Why Democrats shouldn't be scared - By Michael Moore

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2004-09-03 09:40pm

Michael Moore wrote:NEW YORK — If I've heard it once, I've heard it a hundred times from discouraged Democrats and liberals as the Republican convention here wrapped up this week. Their shoulders hunched, their eyes at a droop, they lower their voice to a whisper hoping that if they don't say it too loud it may not come true: "I...I...I think Bush is going to win."

Clearly, they're watching too much TV. Too much of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Zell Miller, Dick Cheney and Rudy Giuliani. Too much of swift boat veterans and Fox News commentators.

Action heroes always look good on TV. On Wednesday night, the GOP even made an action-hero video and showed it at the convention. There was White House political czar Karl Rove and other administration officials dressed up for "war" and going through boot camp on the National Mall in Washington.

I could only sit there in the convention hall and wish this were the real thing: Rove, national security adviser Condi Rice and Co. being sent to Iraq, and our boys and girls being brought home. But then the lights came up, and everyone sitting in the Bush family box was having a grand ol' hoot and a holler at the video they just saw.

For some reason, all of this has scared the bejabbers out of the Democrats. I can hear the wailing and moaning from Berkeley, Calif., to Cambridge, Mass. The frightening scenes from the convention have sent John Kerry's supporters looking for the shovels so they can dig their underground bunkers in preparation for another four years of the Dark Force.

I can't believe all of this whimpering and whining. Kerry has been ahead in many polls all summer long, but the Republicans come to New York for one week off-Broadway and suddenly everyone is dressed in mourning black and sitting shivah?

Exactly what moment was it during the convention that convinced them that the Republicans had now "connected" with the majority of Americans and that it was all over? Arnold praising Richard Nixon? Ooooh, that's a real crowd-pleaser. Elizabeth Dole decrying the removal of the Ten Commandments from a courthouse wall in Alabama? Yes, that's a big topic of conversation in the unemployment line in Akron, Ohio. Georgia Sen. Miller, a Democratic turncoat, looking like Freddy Krueger at an all-girls camp? His speech — and the look on what you could see of his strangely lit face — was enough for parents to send small children to their bedrooms.

My friends — and I include all Democrats, independents and recovering Republicans in this salutation — do not be afraid. Yes, the Bush Republicans huff and they puff, but they blow their own house down.

As many polls confirm, a majority of your fellow Americans believe in your agenda. They want stronger environmental laws, are strong supporters of women's rights, favor gun control and want the war in Iraq to end.

Rejoice. You're already more than halfway there when you have the public on board. Just imagine if you had to go out and do the work to convince the majority of Americans that women shouldn't be paid the same as men. All they ask is that you put up a candidate for president who believes in something and fights for those beliefs.

Is that too much to ask?

The Republicans have no idea how much harm they have done to themselves. They used to have a folk-hero mayor of New York named Rudy Giuliani. On 9/11, he went charging right into Ground Zero to see whom he could help save. Everyone loved Rudy because he seemed as though he was there to comfort all Americans, not just members of his own party.

But in his speech to the convention this week, he revised the history of that tragic day for partisan gain:

As chaos ensued, "spontaneously, I grabbed the arm of then-police commissioner Bernard Kerik and said to Bernie, 'Thank God George Bush is our president.' And I say it again tonight, 'Thank God George Bush is our president.' "

Please.

There were the sub-par entertainers nobody knew. There was the show of "Black Republicans," "Arab-American Republicans" and other minorities they trot out to show how much they are loved by groups their policies abuse.

And there were the Band-Aids. The worst display of how out of touch the Republicans are was those Purple Heart Band-Aids the delegates wore to mock Kerry over his war wounds, which, for them, did not spill the required amount of blood.

What they didn't seem to get is that watching at home might have been millions of war veterans feeling that they were being ridiculed by a bunch of rich Republicans who would never send their own offspring to die in Fallujah or Danang.

Kerry supporters and Bush-bashers should not despair. These Republicans have not made a permanent dent in Kerry's armor. The only person who can do that is John Kerry. And by coming out swinging as he did just minutes after Bush finished his speech Thursday night, Kerry proved he knows that the only way to win this fight is to fight — and fight hard.

He must realize that he faces Al Gore's fate only if he fails to stand up like the hero he is, only if he sits on the fence and keeps justifying his vote for the Iraq war instead of just saying, "Look, I was for it just like 70% of America until we learned the truth, and now I'm against it, like the majority of Americans are now."

