Dear American right
 

Where does it say that because your candidate won I have to shut up?

If they could they would probably just punch (or shoot) you. Resorting to violence is another sign of ignorance.

Mike, reading your other posts I see that your ideas "flip flop" :D

Mikester -
I don't know, where does it say that?

-- The American Right.

According to the rule book (I think there is only one copy in existance and I'm not sure who has it now), lefties are now required to assume that Dubya is a brilliant administrator and that he's going to unite the nation. Oh, and there's a chapter in there about fairies, leprechauns, Santa Claus and the material that comprises our Moon.

Hey, Supe,

Was that you I saw clicking the heels of your ruby slippers (boots) together....."There's no place like Hollywood! there's no place like Hollywood! There's no place like Hollywood!" :D

Randy

Well it might be hard to tell if im serious or not. unless of course you are talking to the other mike.

I guess I could be considered a flip floper by the social conservatives...

The way I see myself is as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative.

I can live with another four years of Bush but I don't have to like him and I don't have to shut about complaining about him or his policies.

I get the distinct impression that because the Democratic candidate lost the election that those democrats and those who voted for that candidate (who may not be democrats) are supposed to submit to the right. That just isn't the case at all. This is still america and we're still free so just because you have another four years do not expect that we will quiet down and do not expect that we will submit.

2% is a small margin and that is all those of us who are in that current 49% need to win the next time. 2% - it isn't much.

Hell yeah.

Mikester -
I rephrase -- who told you you had to shut up about Bush or his policies?

and if it was Mule or somebody like Mule that actually said that, it's a more than a little uncharitable of you to hold the entire American Right responsible for such a comment.

JP

Na, let's start with the easy (obvious) admissions:
-That W may not be brilliant, but he also isn't the idiot you thought he was
-That he is indeed popular enough to be elected by a true majority of the populace
-That said populace isn't just a bunch of idiots
-That maybe a majority of your fellow citizens thought Kerry was so weak that he couldn't beat a strong but heavily flawed sitting president

Any takers?

Nobody on this board told me to shut up but somoone did tell me more less - "You lost - deal with it and shut the hell up."

That's where some of my zeal on the topic comes from but I do get the impression from some on this board that they do feel this way.

No, but it should say that America rejects your thinking. Your platform could not oust an obviously weak incumbent, this is a problem. Look to change you platform or our citizens. I hope you guys just choose complaining as it guarantees my party stays heavily in power.

It also means to some extent you get to watch us employ our vision for America without recourse. Sorta like Republicans in Cali have done for some time.
gday

Mother always did say I was a ignorant twit...and a twisted fk if I might add....but that is just one womans opinion...

Mike: you definetly need some, uh, comfort.

Your saying the GW Bush was a "weak incumbent"....Why do you think that? and What facts make you think that? This we need to hear...

Mikester - no need to shut up, none at all.

The same thing with all the Democrats in the House & Senate. But when the bills are introduced, the bills are passed and signed off on and laws and statues are created, it will be the Republicans doing the doing.

Aint it grand living in a republic!

Weak politically. I do not believe Bush is weak in the slightest when it comes to his positions and/or convictions. I am saying with all that has happened both overseas and here economically he was a pear ripe for the picking. The perception of Bush by Joe Citizen is "well he's not very smart but I like the guy". I disagree with this assumption, but it is common. That being the case, he should have been easy to defeat. I think history will alter Joe's view of him but for now that's the bold truth.

James...you may be right.

Anyway - I never thought that Kerry was a good candidate. I did however feel he was better than Bush. The upside is that the market is up; Oil is down and jobs look like they might be up as well. So...we'll see.

I'm still a social moderate and a fiscal conservative.

OK, I'd like to address this quote :

-That W may not be brilliant, but he also isn't the idiot you thought he was

• he just had brilliant political advisors that told him to stay away from the facts.. and don't let Kerry actually have a platform other than Defense of allegations ( swiftboat stuff )

-That he is indeed popular enough to be elected by a true majority of the populace

• Many of those that voted for him wanted another option, but didn't know about Kerry's stand on things cuz of the haze of mudslinging

-That said populace isn't just a bunch of idiots

• Lets just say that gullable people lead like sheep to slaughter usually are not from the upper IQ's and tend to lean towards the filter basket of the gene pool..

-That maybe a majority of your fellow citizens thought Kerry was so weak that he couldn't beat a strong but heavily flawed sitting president

• I for one would have liked to see an actual campaign from Kerry, and not have to crawl out of a ditch from mudslinging and irrelevant stuff to get to level ground... Misdirection is a wonderfull thing, no ??
  So, yeah, he may have been viewed as weak

Don