opposition. Remember that the American media ran hundreds of negative stories about Gore in 2000...while barely touching on anything negative about Bush*.

- We should prepare for the attacks.

[ShaneGR]

73. Consider What?

huh?

[snippy]

9. Since the 1980's takeover of GOPAC by Newt Gingrich, republicans

always have spent far more money and devoted far more man hours defining the democratic party than democrats have. It is part of a very well thought out, very well funded and very well executed startegy. It has been more successful than even Gingrich expected.

[Q]

18. It has been successful...

...in that their smearing of Democrats has convinced many in the 'middle' to swing their votes towards the right. Memes like 'baby killers', welfare queens, tax and spend, weak on natinal security, hate the military...have been successfully ingrained into society's subconscience.

- They have defined the Democratic party to death. Have we allowed them to do it? Or have we been powerless to stop them?

[Kahuna]

10. We already know that, Q. This is hardly...

earth shattering news. Some of us are doing more about it than just complaining. Wanna help for a change?

[Q]

14. True...

...but it seems that the party is seldom prepared for these types of attacks. Bascially all we hear from the party is 'not true'. Meanwhile the RWing smear teams are busy inventing one allegation after another and distributing to their vast network of pundits and talking heads.

- This puts the Democrat on the defensive...spending more time defending himself than getting out his message.

- Will it be the same this time around? Probably...if we don't find a way to stop it and finally put an end to this brand of dirty politics.

[Q]

19. Do I want to 'help' for a change?

- Why is it that you presume I haven't been helping? Your prejudices are showing from beneath your skirt.

[tom_paine]

11. This is just stating the obvious, Q

And the Nazis hate Jews, too.

[Q]

16. If you look at some of the threads...

...'round here...it's as if it IS a surprise to many. Perhaps they're new at politics?

- It's easy to say it's stating the obvious...but an even more obvious question is what are we going to do about it? If the answer is politics as usual...then we're headed once again for trouble.

[SeasonedOberver]

13. Surprise, Surprise

n/t

[Richardo]

15. It started in earnest with Muskie in 1972...

Good ol' Nixon, Segretti, and proto-Rove. The ratfuckers. Watch or read "All the President's Men"

[Q]

17. Indeed...

...the dirty tricks against Democrats in the Nixon era were known as "DemocRAT-f**king".

- Now they call it 'bipartisan date rape'.

[Tatiana]

20. I was listening to Randi Rhodes one day.

And she pretty much pointed this out.

I won't even say "Democrats," but left-leaning and progressive people generally advocate fairness and "rule of law." We, inherently, expect everyone to play by those rules and always seemed shocked when the other side feels no moral compulsion to play on a level field.

It's the difference between us and them. They play by the rules as long as they get what they want. If playing by the rules doesn't get them what they want, they simply invent new rules, change the rules to their liking, or ignore the rules. If playing by the rules doesn't get US what WE want, we just suck it up and yield the outcome or point.

So the question then becomes how do we level the playing field? Do we adopt their tactics and change the rules to our liking? Do we continue to suck it up and get trampled upon?

Or do we REINFORCE (through regulation and litigation, if necessary) that EVERYONE MUST FOLLOW the same rules and laws of this land? That's what we don't do. We let them ignore the Fairness Doctrine. We let them ignore our environmental protections. We let them pass late term abortion amendments. We let the FCC allow our media to merge and swallow the little guy.

We LET it happen because we didn't FIGHT for the ENFORCEMENT of the rule of law.

[Q]

23. It won't help to adopt their tactics...

...because then we'd have nothing but a screaming match.

- It WOULD help to have bodies ready to go out and confront the RWing talking head pundits on their own turf when they try to spread these lies about our candidates.

- BUT...what's stopping us from telling the truth about Bush*?

[Tatiana]

35. Death threats.

Wonder why no Republican Senators received anthrax....

JFK, RFK, Paul Wellstone, Ron Brown... some is probably coincidence, but I find it strange that these coincidences always seem to happen to persons in positions of Democratic LEADERSHIP and not just some ol' anybody Demcrocrat.

[nannygoat]

38. Here are some good ideas for taking them on ...

31 Ways to Take on the Neocon Think Tanks: A Progressive Policy and Position Promotion Think Tank Prospectus
http://www.opednews.com/kall1103_Progressive_think_tank_Prospectus.htm

OKAY, HERE’S WHAT WE’VE GOT TO DO
http://www.makethemaccountable.com/misc/WhatToDo.htm

GROUND RULES & TIPS FOR CHALLENGING THE RIGHT
http://www.publiceye.org/ark/tips.htm

10 Preliminary Actions to Defeat Bush in 2004
http://www.stopbushin2004.com./10_actions.htm

[BeyondLeftist]

85. Hear hear-hammer on the truth- the realities!

The one thing you WON'T hear from the mass media is simple answers to simple questions. Why? BECAUSE NO ONE IS ASKING THE SIMPLE QUESTIONS!
They can try to evade, they will lie, they will try to slander the questioner, don't allow it, get any good psyche nurse to question them, they will keep them on track in a very straight and narrow way! Seriously mental health pros used to evaluating and getting answers from people like this would be the best 'hosts' to do this job.

Working American people have emotions about others that take a lot of their money and live way better than they do-that emotion is hate-with specific questions and specific answers a lot of Americans would wake up and be quick to change that emotion to RIGHTEOUS RAGE! Turn on this bunch like a pack of animals! And the only weapon we would need is the truth! So much to work with, so little time. Everyone I know is totally fed up with the lies, let alone the bullying, the constant threats, the invasions,the massacres and the corruption from them to us, WE WHO PAY THESE TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES!

