Well, this was supposed to be my response in my other thread, but...

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Hmmm... well, now that I see that I am being quoted as saying "I am not Alcon" I woudl liek to explain that my comment was not intended to be any kinda of statement against Alcon, and I appologize for it.

you disappoint me, man. I was right there with you, raging against the machine.  I was Dennis Hopper and you were Colonel Kurtz.

And now, what's this?!  you're gone! 

Who will tell your story?

I will! I will tell your story!...:

"I've seen horrors... horrors that you've seen. But you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that... but you have no right to judge me. It's impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror. Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies. I remember when I was with Special Forces. Seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate the children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for Polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried. I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out. I didn't know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God... the genius of that. The genius. The will to do that. Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they were stronger than we. Because they could stand that these were not monsters. These were men... trained cadres. These men who fought with their hearts, who had families, who had children, who were filled with love... but they had the strength... the strength... to do that. If I had ten divisions of those men our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are moral... and at the same time who are able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling... without passion... without judgment... without judgment. Because it's judgment that defeats us."

[12th Doctor]

Hmmm... well, now that I see that I am being quoted as saying "I am not Alcon" I woudl liek to explain that my comment was not intended to be any kinda of statement against Alcon, and I appologize for it.

you disappoint me, man. I was right there with you, raging against the machine.  I was Dennis Hopper and you were Colonel Kurtz.

And now, what's this?!  you're gone! 

Who will tell your story?

I will! I will tell your story!...:

"I've seen horrors... horrors that you've seen. But you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that... but you have no right to judge me. It's impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror. Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies. I remember when I was with Special Forces. Seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate the children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for Polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried. I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out. I didn't know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God... the genius of that. The genius. The will to do that. Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they were stronger than we. Because they could stand that these were not monsters. These were men... trained cadres. These men who fought with their hearts, who had families, who had children, who were filled with love... but they had the strength... the strength... to do that. If I had ten divisions of those men our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are moral... and at the same time who are able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling... without passion... without judgment... without judgment. Because it's judgment that defeats us."

LOL... thanks man, that really did cheer me up, believe it or not.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

LOL... thanks man, that really did cheer me up, believe it or not.

It's always good to put things in perspective.

Rom 12:21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

[NewFederalist]

Wow... just wow! So much hatred... so little time.

[Deano963]

Deano, I don't see why you don't believe it, since there is nothing really surprising about it.

Sorry, Gustaf, I need this little thing called "evidence" before I will believe a rumor to be true. If you don't make a habit of that that's fine, but I do.

I don't think Chris is lying, but then again, I know him better than you do. I guess I don't consider rudeness to be as virtous as you seem to do.

First of all Gustaf, I never said he is lying. I simply said he has presented no evidence - there is a big difference and I am sorry you are uhable to see that.

Second of all, I was never rude, unless you equate being a skeptic with being rude. I have this terrible habit of not believing heresay, I'm sorry if that upsets you.

If you can't argue without putting words in my mouth that should probably serve as a clue to you that you should not be arguing with me in the first place.

Lol, I don't know why I even try...

I've been trying to figure that out myself. You always lose yet you keep coming back for more. Weird.

[Deano963]

 During the campaign, the Democrat used certian little code phrases several times which were intended to put the idea in people's heads without just saying it.  I am assuming that, if they had any evidence, they would have just broke the story.  The code phrases included "I am a family man and **** is not."  "I have raised a family."  "I am married and **** is not."  

Wow, Soulty - you know whose tactics that reminds me of?

Well, besides every single Republican on the face of the Earth.....it reminds me of how Nancy Pelosi is constantly referred to as a "San Francisco liberal" by the rightwing bigots.

I'll leave it to you to decide what the Republicans are trying to infer about Pelosi when they describe her that way..........

It's funny I've never seen you get all angry about this kind of thing when the republicans have been doing it for years and years and years......

.

Once again, show me proof that I had anything to do with "tactics" of the Republicans and I will grant you your peace on that.  

Wow. All of a sudden you are interested in proof. LOL!!!!

My God you are the biggest hypocrite on this forum.

[Deano963]

Um.....thanks dude. Now.......

Can you please explain to me WHAT ON EARTH ANY OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH YOU BELIEVING THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN?

Sorry for the confusion, my post was a repost from another thread....but, basically, you called me a bigot for believing homosexuality is a sin. 

My usual retort is to point out that in order for your logic is be consistent, then you have to call me a bigot for believing lying is sin, and a bigot for believing the same about fornication, and a bigot for believing the same about adultery,  and a bigot for believing the same about murder,  and a bigot for believing the same about hatred,  and a bigot for believing the same about stealing,  and a bigot for believing the same about impurity,  and a bigot for believing the same about debauchery,  and a bigot for believing the same about idolatry,  and a bigot for believing the same about witchcraft,  and a bigot for believing the same about hatred,  and a bigot for believing the same about discord,  and a bigot for believing the same about jealousy,  and a bigot for believing the same about fits of rage,  and a bigot for believing the same about selfish ambition,  and a bigot for believing the same about dissensions,  and a bigot for believing the same about envy,  and a bigot for believing the same about drunkenness.

