Free Speech Feeding Frenzy Fodder

[Bertha Venation]

perhaps I should've entitled this "flame war fodder" but I hope it doesn't turn out that way

Recieved in email today:

Dear Kimberly,

I am writing you today as a fellow supporter of Howard Dean. It is now more important than ever that we stand up with him.

At yesterday's presidential debate in New York City, the Washington candidates continued their relentless attacks on Howard Dean. For the past month, the establishment candidates have been conducting orchestrated assaults on Dean's character, employing radio ads, speeches, direct mail, and a whisper campaign questioning the Governor's commitment to key Democratic values -- one of them has even created a website devoted exclusively to criticizing Howard Dean.

As Howard Dean said at the debate, "We need to remember that the enemy here is George Bush, not each other." []

We need Howard Dean's bold leadership in the White House. Strong fundraising keeps our campaign's momentum going; it pays for such-needed media buys in key battleground states and it attracts new supporters to Howard Dean. And continuing strong fundraising will also help with the campaign's latest bold move: hiring a coordinator for each of Iowa's 99 counties.

There are five days left before the FEC filing deadline. I urge you to make a contribution now to help Governor Dean:

http://www.deanforamerica.com/contributetoday

I know that you have done a great deal to get Howard Dean to where he is today. But today and for the next five days the most important thing he needs is your financial support. Please join more than 150,000 Americans who have already contributed.

Thank you for taking the time today to support Howard Dean.

Sincerely,

Martin Sheen

(I also got an email from Rob Reiner.... )

I'll just climb the stairs to the balcony and enjoy the show.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by Bertha Venation
As Howard Dean said at the debate, "We need to remember that the enemy here is George Bush, not each other." [/i][]

Excuse me Howard, but at this stage of the battle the other 8 are the enemy. He lost some points with me, but who else do the Dems have?

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Bertha Venation
(I also got an email from Rob Reiner.... )

Ooooooooh! *she wiggles her fingers excitedly*

 

[mainman]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Ooooooooh! *she wiggles her fingers excitedly*

I so want to comment on this..... (frickin respect )

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Ooooooooh! *she wiggles her fingers excitedly*

It's more of the same. They're just chatting up Howard Dean. Shall I post his letter, too?

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Bertha Venation
Shall I post his letter, too?

You got a letter from Meathead, President whats-his-name AND Fart Man? WOW!! I may faint.

To my good friend, [insert name here],

Please send us money so we can kick our mortal enemy, George W. Bush, out of office and replace him with a REAL leader!

With warmest regards,

The guy who played Charlie Sheen's father in Wall Street

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
You got a letter from Meathead, President whats-his-name AND Fart Man? WOW!! I may faint.

Of course, I fainted dead away that these fine, fabulous Americans, who should all be on Mount Rushmore, let alone in the White House & Cabinet, would deign to write a lowly grunt Democrat like me.

Give me a break.

I got letters from Howard Dean's campaign with those guys' names on them. I posted the Martin Sheen letter because conservatives seem to despise him and I wanted to see what kind of reaction it'd get. The Democratic party doesn't have a corner on the market of using outspoken celebrities of like minds to hawk their wares. I've had email from other Democrats' campaigns, too. I'd offer comparison letters from people campaigning for the president, but, not having supported a Republican for office for a very long time, I haven't received any.

 

[Frank]

I guess among the other things that bugs me about celebrities who are so vocal about their political opinions is, some of the crap they regurgitate is just terrible (vis - some of Streisand's gaffes, like confusing Iraq with Iran and quoting a non-Shakespeare source as Shakespeare). And *regurgitate* is what it is - she only made THAT mistake because someone equally ill informed told her.

I e-mail some of my old friends in Taxachusetts. Some of them are reasonable Democrats who know that some of their guys, like Kerry and Kennedy, are just big-mouthed blowhards, but they agree with them *politically* and so forgive their bombast. But although all of them hate and despise John Ashcroft, none can actually tell me WHY they do. One actually said - well all I know is I'm *supposed* to hate him for *something*, so I will go look it up and get back to you.

So what does this have to do with celebrities? They get a big platform to stand on and tell us stuff which doesn't stand up to scrutiny, but because they are celebrities and not elected officials, they don't have to answer for it when they're wrong. If a newspaper or newschannel says something patently wrong, they WILL pay for it, and will have to retract it. Celebrities very often have a MUCH wider reach than your average paper or newschannel - at least, in reaching the average American who reads little beyond the comics and sports page - and they get to shape the opinions of Americans.

I go to some of these guy's politically charged websites, and part of me thinks my God, this moron is SO ill-informed, he must be getting his news from the gossip columns - please, God, let ME debate him (and I don't know *anything*).

 

[vraiblonde]

Bertha, I'm curious why you thought it would start a flamewar that a bunch of rich guys wrote you letters asking you for money?

Think about it - who has more dough, you or Martin Sheen? Rob Reiner has lots of dough - why is he panhandling from you?

 

[Larry Gude]

Couple points...