How much of the huge per centage of the money taken from your paycheck goes to provide these dorks who are and lets hammer this one home too, TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES- THAT'S ALL THEY ARE-they are not God, they are not the effin elite THEY ARE TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES-who take OUR money and squander it in the most hideous murderous filthy ways & aggrandize themselves, IN SECRET, at our expense. How bizarre is that? They take our money and spend it traveling to foreign countries with an entourage of SEVEN HUNDRED other cretins. -----Who are the numerous cretins in this entourage?
--- How much of our money did George blow for this trip? The mindless masses of America do not seem to care about Iraqi civilian dead numbers, but they might care to hear about these numbers.
---how much does it cost to have any of these TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES swing by your town or city for a little cash fundraising? Are they on our dime while doing so?
---Who are the dead souls who would pay these ickys to speak let alone be in the same room with any of them-ughh EXPOSE THEM
---who pays for all of ugly Laura's ugly wardrobe? And she isn't even a TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEE!

---What was Ashcroft ANOTHER TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEE- saying to all of the DAs, law enforcement and other ONCE AGAIN TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES? in secret from us, the ones who pay.
---How much did these PR/SECRET AGENDA trips cost us? again WTF?
---Who were all of the TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES he was speaking to in private, makes me feel like they were talking about us, behind our backs-again how bizarre is this? Tackle the locals EXPOSE THEM!

TIPS FOR PROTESTERS: Ask lots of questions from your area's local authorities BEFORE you protest. Like:
What is your TAXPAID agency's behavior policies while engaging with taxpayers who are exercising their 1rst amendment rights?
What is your documentation requirements for injuries received by taxpayers while under your TAXPAID agency's protection?
Which TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES will be working that day?
Who is the head honcho I should relay any critiques or kudos to in regards to their agency's TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES work performance?
Ask for a copy of the oath to public service all PUBLIC EMPLOYEES take upon employment.
AGAIN THESE ARE NOT THE GESTAPO THEY ARE YOUR LOCAL PEACE OFFICERS

These are just a few of the questions that I would like some answers to from these TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES! Since when is the only Performance Evaluations the run by these same PUBLIC EMPLOYEES elections? Who evaluates these evaluaters besides us?

I have plenty more WHY DON'T ANY OF THE DEMOCRATS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT HAVE QUESTIONS LIKE THESE TOO?
Don't let them slip away and not answer. Hammer the locals and the big boys will be involved. Publicly ask these questions-everyone would like to hear their answers-after all they are only TAXPAID PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. They are getting away with literal murder because no one is asking the simple questions!

[gristy]

21. Hey folks, this isn't news.

It really isn't.

[Q]

22. Golly Gee...ya think?

- Perhaps that's why I put this thread in General Discussion rather than Breaking News?

- Call it a reminder. It seems every election cycle we experience this same bullshit scenario of the RWing doing everything they can do destroy and discredit our candidates. How is it they can do this when THEIR candidates are usually the most corrupt politicos ever to set foot on this earth?

[ramapo]

24. That's why they hated Clinton

This is what Republicans do. It's their way.

Clinton didn't stand for it. He had the rapid response warroom in '92. His campaign always had an answer. And he raised a ton of money. Beat them at their own game. I'm convinced that's why they had it in for him from Day 1 of the Clinton admininstration.

Gore didn't. He got trashed early on and never responded effectively. Remember Dukakis? Repubs destroyed him without a fight.

I think Dean can hold his own. Maybe Clark. You would think Kerry but I'm not sure.

[msmcghee]

25. Thanks for starting this thread.

I, for one, believe that we should continue disussing this for as long as it takes - for as many of us on the left as possible to fully understand just what we are up against - and maybe even come up with some better ideas for combatting it.

Writing your ideas down and getting (constructive) feedback from others is how problems get solved. It also forces you to check your logic. If you can't explain it to someone else - maybe you need to rethink your opinion.

The last thing we need to do is criticize someone who is concerned (as I think we all are) and wants to help find a solution. I'm not sure we'll find one today - but at least we can think about these things and focus on them creatively - and get closer to a solution that might appear tomorrow or the next day because of it.

Way to go, Q

:toast:

[KT2000]

26. Know the enemy

and it is not other Democrats, that is first and foremost.

When Hillary Clinton first went to the Senate she told Daschle they needed to set up a war room - but Daschle told her "we don't do things that way here."
Sidney Blumenthal talking at a book event (C-Span-2) told the audience that Democratic candidates have been so blindsided by the dirtiness of the dirty tricks that they become stunned and immobilized (he used the examples of Max Cleland and Al Gore).

The candidates must have a war room and as Democrats we can help by pounding the media for allowing the Republicans to get away with their dirty tricks. We can call for the media to report on the RW efforts to influence the selection of our candidate. We need to make noise.
We need a war room that traces the genesis of the RW stories so the media can see where they fit into serving the GOP message machine.
i.e., Norquist to WSJ, WA Times, to Drudge to Limbaugh to CNN to ABC,NBC,CBS (??)

Look what the RW did with that Reagan movie on CBS.

[Gingergal]

27. Q, this is like Watergate on steroids.

The repukes have broken into steal documents right in the U.S. Senate, probably done with Tom DeLay's blessings. Remember the riot staged in Florida by repuke staffers? And recently, they have revealed the identity of CIA operatives as political pay back. There are multiple enemies lists. The Secret Service has been turned into bush's palace guard. Protestors are herded into pens. They start wars for political gain. They plan conventions to exploit the deaths of 3000 Americnas for political advantage.
The gop will do anything. The end justifies the means. They put up websites mocking the deaths of Democratic senators. They are brazen because they control the media or much of it.
In relation to an earlier post that Q made stating that we need to be ready when repugs do not allow a Democrat to come to power in 2004, it reminds me of the U.S. in 1860. The slave south would not accept the legitmate election of Abraham Lincoln and so seceded. The GOP and the red states will not accept it even if the Dems pull it off despite avalance of money and smears from the repukes and even if the voting machines aren't rigged beyond hope.
They will claim fraud and will NOT give up the White House. Scary times...