Kerry needs to trust that his victory is only going to happen by inspiring the natural base of the Democratic Party — blacks, working people, women, the poor and young people. Women and people of color make up 62% of this country. That's a big majority. Give them a reason to come out on Nov. 2.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-09-03 09:45pm

That's great, Mike, but the fact that the most recent polls showed Bush got a massive bounce from the RNC (at least, massive compared to Kerry's), STILL scares me and a lot of people I know. If Kerry doesn't do something fast, he IS going to lose the election. It's one thing to keep trotting out problems you see with the Republican cause, but the people you're reaching out to aren't acting scared because the Republicans look weak. They're acting scared because the Republican electorate looks strong when Kerry doesn't. Why not address the fact that the Republicans, as of right now, are winning this election rather than ignoring that fact and keeping your fingers in your ears?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-09-03 09:47pm

If that eleven point bounce has any staying power to it at all the better worry.

Hell, they ought to be worried now. The problem is Kerry is just an utterly hapless canidate. Against any one of the credible candidates (and maybe even Dean) Bush would have been crushed. The fact that it remains neck and neck should worry them.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-09-03 09:56pm

Somehow, a bounce two months before the election somehow doesn't tell me 'It's all in the sack'. As for my thoughts on the bounce, well, another thread for that.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-09-03 09:59pm

SirNitram wrote:Somehow, a bounce two months before the election somehow doesn't tell me 'It's all in the sack'. As for my thoughts on the bounce, well, another thread for that.

I agree it doesn't mean that Kerry is buried completely, but any Democrats who don't think that it's cause to be concerned are nuts.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-09-03 10:00pm

SirNitram wrote:Somehow, a bounce two months before the election somehow doesn't tell me 'It's all in the sack'. As for my thoughts on the bounce, well, another thread for that.

It's not in the bag, but a major eleven point bounce when your guy got jack-shit should worry a sane person.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-09-03 10:00pm

Master of Ossus wrote:
SirNitram wrote:Somehow, a bounce two months before the election somehow doesn't tell me 'It's all in the sack'. As for my thoughts on the bounce, well, another thread for that.
I agree it doesn't mean that Kerry is buried completely, but any Democrats who don't think that it's cause to be concerned are nuts.

I agree Kerry should actually grow some genitalia, but my tune isn't changing just yet.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-09-03 10:08pm

I just have one disagreement. The gun control one, the vast majority of us around here (I can't speak nationally, only locally) want you to keep your hands off our guns. Having a pistol doesn't mean you're afraid, it means you're armed.

But really, I doubt this bounce is going to last. Bush will swiftly alienate large groups of Americans all over again and all will be well democratville. But Kerry could really help himself by giving me something other then "I'm not Bush." I understand that Kerry and believe me it's a point in your favor, now what else you got?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-03 10:08pm

Moore is sticking his head in the sand. Kerry was not a good choice; I said that on the day he was nominated. And they've failed to capitalize on all the golden opportunities Bush has thrown their way. Perhaps the best of the MoveOn.Org ads was the one showing little children working in sweatshops, with the tagline "who will pay for George W. Bush's deficits?"

Great ad. Taps into a very real weakness of George W. Bush. So does Kerry take advantage? Noooooo, instead he promises his own spending initiatives and magical "I'll create jobs through fiscal voodoo" platform. Everywhere that George W. Bush has left open a door which can be kicked in, Kerry was tentatively put one toe on the doorframe and figured that was enough. Any more might offend somebody.

George W. Bush has his head in the clouds, his lieutenants are spending like drunken sailors, giving YOUR money to HIS rich friends. Time for some common-sense fiscal reforms. Time to return to reality. Your children can't afford these tax cuts or these huge spending programs. Doesn't that sound better than "I'll magically create jobs"? But of course, that would mean that Kerry would have to refrain from promising his own goofy initiatives.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-09-03 10:10pm

Isn't going to happen, the Democrats have their own special interest masters to appease.

Folks, I honestly think we need to cut these two parties loose. I'm not suggesting we go insane, but we might want to look at other options here.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-09-03 10:17pm

frigidmagi wrote:Isn't going to happen, the Democrats have their own special interest masters to appease.

Folks, I honestly think we need to cut these two parties loose. I'm not suggesting we go insane, but we might want to look at other options here.

See the sig, brother, see the sig.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-09-03 10:21pm

SirNitram wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:
SirNitram wrote:Somehow, a bounce two months before the election somehow doesn't tell me 'It's all in the sack'. As for my thoughts on the bounce, well, another thread for that.
I agree it doesn't mean that Kerry is buried completely, but any Democrats who don't think that it's cause to be concerned are nuts.
I agree Kerry should actually grow some genitalia, but my tune isn't changing just yet.

