What Happened?

today, i’m sad to be an american

12 Comments so far

  1. dana bushman (unregistered) on November 3rd, 2004 @ 11:54 am

    I’m sorely disappointed too. The only thing I can figure out is that people are scared and don’t like change. War time presidents almost always get re-elected when the war is still ongoing. Bush’s campaign fought dirty and managed to bring Kerry down to their level, which is sad and utterly predictable. I guess everyone just likes the status quo better than the unknown. I for one, was willing to take that leap of faith that anything different would be an improvement. Obviously I don’t have my finger on the pulse of this country. Who wants some whiskey?


  2. Melissa (unregistered) on November 3rd, 2004 @ 12:24 pm

    I am disappointed too and would love some whiskey. The good news is it wasn’t an easy victory for Bush, which considering the past four years, if he had been a “uniter” like he claimed he was, he would have slam-dunked this election. Obviously, the nation is still deeply divided and wounded – sadly, I don’t think Bush is capable of healing the US.


  3. Rick (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 10:35 am

    I am proud to be an American every day I wake up in this country, regardless of the President. I think it is funny that the popular vote carried so much weight 4 years ago, when Bush “stole” the election, but now that he has gotten more of the popular vote than ANY president in history, it is termed as a hard fought, close, election.

    If there was dirty fighting, it was most surely done on both sides. With the money and ads of Moveon.org (remember the ads comparing Bush to Hitler?), ACT (legal actions against this group still pending), and others matching up against the swiftys and other 527s on the Republican side.

    The truth is that the majority of Americans flatly reject the platform of the Democratic party as it now stands. If you take all of the electorate that voted for Kerry, and removed the voters that were only voting against Bush (instead of the “values” of the Democratic platform) you would have an even smaller group of people (and a more accurate accounting) that believe that the plan the Democrats were selling was the best for this country.

    As for Bush “uniting” the country? It has been the Democrats that are selling divisiveness, Democrat obstructionists in congress creating bad will among their political counterparts. It was Democrats that tried to tell the country that some privatization of Social Security would bankrupt the retirement of the middle class (while never telling us exactly what the middle class was.) The list goes on. It needs to be the Democratic leadership that moves the party away from the looney left (Michael Moore, George Soros, etc). They need to move it back toward the center before they can ever expect the Republicans to meet them on a more “common” ground.


  4. Sean Bonner (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 11:54 am

    Rick – put down the propagada pipe for a second buddy. Yes Bush got more of the popular votes than ny president in history, but you know what? Kerry got more than any Democrat in history, know why? Bigger voter turn out than ever – it’s not because Bush is so deeply loved. And the majority of American’s don’t reject the platform of the Democrats, the majority aren’t even registered to vote. And of those that are, the majority of them couldn’t even find the time to go to the polls. A more accurate statement is that the majority of registered voters who actually showed up to vote reject the democrats. But to be fair, I think the “platform” isn’t as much of a problem as the “politicians.” Democrats are picking candidates that are as close to being Republicans as possible without changing sides, so there’s a hell of a lot of Democrats that are rejecting the democratic party right about now. Bush was elected, that is that, there’s no rules that people have to be happy about it, so if Sonia wants to be sad today, that is her choice, but as far as uniting, you aren’t going to get anywhere so long as you keeping pointing out the faults of the other side.


  5. Rick (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 1:33 pm

    Sean,

    I don’t deny Sonia her right to be sad. But really “sad to be an American” is a lot different than “sad because my candidate lost”. I do agree that a lot of the problems on both sides can be attributed to the politicians, but we are stuck with them.

    If you are saying that the Democrats are too far center to be electable by those that care (those that go to the trouble of registering and voting), I’d have to disagree. They are already way left of mainstream America. The agenda(s)they push (many VERY close to, if not outright socialism),others at odds with mainstream American morality, the contempt they exhibit toward individual accomplishment, the emphasis they place on the DIFFERENCES in America, the stance that ours is a problematic country, responsible for most of the problems in the world, always needing to try to please the world community. While I view these as faults, many on the left see nothing wrong with these issues. It’s really amazing. Bill Clinton lead from the center. It was the key to the success that he had with the American public.

    So I’ll restate my opinion using your definition. Of the people that care enough to have their voice heard (vote counted), they believe more strongly, that the platform AND politicians of the Republican party more closely match their view of what America should be than what the Democrats offered. The answer isn’t for both parties to move further apart, towards the left and the right. Successful Democratic leadership in the past knows it.