[Q]

41. Not just 'scary times'...

...but a time when our country and party needs our help. As you pointed out in your post...it's gone way beyond 'politics as usual' where candidates debate ideas. The Right realized long ago that they can't get elected on their platform of totalitarian rule and theocracy. Instead...they lie, cheat and steal their way into office and then go about CHANGING THE RULES.

- We dealing with very ruthless people. We can fight them on their own turf or become victims of their tyranny.

[Skwmom]

28. If Dean is the nominee, they can do him major

damage just by revealing the truth about Howard Dean. How sad is that.

[Scott Lee]

65. If Kerry or Gephardt is the nominee, they won't even have to try

The vote is as good as in the GOP pocket.

The GOP is most fearful of a Dean nomination, don't let their poker faces fool you.

[Q]

69. They will destroy ANY nominee...

...weather they think they can win or not. That's how they hedge their bet...just in case rigging the election won't give them enough votes to steal it.

[bobbyboucher]

84. Just had to hit Dean,

didn't ya. Can't lay off im for nothin.

[Scott Lee]

110. LOL! So transparent, isn't it.....

[arewethereyet]

29. This concept ought to make Edwards look real good

About all you can say bad is that he's a lawyer (sorry councellors, no offense intended). Most of the others have provided more than a little bit of annunition for the other side to use.

[yowzayowzayowza]

30. It seems to me...

that the left has a serious reluctance to, in poker terms, CALL. During sElection 2k I logged onto Gore's site several times and begged them to challenge the media to produce a statement wherein he claimed to "invent the internet" or even further to offer a reward for anyone who could produce same. Of course, such a quote does not exist, but the money can force a dialog ON THE FACTS that the media CANNOT ignore.

[theorist]

32. We can take them on.

You know what we have to do. They know we can and will do it. All we'd have to do is blame it on a fabricated anarchist movement.

[yowzayowzayowza]

33. Ya lost me there.

Sorry.

[theorist]

34. I meant to reply to the main part the thread.

Sorry.

[chookie]

36. Character assassination vs physical assassination

I have been raising this issue for -- hell -- years now, and no one seems to be preparing to deal with the inevitable -- which is going to be the most vicious presidential election cycle in American history.

Does the Party or any of the candidates have a plan for how they are going to deal with the ruthless character assassination that will ensue? They sure were clueless about defending Gore and calling the chimp on his tactics and motives last time. Is there a candidate *ready* to go toe to toe with the ruthless viciousness of Karl Rove? Anyone have a plan?

This is the week of the 40th anniversary of the assassination (physical) of Kennedy. Those were the days, when "they" could pull off operations like *that* one! These days, they seem to prefer character assassination -- although Mr Kelly was done in the old fashioned way -- although why I am not sure.

[Q]

39. 2004 will make 2000 look like a picnic...

...because the Right has tasted unlimited power and they WON'T agree with a casual transfer of power to a Democrat.

- Many of the responses to this thread have been little more than 'Duh, tell us something we don't know'. But 2004 will be unlike any other election in history. Those who TOOK control of this country against the will of the people (majority) can't afford to let go of that power now. Once out of office and outside of the protection of the excutive branch...they'll be subjected to lawsuits and prosecution for their bad acts.

- The 2000 election was indeed 'vicious'...but in a way the Democrats shouldn't shoulder all the blame for their confused response to having an election stolen in broad daylight. Nothing like this has happened before in the 200 + years of the American experiment.

- But now that we know the extent the Right will go to gain and keep power...we should prepare ourselves for more of the same in 2004.

[MotorCityMan]

46. Agreed, 2004 will be MUCH worse

I was pretty much in a state of shock during the farce of the 2000 election.

The '04 election is going to be bad. The thugs in office are NOT going to give up power easily. And if we do manage to get our candidate in, get ready for the Clinton years, part 2. It will be another 4-8 years of smearing, trashing, rumors, innuendo, witch hunts, and nonstop lies.

The one good thing about it this time is we know it's coming. We have to ensure that our candidate is ready to dig in and fight back.

[Q]

47. What the GOP/Bush family did to Clinton and Gore...

...is not just unethical....it's illegal. But the American media wasn't 'free' enough to report that truth.

- Part of the reason Nixon had to resign was because of his dirty tricks (bugging offices, etc) against the Democrats.

- Today...Republicans use dirty tricks as standard operating procedure and GET AWAY WITH IT because the media is actually helping them do it.

[chookie]

70. We agree that it was a coup

I have maintained that the Bush Family Motto is taken from Groucho Marx's line -- "Who do you believe, me, or your own eyes."

You raise a critical issue (as usual, my dear Q). The tactics of the Right MUST be confronted, countered, and exposed.

They were able to carry off a coup successfully because one of their supreme tactics is The Big Lie. It cannot be overstated that the American people were taken by surprise, by the utter audacity of their accomplishment -- even high up. The smirkistas knew that people will not want to believe that something this big was actually happening, and they were able to seize power. The GOP went on tv and congratulated America on how it was able to have an orderly transfer of power (i.e. allow us to seize the country and do not get in our way) -- while the rest of the world watched in horror as *Americans* handed their country over to a junta. We have gone from being a Banana Republic in 2000, to Bolsheviks/Soviets in 2001. I am eerily reminded of fascist culture, of the bad old days of Soviet Pravda, and the Chinese Cultural Revolution. The images, the emotions, the tactics and the consequences are the same -- only the flags are different.