I don't know what you plan on changing it to, but it should give you some pause to see that.

frigidmagi wrote:But really, I doubt this bounce is going to last. Bush will swiftly alienate large groups of Americans all over again and all will be well democratville.

Even when he was alienating the American people and the rest of the world he was neck and neck with Kerry. Now that he's not fucking up he might just be ahead. This isn't going to be that easy, not by a long shot.

frigidmagi wrote: But Kerry could really help himself by giving me something other then "I'm not Bush." I understand that Kerry and believe me it's a point in your favor, now what else you got?

Depressingly little. And all too much of it probably basically Dubya-Lite.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-09-03 11:29pm

frigidmagi wrote:Isn't going to happen, the Democrats have their own special interest masters to appease.

Folks, I honestly think we need to cut these two parties loose. I'm not suggesting we go insane, but we might want to look at other options here.

I completely agree. The parties have taken intolerable positions over the last decade. It's time we told them that they can't mess around like that and count on our support, even if no one else stands with us.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-03 11:32pm

Master of Ossus wrote:I completely agree. The parties have taken intolerable positions over the last decade. It's time we told them that they can't mess around like that and count on our support, even if no one else stands with us.

The problem is that for some reason, there are certain loyalists who honestly seem to feel that their particular candidate is God's gift to the world. The Republicans in particular can count on a huge block of people who seem to regard George W. Bush with almost worshipful adulation.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-09-03 11:34pm

Part of the reason he scares me. I don't want my leaders worshipped like they were regilious prophets, I want my church and state seperated. It's a matter of self preversvation, Fundies always burn moderates before going after the unbelievers.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-03 11:39pm

This isn't surprising. Moore's just maintaining optimism. That's what every party does. You'll notice that when people ask Ralph Nader if he thinks he has a chance, he pussyfoots around the issue by saying, "Well I think a lot of people in this country are tired of the two-party system." No politician will ever come out and say, "I'm going to lose, and I know it." Neither are those actively working to further the campaign.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-09-03 11:49pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:I completely agree. The parties have taken intolerable positions over the last decade. It's time we told them that they can't mess around like that and count on our support, even if no one else stands with us.
The problem is that for some reason, there are certain loyalists who honestly seem to feel that their particular candidate is God's gift to the world. The Republicans in particular can count on a huge block of people who seem to regard George W. Bush with almost worshipful adulation.

I agree, but I've committed myself to finding and voting for a third party. I find the actions of both groups unacceptable, and I can't bring myself to support either one. I don't care if NO ONE else votes for a third party. It's my voice, and even though it's statistically completely insignificant I'm going to do what I can when asked to use it.

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2004-09-04 12:03am

I agree, every voting cycle is a choice between the less of the two canadits I don't like.

I am still undecided, but I am leaning towards Bush this cycle.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-04 12:05am

George Carlin put it best when he said that the more important a decision is, the fewer choices you have. A hundred brands of breakfast cereal, a dozen brands of automobile ... two political parties.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-09-04 12:09am

Well that ain't working for us is it? Perhaps we need a couple more choices.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-09-04 12:13am

frigidmagi wrote:Well that ain't working for us is it? Perhaps we need a couple more choices.

I don't care about the NUMBER of choices, and can recognize that we'll never have a viable third party in my lifetime. However, I do care about the QUALITY of the two choices we are presented with. The goal of modern third-parties is not to win elections, but to have the major parties pay attention to their agendas, and move their ideologies to be more in line with that of the third-party as a method of attracting more voters.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-04 12:14am

frigidmagi wrote:Well that ain't working for us is it? Perhaps we need a couple more choices.

Our political system was designed to be a two-party system. It's obvious when you look at how Congress was set up. The Founders allowed for riders to be attached to a bill so that only the most important bills that both extremes could agree on would be passed. It's a system that embraces the concept of "survival of the fittest."

Once a third party attained any kind of respectable power, it would wipe out one of the remaining two parties, and we'd be back to two parties. That's the way it's been historically.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-09-04 12:35am

I've never been really thrilled with either the Dems or the Republicans, but I'm still somewhat wary of having a reasonably powerful third party in America. A large enough third party could pretty much prevent any legislation it didn't like from passing despite not having that kind of mandate.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-09-04 12:36am

True enough, that is what the Republicians did after all.

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2004-09-04 12:38am

Dol I smell the resurrection of the Whigs. J/K