    And Sean, in many situations when the truth is stated the only argument is “your using stereotypes” as if there is no truth in stereotypes, the same holds true for the propaganda pipe. Sometimes there is far more truth in it than those listening care to admit. Just so you know, I am not a huge drinker of the Kool-Aid. I have been sorely disappointed by the Bush administration more than once. I had to make a decision based on what I know about history, what I know about this country and what I feel like it means to be an American. Socialism has ruined the economy and prosperity of countries all over the world. It would do the same here.


  6. Sean Bonner (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 2:36 pm

    Rick – I’m not a democrat so I’m not going to argue the method that the democratic party needs to proceede to be sucessful. What I do know is that assuming the Democratic party is too Left is a very Right observation, as most people on the left think they are too far center and that is their problem. The dems and reps both have a set of beliefs that they are supposed to be working towards but aren’t. For instance, is the gorvernment smaller than is was 4 years ago? No. Is there less Govt spending than 4 years ago? No. Is the govt less involved in personal lives? No. Doesn’t sound very republican to me.


  7. Rick (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 2:56 pm

    That I agree with 100%. Those are the things about this administration that haven driven me crazy. So what do you do? “Throw the bums out” is great when you are sitting around having a few, but you have to have a clear understanding of the alternatives. Would the Dems shrink government down to a more acceptable level? No. Would they decrease spending? Not on your life.

    As a conservative I am not sure what my recourse is. The fact remains that for every 3 or 4 things that the administration does that “aren’t very Republican” from the education bill, the medicare prescription drug travesty, to their completely incomprehensible immigration policies (to me anyway), there are many more Democratic agenda items that were more opposed to my core conservative beliefs. Its a trade off. We do the best we can with what we have.

    I am a firm believer that in order to keep the country moving politically, economically and maybe socially in a healthy way, a strong two party system is needed. The weaker the Democratic party gets, the fewer reasons the Republicans have to be responsible with the power they were given by the electorate. A strong two party system keeps them both honest (well, as honest as you can get with politicians involved).


  8. Sean Bonner (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 5:38 pm

    “As a conservative I am not sure what my recourse is…. the fewer reasons the Republicans have to be responsible with the power they were given by the electorate.”

    There is your recourse right there. You voted them into office, call them up and tell them how you feel. They only have the power because you gave it to them, if you don’t like what they are doing it’s your job to call them on it. They certainly don’t care what I have to say.


  9. Rick (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 6:17 pm

    I do provide them with my comments. I let them know that I don’t like some of their policys.

    My point was – of the two choices, I had to pick the one that aligns more closely with my view of where this country need to go. Voting them out (or the Dems in) wasn’t an option for me, because I know Socialism would ruin this country. The Republicans got my vote because they derserved it more. Obviously a majority of the voters (that care) felt the same way.


  10. sonia (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 6:24 pm

    Rick,

    I’m not sad because my candidate lost. I’m sad that despite revealing that Bush mislead the nation regarding Iraq’s yet to be found WMDs (which btw, the CIA informed Bush pre-war that there would be none there), people voted for him. That despite revealing that the search for Bin Laden was severely mishandled and practically abandoned, people voted for Bush. I’m sad that I live in a country where people decided to re-elect a liar, a manipulator, and (in my eyes) a failure.


  11. Rick (unregistered) on November 4th, 2004 @ 7:09 pm

    Sonia,

    I won’t bother to discuss the reasons for your sadness because I don’t think I would have much luck discussing those issues here. I do think that maybe your sadness is misdirected. Maybe then *if* what you say is true about Bush, the real sadness is that the Democratic Party could not find a candidate suitable enough to mount a successful challenge. If what you said about Bush (gee, where’s Sean with the propaganda pipe metaphor when you need him?:-)) were true and I thought the way you do, that would be where my sadness, and anger would lie.

    But thats just me.


  12. Chris (unregistered) on December 4th, 2004 @ 12:32 am

    Sad to be an American? I am sad that YOU are American. What happened was an election was held and Americans voted for a candidate other than your’s…

    …and remember, because you are an American – you always have the option of leaving. :)

    Or maybe instead of the hysterics – you will just stay and complain… another great thing about being American.



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.