They succeed because *they* provide a certainty; and they sow confusion among our ranks. Keeping people confused, deliberately, and then provide The Only Clear Answer, while ridiculing and destroying your opponents.

One scenario I see unfolding: the economy is shit, people are losing their jobs, people fear falling further into economic chaos -- they're TERRIFIED. So will they confront their fears with objective analysis and actions, or *want* to believe that Prosperity is Just Around the Corner, War is Peace, Slavery is Freedom.

The people who have hijacked the Republican Party have made it *clear* that they wish to impose one party rule in the US. They are not going to let go of absolute power -- in fact, they can never get too much.

I admittedly am pessimistic, but believe that anyone who thinks this process is going to work itself out peacefully in our country better think again, and make contingency plans for the confrontation to come.

But will there be a confrontation? Or are Americans happy to be ruled by despots in a police state?

[Blue_Roses]

37. Bush has been doing this since he ran for govenor in Texas

against Ann Richards. He ran countless televison ads on what a drunk she was (actually she was and still a recovering alcoholic) and all the while he was hiding his dirty little secret...HIS DWI didn't come out until 2000, so YES they have a HUGE damage control team and I've been "studying" it for years.

Karl Rove is the mastermind behind the onslaught. Our candidates are gonna have to know how to think fast on their feet to counterpunch their attacks.

I think Dean and Sharpton do great with this, but the attacks will continue to get faster and harder as this year progresses.

[Q]

42. Bush* is too ignorant to do this on his own...

...making it clear that he leaves it to his 'handlers' to destroy his enemies for him. This way he can act 'innocent' and claim he has nothing to do with the smearing of his opponents.

-

[Bridget Burke]

40. This isn't news but it DOES bear repeating.

Lots of people said that Gore shouldn't run again because the media were against him--he had too much "baggage".

Whomever the Democrats pick will be savagely attacked. We need to be ready to fight. Those of us not in positions of power should arm ourselves with knowledge to fight propaganda one person at a time.

[Q]

44. That's why I like the idea of a...

...'war room' where Democrats can plan and respond to the many expected rumors and allegations coming our way in 2004 and beyond.

- We have to be much more concerned about this in the absence of the Fairness Doctrine. Networks are no longer 'required' to give equal time to both sides. It's up to us to DEMAND equal time.

[rucky]

55. Not only respond, but ATTACK

We have so much ammo we never use. It's hard to put all the bushlies together in one place for easy reference, but a war room could do it.

[theboss]

43. In other news . . .

. . . the sun will set in the West tonight.

[Q]

45. In other words...

...you know they're going to attack us and your response is a yawn?

- Welcome to victimhood.

[theboss]

48. No

My response is to fight back.

But I don't understand why this is news to anyone.

And guess what? We have guys who are going to attack Bush. That's what politics is. We won in '92 because Carville made Bush I look like a senile, lazy, out-of-touch country clubber who couldn't care less about people who have to buy their own groceries.

The Republicans just seem to be better at it these days.

[Q]

49. Good for you.

- Okay...my turn: What I don't understand is why this thread has to be 'news' in order to be relevant?

- Are you really depending on the likes of Carville to make a difference against the organized, concerted attacks planned by the RWingers? Are we once again going to bring a knife to a gunfight?

- We can't keep going back to the Clinton campaign for hints on how to approach the New Republican party. Things are different now: the Bushie Republican party has almost full control of the media. This means they can frame the debate in any way they desire.

- The Republicans are 'better at it' for a reason. They've been working at control of the media for a very long time. We may have our Carvilles'...but they have TEAMS of talking head pundits and paid-off 'reporters' that slant the news in their favor. That's all they do. That's their job.

- We have nothing like this to work for our side. The end result is that we send out people after the fact to defend positions that have already been distorted in the news.

[theboss]

50. Pessimism gets us nowhere

While I don't subsribe to the belief in the "Liberal Media," I also don't believe in this new paradigm that the Republicans control the media. Liberals are getting way way too upse about FoxNews when something like 3 million people at most watch it. As far as I can tell, the major newspapers still have a leftward tilt as do some of the networks.

What Conservatives have done and we have failed is create well-funded niche media. FoxNews, the Washington Times, and The New York Post, you don't come close to CBS and the New York Times in numbers. But Fox, the Times, and the Post have deep pockets and an unabashed way of framing issues to paint Liberals in the worst possible light. Whereas CBS and the Times may have a tilt but strive for neutrality. So you end up with "major" newspapers like the Washington Times creating stories that have to be commented on by CBS and the NY Times. It pushes their agenda to the forefront.

For some reason, we ended up with Michael Moore and Larry Flynt as our driving forces. Not good.

We don not need to copy the Right's approach and set up some kind of mirror image of FoxNews, which seems to be what Al Gore is trying to do. I don't think it will work. But we can steal the concept of using alternative media to drive the mainstream.

Why not push to get something like the Daily Show onto ABC or CNN or someplace where it can be treated as "legitimate" and not a comedy show. We had some limited success with Politically Incorrect, except Maher is more a Libertarian than a Liberal. The mainstream media is driven by money; conservatives grasp that while we seem to think ideology is more important. We need to prove that you can make money with a liberal point of view and then we can start driving the news again.

[Q]

52. It's wrong to characterize...

...knowing your opponent's agenda as 'pessimism'.

- I'm simply shocked that you don't believe the Republican party has an undue and unfair influence over the American media. Perhaps you think they're just being 'patriotic' when they don't follow through with stories that would have a negative impact on George's presidency?

- Perhaps you need to do bit more research on the people who happen to OWN most of the media in America? The media NOT owned by conservative ideologues are threatened and intimidated into reporting only patriotic news.

- Moore doesn't pretend to represent anyone but himself. He's not a Democrat and has never suggested he speaks for the party.