...this is an example of how great an idea it is, thank you Alan Keyes, to require all political donations to come ONLY from voters (no PAC's, no Unions, no Corporations) and to be publicly listed, name and amount, right away.

Then, everyone can know who you are by the company you keep.

It has impressed me greatly that Dean has built his campaign on fairly broad appeal via the net and gotten folks to buy in to his leadership.

That said, he is entering back track mode lately.

He is backing off of his correct opinion of Medicaid as the huge mess it is.

He is singing that same sad song that all progressive liberals are required to in order to gain membership: Newt Gingritch is the most evil person in the history of the world.

I am sure it won't be long before he about faces some more and comes out for 'gun control'.

And the biggest one: Now that the national stage beckons, progressives (works better than 'liberal' I guess) are currently trying to get moderates to believe that their hopes and dreams do not begin and end with absolute hatred of George W. Bush. So, what does Howard do? "George Bush is the enemy, not each other." To a cheering audience.

The 'enemy'???

How dare any one compare him to Newt! And George Bush is the enemy. Not 'opponents'. Not 'loyal opposition'. Not even 'the problem with everything'. The ENEMY.

Correct me if I am wrong, but not once did I hear any of these fine folks refer to Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden or radical Islam as the 'enemy'. Or un-employment. Or illness. Or poor education.

 

[Bruzilla]

I got quite a chuckle when I heard Dean talking about unity amongst the candidates. If I were him I would be distancing myself from the rest of those losers as fast as I could. As I was listening to the debate I heard lots of stupid statements and positions that I wouldn't want to be a party to. Like...

1. The need to maintain lower interest rates to promote home ownership while also needing higher interest rates to increase the rate of return on savings.
2. The need to force foreign countries to treat their workers better, which will result in increases in the costs of foreign-made goods, while wanting to lower the expenses of lower-class Americans.
3. The need force American businesses to march in line with the Democratic agenda by imposing lots of regulations, while at the same time encouraging businesses to not move overseas.
4. The need to stick it to "The Rich" while providing financial assistance to businesses, owned by "The Rich", but without "The Rich" benefitting from the assistance.

I thought the high-point of the debate was when Dean showed the guts to actually say that the Dems need to be honest with the American people and admit that there's no way that we can afford tax cuts, healthcare, and all of the other things that the candidates are promising. I thought the low point was when Al Sharpton was asked to define who "The Rich" are, and he said that "The Rich" was anyone who can afford to live the way they would like to. That's scary in and of itself... but what's worse is none of the other nine on the stage challenged him on it.

BTW... speaking of Martin Sheen... I was watching the movie "The Dead Zone" yesterday and I had forgotten he had played another President in that movie. As that President, Sheen was a psycho who would launch World War III and destroy the world if he got elected. Then when he doesn't become President he ends up blowing his brains out in a smoky hotel room. Oh... if only life followed fiction sometimes.

 

[Larry Gude]

Bruz...

...regardless of party there is a profound turbulance in our national politics and always has been. It seems clear to me that the founders knew this would occur, absent a monarchy or dictatorship, and planned for it; for everything in politics to be potentially difficult on an epic scale.

The net result has always pretty much been that nobody can do to much or consolidate to much power.

Witness Iraq. The only reasonable alternative to using force against Hussein was the continued sinking of the UN into international irrelevency and accepting an unstable status quo in terms of the myriad threats Iraq posed to world and our own security. We actually have Democratic candidates for President calling our current President the enemy all the while lamenting the loss of a world class mass murderer.

Conversely, witness the Do Not Call registry. Telemarketers are recognized universally as an enemy to all and the federal laviathan reacted with devestating swiftness to smite this threat.

Absurd. It is profoundly simple to make a case that Hussein was a far larger threat to us all than unwanted phone calls.

Now, as the Congressional support for use of force against Iraq was about as unanimous as the feelings about telemarketers, will we see the Democratic 10 1/2 come out four square against the President on this one as well in a few months?

"We were lied to! People are losing jobs!"

 

[Bruzilla]

I agree with your opening statement Larry, but I think we differ on the issue of scale. Yes the FF's wanted there to be debate and division, but they expected logical debate and division, which is absent today. Back in World War II there was lots of division and debate, but it was restrained and sound. Now you have opposition leaders taking their opinions to a world-wide media and their arguments, like the ones I referenced above, make no sense.

Suppose that in 1944 Thomas Dewey and the Republicans had gone on Japanese and German radio stations and to newspapers and said "if I'm elected I'll put a quick stop to this war! I'll give into the demands of other nations and bring our troops home!" Suppose they had said "Americans will not tolerate any more casualties and more and more people every day oppose this illegal and immoral war." Do you think Japan would have surrendered? The Germans? Would they have fought a whole lot harder? Forget the Founding Fathers... Democrats today are doing things that I doubt Americans living today condone.

I kinda agree with the hold on the Do Not Call list. Why should religious groups and politicans be exempted? I don't want to be bothered by Sister Maria or Senator Smith during dinner anymore than I want to hear from the folks at Comcast.