Alan Colmes is a broken record
 

I heard him repeated the same, "yeah Bush won, but 50 million americans still voted against him," crap no less than FOUR times on tonight's show. What the heck is he trying to prove? he's using John Kerry's trouncing as a reason why bush sucks or something? huh?? Would he be happier if Bush won by 60% instead of 52%?

Uh...maybe somebody should remind him of the percentage, both times, that Clinton won by? Less than half, if memory serves.

Coombes is a poor example of representing the "other side", but maybe that's by design.

Sherwood

Who would you rather see instead of Colmes?

heh, James Carville? bwahahahah!

I hear Tom Daschle is going to be looking for a job :p

There are those of you who actually believe the tripe that comes out of Sean's mouth? Opinionated, condesending, arrogant....

Well, he kinda fits right in with the right wingnuts!!

What neither side of the political spectrum sees is the fear the other has of the canidates on your side of the fence.

GW has 2 choichs or roads he can travel in his 2nd term...one will stand him as a great presidnet and the other as a run of the mill president...

The first choich is to reach across the aisle, be aware of the fears of the other side and allay them by reaching out incorporating some of their ideas in his policies...in other words to be a uniter....after all Bush represents not only the 52% that voted for him but the other 48% as well...he needs to address their aspirations as well as their fears.

The second road is to push for everything you can...to feel like you won the election and can now push your agenda at will without regard for what the people who didn't vote for you think and feel...in other words to build the walls between the parties even higher...to be a divider...This is the easy road and in a sense to fail to represent all Americans.

I sincerly hop GW Bush remembers he represents all Americans and not just the 52% that voted for him..

And I hope that the Democrats will lend him a hand in accomplishing that goal by setting aside their animosity and offering constructive solutions to the complex problems that face out country.

After all whether you realize it or not we are all in the same boat and we all florish or perish together.

I feel sorry for Alan...I think he is propbably intelligent enough to have realized the truth about liberals....but it is his job to represent them....
He probably hates to go to work each day and have to regurgitate liberal lies when he knows thay are untrue....just to get a paycheck.

I agree fint, while he's been cast in the role of ultra-left slobbering lunatic you can just see it in his eyes that he's just reading the script.

Of course H&C isn't exactly "news" anyway.

Tabs..

Your sentiments are in the proper direction. However, quotes from the Prez make that unlikely.

"I'll reach out to anyone who shares our goals" seems to perpetuate the attitude that anyone who dissents is de facto aiding the (ill defined) enemy.

I could be wrong on that, but it certainly looks like it.

"I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it".

I would pray that the God to whom the President prays to would grant him just a modicum of humility to go with the bravado. I would like to see the nation healed. To do this will take both sides bending a bit and remembering they are public servants, hired to do the will of the people...ALL of the people.

Bob
He has been prevented from doing a great deal of things he intended to in his first term because of a liberally coined "lack of legitimacy" of the 2000 election and lack of total "ownership" of the Senate...He has both today...so why should he lie about his intentions....... or not do the things he promised to those who voted for him in favor of those who did not? I would be very disappointed if he did not move to the right as he has been a bit to willing to compromise and a bit too liberal to suit me.
I pray to the same God as the president and I would hope he would just go about doing the right thing..as he has.

The folks who need "healing" need to look to themselves first and realize that they are not the majority in this country... maybe for good reason. Obviously one cannot do the will of "all of the people" when the all want something different done. All he can hope to do...is what is right.

Kerry didn't receive 50M votes because of his good looks or even his vision or competency...He got alot of those votes because alot of Americans are scared of what GW is doing.....

Now I am not afraid of GW, because I agree with alot of the things he has done and is doing...but I certainly want to push him towards being concilatory...especially towards Americans. If GW move a half step to the left politically he might have picked up 60% of the vote or more...Kerry was that bad of a canidate...

Now I see it differently nothing can touch GW anymore...he never will face reelection..he's done. The only thing left for GW is the History books and how he is perceived. He now has a 2 year window of opportunity, in which he can do anything he likes. The the country will vote again to see if it agrees with him or not ...2006 Congressional elections. Also the wrangling for Presidnet will begin again..

If GW tries to be inclusive and he is successfull in obtaining some measure of peace in Palestein, normalize relations with Iran, and disarm N Korea...along with expand the world economy then GW will be among the Greats...thats a tough order if he hits 2 outa 3 he will be still make the Hall of Fame...

But if he leaves America divided, and is unable to achieve some kind of resolution to the other problems GW will be considered a run of the mill president...who just didn't have the bigness of heart or vison.

I think GW's model should be Abraham Lincoln...His own cabinet thought he was a monkey. Yet in the middle of a Civil War he held the presidentail election...he even felt he was going to lose that election and all the sacrafice would have been for nothing. And when he won the Civil War...did he seek vengence....no he sought reconcillation....he offered his hand....and not the stick....Thats what made Abraham Lincoln the BEST PRESIDENT the USA ever had.

BTW: Abraham Lincoln was the first Repblican President...the party was founded in 1854.

This is a funny post.

Does anyone really think that either Hannity or Colmes cares about what anyone thinks of them, oir what their roles are? Please, these guys are in 7 figures, they show up every day to entertain, nothing more, and collect a very fat paycheck.

this show, crossfire, left, right, etc., they are all just pro-wrestling versions of news talk shows, charicatures of real debate.

Even red state folks are smart enough to see that. SmileWavy

Fint:

I don't know who is the majority anymore. Many voted for Bush out of fear: fear of the unknown, fear of change. Had there been a stronger alternative, the results might have been different. The very fact that one party now "owns" both the executive and legislative branches will be an opportunity to continue doing things that the checks and balances system tries to prevent. It is the tension between these two that protects the balance and provides some measure of sanity. By the design of our founding fathers, the federal government is supposed to grid slow but fine. The very fact that we now have a massive fiscal problem could rationally be put down as a result of the lack of balance. Who is to stop and shout "Enough, already!!" Who in the Congress is brave enough to do anything to displease the leadership? Even our own Senator, McCain, had to straighten up and fly right if he expected not to be ostracized.