- I haven't suggested we set up a mirror of the RWing smear machine. My suggestion is we put together an organized effort to confront them on their own turf and expose their lies.

- "Making money' is besides the point. While it's true that the corporate media is more interested in making money than telling the truth...we need to accept the fact that this money is being fed to them for the purpose of propping up their side and smearing their opposition.

[sangh0]

116. Then why did you do it, Q?

In an earlier post, you asked theboss "In other words you know they're going to attack us and your response is a yawn? - Welcome to victimhood."

It seems you have no problem characterizing other people's position (as "victimhood") when they disagree with you (even a little. TheBoss didn't even disagree with your claim. S/He just didn't think it was "news") but when someone does it to you, it becomes inappropriate.

You also do it (while complaining when someone else does it) in your statement "Perhaps you think they're just being 'patriotic' when they don't follow through with stories that would have a negative impact on George's presidency?"

Whenever someone disagrees with you, you immediately respond by mischaracterizing their position. If you want more detail about what theboss thinks, you can ask, instead of asking such a leading question.

IOW, practice what you preach.

[Blue_Roses]

51. what a naive thought

And guess what? We have guys who are going to attack Bush. That's what politics is.

First of all, this isn't just "politics" with Rove and his group. For anyone who has seen his work in the past 10 years(governship included) one would know that he only stands to get better at his mastering art of trashing people. He is notorious for it. Anything short of recognizing that is simply naive.

Second. The "attacks" our guys throws at Bush will pale in comparison to what the rwingers will throw at them and the fersosity at which they are thrown.

Remember that Bush is trying to defend his throne...and their "rule of thumb" is "attack the enemy before the enemy has time to attack you."

Hasn't this war in Iraq taught you anything?

[Q]

53. Lessons:

- How many of you know that Bush Senior had his FBI and CIA operatives try to (illegally) dig up dirt on Clinton? That's where the 'rumors' of his 'protesting on Russian soil', smoking pot and draft dodging originated.

- The lesson here is that there are two sets of rules in our society. One for Republicans and one for Democrats.

[theboss]

61. Rove is not Superman

My big complaint here is that too many people have turned Karl Rove into Grendel.

First, let's not puff him up into more than what he is. He is probably the fourth or fifth most talented political strategist of my lifetime. Nothing more, nothing less. On his best day, Karl Rove couldn't hold Jim Baker's jock. And he is no Lee Atwater either. I think Carville is better. This is what I mean by pessimism - this ridiculous belief that Karl Rove sits in his office and twists all world events to occur in a manner that best helps Bush.

Having said that, yes, they are going to hit the nominee whoever he is. He is going to be called soft on terrorists, a big spending liberal, a fag-lover, and God knows what else.

So, hit back. And I say the best way to do it is turn the tables on them. Who is actually soft? The Democrats who built the miliary that is fighting terrorists or the Republicans who want to waste valuable resources on occupation and silly plans like SDI. Who is big spending? Look at the mountain of spending coming out of this Congress. Who has family values? Cheney's daughter's queer and Bush's daugthers are drunks.

So, expect it and be tough. But don't think that they are any more powerful than anyone else. Your just adding to their myth, and that is all it is.

[Blue_Roses]

74. naive

I lived in Texas during the governor's election in '93 and it wasn't just a slam job--it was a slam-dunk job on Ann Richards. I've never heard such vile words come from a supposive "compassionate" campaign.

Do you think GW just sits in the oval office and thinks this stuff all on his own.

Get real

[Blue_Roses]

76. But he's a genius

according to this:

http://www.texasmonthly.com/mag/issues/2003-03-01/feature2-2.php?108407125

...AS GRUESOME AS THE REPUBLICANS' defeat was in 1982, it was not total. One seed of hope was a conservative Democratic congressman from College Station named Phil Gramm, who had won the all-important Democratic primary with Karl Rove's reluctant help. Rove had been ordered by Clements to help Gramm, who had co-sponsored Ronald Reagan's budget cuts over the objections of the leaders of his own party. Rove ran Gramm's direct-mail and phone-bank operations. After his victory in the general election, Gramm switched parties, then resigned and ran again in a special election. Rove spent New Year's Eve and New Year's Day in his office as he and Gramm signed 14,000 personalized letters explaining why Gramm was changing parties. Gramm won again, and when John Tower chose not to seek a fifth term in 1984, Rove helped elect Gramm to the U.S. Senate.

Though he could not have known it at the time, Rove's timing had been perfect. Gramm was one of the early bellwethers of the political changes that were about to sweep across Texas. Counties like Collin and Denton, north of the Dallas­Fort Worth area, and Fort Bend and Montgomery, near Houston, were booming with an influx of corporate relocations from the North. Gramm's Senate victory had validated Rove's belief that the rural electorate, long considered a sure thing for Democrats, could be persuaded to vote Republican.

His business took off in the mid-eighties, first with direct-mail clients and then with bigger jobs where he was the general consultant, responsible for all aspects of the campaign. He made no more than $30,000 a year for his first four years—less than the people who worked for him—but he met his payrolls. His business grew beyond Texas, aided by his national connections. He did mail for U.S. senators Orrin Hatch, of Utah, and Connie Mack, of Florida, and for Governor John Ashcroft, of Missouri. But he never stopped doing the smaller, less lucrative races that helped broaden the Republican base. Most important, Rove was the general consultant in Bill Clements' 1986 revenge victory over Mark White. "The Clements campaign was so focused and had such discipline," recalls consultant Mark McKinnon, who worked for White (and later became a media adviser for George W. Bush's presidential campaign). "We woke up every morning and got hammered. We were constantly on the defensive. We were constantly responding to something. We would wake up with Karl's fist in our face."

By the 1986 Clements campaign, Rove had become one of the top guns in his field. He was up to eighteen employees. "Karl was one of the earliest practitioners of political direct mail," says John Colyandro, a political consultant who went to work for Rove in 1985. "Direct mail first caught on as a viable campaign ...

--snip--

[TXvote]

54. I Have Seen The Machine and It Is Deadly

Having lived in Texas I have had more time to adjust to the extreme agenda of Biff and Co. When your reaction includes the word "unbelievable" that should be your red flag to sniff out the truth. They are historically unbelievable.
They will take every dig they can on their opposition. Karl Rove may prove to be the man that out does G. Gordon Liddy in the imagination department. How many convicted criminals does it take to fill a White House? Let's not even consider the crimes yet uncovered.
Aside from the political ball busting they are infamous for, do not be niave about their ability to manipulate the infastructure of our electoral system. They have the money and the power and the cahones to hijack the election and do so for generations to come. And they will if they can.
Unbelievable is just a convenient excuse to ignore what is really going on. Mudslinging is a distraction. Don't forget the machine.

Peace,
Teresa

[Q]

58. Well said...

...and it is a 'machine'. And that machine has but one job: destroy any and all opposition.

- Many of their tactics probably never see the light of day. Intimidation. Threats of death and ruined careers.

- We saw how they outted a CIA agent as revenge for her husband simply disagreeing with the Bush* regime.

[TXvote]

62. 100% or nothing

I think one of the fatal flaws will be the GOP's insistance that their members deliver 100% at any cost or they have failed. Texas redistricting is one example. The 30 hour attempt to push through the judicial nominees is another. Though conservatives generally thrive in a shame/reward environment, any machine running at 100% demand is likely to blow.

Peace,
T

[Q]

72. I wouldn't expect it to 'blow' any time soon...

- Unlike the Democratic party...the RWingers have teams of pundits and 'journalists' with the exclusive 'duty' to smear and discredit the other side.

- These pundits don't mind the hard work because they're becoming millionaires in the meanwhile.

- At the same time...the Bushies are using tax funds to hire madison avenue PR teams to keep George and his wars looking good.

[TXvote]

78. In one sense

the GOP already "blows"

The crack up will come from within. Defectors, burnt out by the severe expectations, those who are finally pushed beyond their moral limits and forced to turn away, some like Sam Ervin will be shamed into investigating the truth, and then there will be those that lust for more blood and power than they have working to take over the GOP from inside and willing to take Biff and Co down.

I noticed a definitive crack in the n-con veneer this spring. It is a tenuous hold they have poised to blow up in their faces. Really it's amazing how long they have held on.

I think Orrin Hatch knows this. He has been desperately pushing for a bill to make it legal for a non-native American to serve as President. I believe this is because Orrin KNOWS Biff and Co are impeachable.

I mean, put this group of power players in a room with a pile of cash in the middle and imagine what they would do to get it for themselves. Essentially they are like sharks in a frenzy and prone to eating eachother.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

56. "America will not always be the strongest militarily in the world"

if anyone thinks Dean will survive that quote then they don't have a clue how campaigns work.

[Scott Lee]

66. One trick pony, yet again. Dean spoke the truth.

Are you telling us that Dean should lie to his voter base? That Dean should lie to his fellow citizens?

Why on earth should he do that?

[arewethereyet]

80. you don't actually think any other country will surpass us do you ?

there will be a coup de tait before its so much as considered

[Scott Lee]

111. Of course one will. Someday. It's historically inevitable.

Prove me wrong, by pointing to a single nation or army that has retained its supremacy for good.

I'll wait.

[arewethereyet]

112. on a relative basis, China

The US is different owing to its abundance of natural resources. Having attained it's preimminence, it will direct it's considerable resources to maintaining it.

We dominate in Nobel lautiates and we have the will and the means.

China has been very consistantly dominant for centuries for similar reasons. The US surpassed them only because of our edge in resources. Russia has the will but not the resources, Europe was doomed from the start with few resources.

[Scott Lee]

117. "China" was not always supreme, nor is it now.

They were predated by the Mongol Hordes, the Tartars etc...What you point to now is the PRC army which has only been around for about 50 years. And, it's not "supreme" for our argument's sake.

You were correct about the resources, though. However I maintain that one day we will be unable to exert control over the resources we want from around the world.

[WilliamPitt]

57. Welcome back, Q

Thanks for the reminder.

[Q]

59. Thanks...and a good morning to you, Mr. Pitt.

- As we get caught up in finding the right candidate to oppose Bush* in 2004...we can't overlook what the MACHINE has in store for us.

- Let's stop acting like victims and kick their political asses.

[WilliamPitt]

60. Agreed.

[msmcghee]

63. Many in the muddy middle . .

. . go along with the repukes because they see the repukes will cause bloody hell if they don't win. Florida was a perfect example.

I hate to say it - but until we show that we are not going to accept defeat and will cause a terrible disruption of our governement processes until they become fair and accessible to our side - we will be ignored by the sheeple.

Mild mannered, nice guy, compromising Daschle is our worst enemy.

[CWebster]

64. That is

if the Democratic party doesn't do it first...for them.

[Silverhair]

67. So what else is new? Some past presidental campaign have

been really dirty. There was one where the candidate was accused of having an illegititmate child, at a time when that was a MAJOR no-no. It isn't anything new. And both sides do it. LBJ's daisy ad, Bush v1.0 with Wilie Horton. If you can't stand the heat, don't get in the kitchen.

[Q]

68. I reject your claim that both sides 'do it'...

...and I challenge you to provide evidence that Democrats have ever used the type of dirty tricks and character assassination used against Clinton and Gore.

[Silverhair]

95. LBJ - Goldwater. Like I said, both side have done it.

[Q]

96. How can you reasonably compare...

...the 'daisy' ad with the type of dirty tricks the GOP uses? Their tactics go beyond running attack ads. Can you really compare hard-hitting ads with what they did to Clinton and Gore?