Like I said, Bush is the president of all the people, not 51% of the people. It is time he realized that. If he perceives that he has received a "mandate", this could be a very large step in the wrong direction.

I don't personally give a rodent's patottie. The sun will continue to rise in the east and set in the west, like clockwork. And, four years will go by whether we want them to or not. At the end of those four years, depending upon whether there has been a real effort to "heal the divide", we may, as a country, have to rethink what are our true values.

One cannot continually be a Cafeteria Christian or anything else for that matter. There will have to be some consistency in the application of moral principles. something that seems like many have ignored in their rush to embrace "family values". There has been little or no consistency for the past few years. Both parties are equally guilty of bending the rules of ethics and morality to their advantage, sometimes to the detriment of the public good.

Morality is often in the eye of the beholder. Consider that December 7, 1941 was looked upon by one side as a "day that will live in infamy" and by the other as "a necessary pre-emptive strike".

Bob
I agree with much of your last post except the part about many voting for Bush because of fear. I believe just the opposite. I think the margin would have been much greater if the dems had not falsely made:

elderly folks afraid of losing medicine and social security
young men and women afraid of being drafted
People of middle eastern desent aftiad of persecution via the patriot act
Industrial workers fraid of losing their jobs due to Bush "paying companies to outsource overseas"
Everyone afraid that the escallating federal debt would bankrupt the country
Afraid that the frennch would not like us and start charging a tarrif on french bread...etc

The fear of terrorism that you cite that may have caused people to vote Bush was logical after we were attacked on 9/11...Too bad the dems nominated a person with a lifetime of anti-war and anti-military actions and votes. what did they expect?

So someone pro-war is a good thing? I've never understood why people like war so much.

It is a simple concept. being Anti-war/anti-military to the extreme....is certainly not in the best interests of the nation. Some examples:

As a civilian, supporting/meeting with the enemy during an ongoing war

Lying about personal experiences during a war to hurt the political reputation/cause of your country

Voting to deprive troops of necessary funding during an ongoing war that you voted to approve

Voting against every possible combination of weapons during peacetime ....that your nation could use to defend itself if ever drwn into a war

Using the bully pulpit of a Senator and presidentiual candidate to mischaracterize a war and your country's motives....for partisan politics

...

Those are really small examples in the face of the much bigger world picture of diplomacy via communication. Every, and I mean every business book, Fortune 500 C-level and management consultant out there says communication is the key to success. Running the world isn't very different from running departments, say in Cisco Systems. You've got Marketing, Sales, IT, Support, Production, etc. When all of them communicate and work together, the whole company wins. This is incontrovertible. Now instead of the Cisco, think of the world, instead of departments, we have countries.

Honestly, I'd really like to know why republicans are so prone to "us against them," instead of understanding what they want/need and working together to achieve results. They see war as the solution to everything. Why do they think so small?

Sound kind of Utopian? Sure, but God, at least make an effort.

I see it as just the opposite. The liberals are determine to make any action perceived as "taken or supported by conservatives" fail; regardless of the detrimental effect on this country or its people. War is seen by conservatives as a last resort....but once the decision is made to fight a war; they will not do anything to hinder our troops or help the enemy. That is only true for Democrats if it is a Democratic administration (like in Yugoslavia). Otherwise they are in bed with the enemy.

Those who think that no regime or act is so evil or no cause is so just or righteous that our nation should go to war...are the ones thinking small.

So you think exchanging 1100+ US lives for Iraqi lives was the right thing to do? 10,000 wounded, many disfigured for life. You think they agree. What did we get that price?

War is ALWAYS the smallest thought, the most narrow, the least informed. It is an instinct that goes back to prehistory. It is a big hammer when ratchet is required. It is humanity at it's worst. to argue anything else is subhuman and truly de-evolved.

I feel sorry for you man. I'd love to meet to see what you are really like.

I am afraid fint is serious. The world is "us vs them" and very black and white. And, you ARE the enemy since you question. Can't you get that? Also..remember: You MUST respond to any question with another question rather rhan an answer.

But, like with the Mirror, I defend his right to say whatever he wishes. At least, for the time being, this is still a free country.....

BTW...lying about things seems to be the de rigour...For a moral party, considerable effort was used in misquotes, partial quotes and things taken out of context. Isn't bearing false witness also a sin and oone of the big ten? Interesting the internal contradictions.

We know little about posters since anyone can be anything they might claim to be. It would be interesting to find out how many who advocate war have been shot at in anger...We will never know for sure.

You are sooooo right Bob. IMHO, that's the real reason the republicans won. the democrats have cowered for 3 years (the press too) under Bush's "if you aren't with us, you are against us." Anyone not supporting the war, anyone questioning actions or directions, is labeled unpatriotic. "You won't need these, thank you very much." Picture Bush's hand grabbing the balls of a dog with democrats written on the side and ripping them away. I only wish I could draw!

Here's the truth. Anyone not questioning government, giving any administration a blank check, is the greatest traitor of them all. Sorry for the all caps, BUT THIS IS WHAT OUR COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Questioning government is the key to freedom.

What I really want to see though is the battle between Old Guard Republicans and the new power of the Religious Right. I have great respect for many of the tenants in true conservatism, in fact I am very fiscally conservative. But this new religious fundamentalism that seeks to legislate our bedrooms, let alone our lives, is in direct contradiction to the values of so many old white men with money.