- You're pulling my leg, right?

[Silverhair]

I'm talking only about the campaign. Not the rest of the time.

Your question was narrow. It spoke of the nominee. That means the campaign phase. And if you look over the entire history of campaigns, you will find a lot of smear stuff done by everybody. I don't remember when, but one presidental candidate was accused of having illegitiment children, back when that was a super no-no. (No, I'm not talking about Jackson, which we now know to be true.) It's routine. If you can't stand the heat, don't go to the kitchen.

[Silverhair]

104. Another example.

I had forgotten about it because I haven't thought about it or watched it in years, but I happen to have an old 1944 campaign cartoon on VHS. It was shown in theaters at the time, as the regular cartoons were. It was a Democratic cartoon that had the Republican morph in Hitler, then embarressment as he realizes that his secret was out and quickly morphs back into a Republican. The cartoon outright accuses the Republicans of trying to arrange a negoiated separate peace with Germany. In 1944, calling the Rep candidate a Nazi was quite a bit different than now.

Now it is used for anybody that you don't like. The Freepers call us Nazis and many DUers call them the same.

The kitchen is hot.

[Blue_Roses]

75. did we see this out of Clinton's campaign

I didn't. So "both sides" don't always participate in ferious mud-slinging...come to think of it, I didn't see Gore do it either.

Defending oneself from such attacks is a different story.

[Skwmom]

77. I think they are going to try to destroy the Democratic PARTY

and the wrong candidate will really give them a good shot of doing this.

[Q]

91. Destroying the leadership is the same as destroying the party...

...because it keeps Democrats out of power.

- Frankly...I think any of the candidates could beat Bush* in a 'fair' election. The only 'wrong' candidate is one that compromises too much with the Bush* opposition...thus ceding political ground to them.

[Silverhair]

106. Yes, they are trying to destroy the Democratic Party. So What?

1. They can't do it.
2. How often do you see threads and posts here about the destruction of the Republican party? Often. Many DUers wish for the same thing. Back in grad school, I once had a prof predict the death of the Republican Party before the year 2000.

Nothing new. The kitchen is hot.

[knight_of_the_star]

79. You are stating the obvious

We know that they will try to do that. They have been since 1868.

[Q]

90. I think we need to make a distinction...

...between the 'old' and New Republican Party. There has always been 'conflict' between the parties...that's what politics is all about.

- But in the 70s and 80s the GOP began a transformation where the 'moderates' and 'real conservatives' were driven from the party by a new breed of far-right politician. They solidified their power (including the media) in the 90s and used it to try to keep the Republican Revolution going and to keep Clinton out of office.

- They weren't able to keep Clinton from taking the White House so they did the 'next best' thing: they prevented him from governing and advancing the Democratic agenda. They divided the nation against him and misused the power of their office to hold one hearing and investigation after another.

- After Clinton...their biggest fear was Gore...so they set out to destroy him. The rest is history.

[Ksec]

81. from what the mood of DU is lately, it seems we are doing a pretty good

job of that ourselves.

[Q]

92. Good point...

...and the 'other side' does everything they can to encourage infighting. It's easy to do because of the influx of conservatives into the party.

- We fight about things like abortion and social security...while THEY steal the issue...pervert it and then use their majority to pass THEIR version.

[David Zephyr]

82. Nixon Actually Went Pretty Far, Too

But I think that 2004 will be the grand daddy of all election thievery.

And just as the GOP had been purging voters from the Florida registration lists up to two years before the election, and had been infiltrating county agencies and downloading from their computers voter information, so are they right at this very moment loading the dice for their "victory" in 2004.

I'm with you, Q.

[Q]

87. Some other posts talk about Nixon...

...and his teams of 'rat-f**ers'. Now that you mention him...it seems that hiding corruption and attacking the opposition go hand in hand. It keeps those who could prosecute you off balance and on the defense. They attack to hide their corruption.

[ShaneGR]

83. This just in, Republicans will try to smear our candidate.....

One word, well not really a word, and expression.


DUH

[Q]

88. They don't just 'smear'...

...they 'destroy'. There's a big difference. They can't afford to leave a popular Democrat standing..so they kneecap him. The idea is to drive them OUT of politics if they can...like they did Gore.

- The 'duh' response really doesn't help.

[Gman]

86. I'm astounded that we don't do the same thing

with a sitting (albeit illegal) president that's been convicted of DWI, lied about his alcohol and drug abuse (and no doubt with these problems there has to be some spousal abuse), AWOL from the Guard and tons more, we should be going for the jugular with these very real issues.

[Q]

89. No need for surprise...

- I was reading an article the other day...think it was by Ivins...talking about the fact that the Right is much better than the Left at...hating. Most Democrats simply can't find the level of HATE required to go on the attack.

- But on the other hand...there is absolutely no reason why we can't use the truth against this administration. We don't have to use his past against him...we can used his failed 'presidency', his arrogance and secrecy.

[loudsue]

93. The Mob-infiltrated rightwing has taken over EVERYTHING...

:loveya: They've taken over everything ...except the hearts and minds of truly patriotic Americans who bother to READ, and educate themselves...which a true Democracy requires of its citizens who are supposed to BE the governors of their country.

You can't inform yourself by having your head up some tabloid news station's butt!

The mob has been running the country for too long...creating a banana republic in the most powerful country in the world. It's time to clean house...and senate.

:kick:

[Q]

94. The mob metaphor is appropriate...

...to use in this case. But the problem remains: they don't LOOK like a mob because the media is always there to label them as 'patriotic' or 'righteous'.

- A case in point is the 'mob' that roughed up and intimidated the election workers in Florida. They were identified as staff members of Republican politicians...but the media portrayed them as 'concerned Americans' from the Florida area just standing up for their rights. But few if any of them were actually from Florida and were there to disrupt the recount. I would bet that many Americans still don't know the truth about who sent this mob and why they were there.

- I agree that we need to 'clean house'. But first we must ALL agree that the 'house' is dirty and that it needs cleaning.

[Tellurian]

98. Have any idea when Conason's movie is ...

going to play concerning the VRWC and Clinton's persecution that eventually led up to the Impeachment?

People need visuals to connect the dots!

[Q]

100. I haven't heard about the Conason movie...

....but I just ordered a copy of 'Unprecedented'...about the theft of the 2000 election.

[Tellurian]

114. Conason's movie- "The Hunting of the President", expose of the VRWC:

"Hunting the President" - Conason/Lyons/Thomason film on Clinton Impeachment set for 2004 debut

KATV.com ^ | October 24, 2003 |

Posted on 11/04/2003

Hot Springs is a haven for serious movie goers this weekend, as the 12th Annual Documentary Film Festival kicks off. Friday's featured film was titled "Hunting The President," it's based on a book by Joe Conason and Gene Lyons. The film's producer, Harry Thomason, is an Arkansas native. He was on hand, along with the authors, for a question and answer session Friday night.

Channel 7's Michelle Rupp reports:

Movie goers only saw pieces of the film. Thomason tells me it will be finished by the first of the year and premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah. The customary champagne and popcorn reception was held opening night, before the hundreds were able to see the feature film.

"Hunting the President" is a documentary, based on the Clinton years in the White House. It lays out what some would describe as scandalous events during his administration. Thomason says the hardest part in making the movie was taking the 1,000 hours of film and cutting it down to only 90 minutes. However, he was willing to give us a nugget.

(Thomason) "You'll find the Susan McDougal story one of the most compelling pieces you've ever seen, and something's that she's never said on the air before and they're not even nasty things, they're personal things."

The documentary film festival begins Saturday morning at 10:00 and will continue for the next week. For a complete listing of movies, times and prices, you can log onto our website at katv.com



**************************************************


‘The Hunting of the President’ Documentary film will make premiere at Spa film fest

BY JOHN LOVETT

THE SENTINEL RECORD (June 17,2003)

How far did the right-wing go to bring down the Clintons?

Hot Springs Documentary Film Festival-goers will get the chance to make up their own mind Friday, Oct. 24, when a film on the subject makes its U.S. premiere with filmmaker Harry Thomason.

The documentary, based on Gene Lyons’ and Joe Conason’s book “The Hunting of the President: The Ten Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton,” will first premiere at the Toronto Documentary Film Festival in September.

“It disrupts myths and explains how people opposed to the Cintons were connected,” Thomason said of the film Monday from Mozark Productions in Los Angeles. “It’s definitely a fact-based film. Nobody can sue us for what’s said.”

In a May 2000 review of “Hunting the President” J. Kingston Pierce wrote in January Magazine that “few of his 40 predecessors attracted hateful right-wing extremists and nutball consipiracy-mongers as prodigiously as Bill Clinton has done. . . As ‘The Hunting of the President’ recounts ever-more outrageous indictments against Bill and Hillary Clinton, only to shoot each down in a barrage of well-documented and often previously ignored exculpatory evidence, it’s frightening to realize how easily cabal’ of well-financed Clinton haters (‘an angry gallery of defeated politicians, disappointed office seekers, right-wing pamphleteers, wealthy eccentrics, zany private detectives, religious fanatics, and die-hard segregationists’).”

Thomas, a confident of former President Bill Clinton and co-producer of the TV shows “Designing Women” and “Evening Shade,” is expected to make the premiere with wife Linda Bloodworth-Thomason, Hot Springs Documentary Film Institute Executive Director Melanie Masino said recently.

[YNGW]

97. comment

That's politics.

:wow:

fitda

[Q]

99. Actually, no...it isn't 'politics'...

...at least not the type of politics needed in a free country.

- For a democracy to work there must exist an even playing field for both sides....with everyone agreeing upon a set of rules and then abiding by them.

- We must accept that the Republicans aren't interested in Democracy and have other plans for this nation. They really do believe that the means justifies the end. They will gladly destroy the 'village' to save it if it means staying in power.

[YNGW]

105. comment

I consider it to be politics, so that's what I call it and will continue to call it.

:)

iiwysaoiwafi

[fallow]

109. I think you mean the "end justifies the means"

?

[criticalwords]

101. Well, if it's Dean...

...destruction is inevitable.

They won't even have to spend a lot of money to "DESTROY HIM."

He'll do it to himself, and the Democratic party also.

A mass exodus from the party will occur with a pisspoor candidate like Dean, and a second Bush term will seek to destroy the Democratic party and render it nonexistent.

That's what will result from a Dean nomination.

I don't care if you disagree.

It doesn't change what will happen, and YES, I do know...

[Q]

102. The point has always been...

...that they were destroy any candidate. They won't care if it's Dean or Clark or anyone else. Any Democrat with a following will be their target.

- I refuse to turn this thread into a tirade against any candidate. The object of our scorn needs to focus on RWing dirty tricks against Democrats.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

103. Gee....that's a real newsflash.

[Q]

107. I appreciate you kicking the thread...

...but how about a dialogue?

- The radicial right is kicking our asses and framing the debate...and all you have to say is that it's not a 'newsflash'?

- We need ideas...ways to neutralize the attack dogs that will most certainly do to the 2004 nominee what they did to Clinton and Gore.

- Are we simply going to 'take it'? Or come up with a plan?

[Kazak]

108. To quote our fearless leader:

Bring 'em on.

[Tellurian]

115. Check out post #114

VRWC movie info..