Again, your post makes no sense at all. Basically what you just did was rehash everything you already said as if you were saying something new and it still makes no logical sense whatsoever. You seem to be assuming it as fact that homosexuality is a sin like stealing is a sin. Therefore your argument is fundamentally flawed. Your logic needs a ton of work buddy.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Again, your post makes no sense at all. Basically what you just did was rehash everything you already said as if you were saying something new and it still makes no logical sense whatsoever. You seem to be assuming it as fact that homosexuality is a sin like stealing is a sin. Therefore your argument is fundamentally flawed. Your logic needs a ton of work buddy.

So, you refuse to call me a bigot for believing fornication is a sin...along with adultery, murder, stealing, lying, etc...but you will call me a bigot because I believe homosexuality is a sin. 

And you claim my logic needs a lot of work?!

[afleitch]

Again, your post makes no sense at all. Basically what you just did was rehash everything you already said as if you were saying something new and it still makes no logical sense whatsoever. You seem to be assuming it as fact that homosexuality is a sin like stealing is a sin. Therefore your argument is fundamentally flawed. Your logic needs a ton of work buddy.

So, you refuse to call me a bigot for believing fornication is a sin...along with adultery, murder, stealing, lying, etc...but you will call me a bigot because I believe homosexuality is a sin. 

And you claim my logic needs a lot of work?!

Actually it does; you see every 'sin' of equal worth lumping gays in with murders which is not logical (but at least it is consistent) and then saying to people that if they don't believe that homosexuality is sinful then they must also be an apologist or condoner of murderers, thieves etc which is essentially bull.

But this is a thread about an election so lets steer it back to that.

[12th Doctor]

 During the campaign, the Democrat used certian little code phrases several times which were intended to put the idea in people's heads without just saying it.  I am assuming that, if they had any evidence, they would have just broke the story.  The code phrases included "I am a family man and **** is not."  "I have raised a family."  "I am married and **** is not."  

Wow, Soulty - you know whose tactics that reminds me of?

Well, besides every single Republican on the face of the Earth.....it reminds me of how Nancy Pelosi is constantly referred to as a "San Francisco liberal" by the rightwing bigots.

I'll leave it to you to decide what the Republicans are trying to infer about Pelosi when they describe her that way..........

It's funny I've never seen you get all angry about this kind of thing when the republicans have been doing it for years and years and years......

.

Once again, show me proof that I had anything to do with "tactics" of the Republicans and I will grant you your peace on that.  

Wow. All of a sudden you are interested in proof. LOL!!!!

My God you are the biggest hypocrite on this forum.

I gave you proof, or rather Bacon did.

There is an obvious difference between these circumstances, however... out of my more than 11,000 posts on this forum I am certain that if I approved of these kinda tactics, you would be able to find at least one of my posts over the last 3 years that would show it.  You can provide proof in that way.

I can't bring "The List" (as the NEW YORK TIMES reported it) here to the forum.

[MarkDel]

Someone just emailed me the link to this thread, and even though I no longer post here, I felt the need to come and comment based on the fact that my name was used as a weapon against Chris Soulty.

While it's true that I used to work for Lee Atwater and greatly admired the man and his tactics, I assure you we never did anything quite as despicable as what was done to Soulty's friend. But even if we had, it would have been justified in my mind because our tactics were always in response to those sort of tactics being used against us. As I told you people a few years ago, the Democrats ROUTINELY engaged in this sort of behavior against us, and a person can have one of two responses...

1. They sit back and take it and retain the moral high ground...but probably lose.

2. They fight back every bit as hard and employ the same kind of despicable tactics.

My main point is that I loved Atwater because he was the one Republican I worked with who was every bit as vicious and heartless as the Democrats we came up against. So I make ZERO apologies for what he was, what I was, or what I think the Republican party sometimes NEEDS to be to combat the other side.

BUT...Chris Soulty is a different sort of animal. He is without a doubt the finest human being I encountered during my days on this forum, and perhaps too good a guy to be in the political game. After reading this and another thread by Keystone Phil, it has been very sad for me to see two such fine young men become disillusioned...they are going through the same sort of personal evolution that I went through at their age. My reaction was to embrace the Atwater style and seek to DESTROY those who attacked us in that manner, and I eventually left the game partly because I did not see the same "fire" in the hearts of my fellow Republicans when we allowed Bill Clinton to win the White House in 1992.

So Chris, and to a lesser extent Phil, I am very sad that two decent and honorable young men like you had to receive such a bitter lesson in the way modern American politics works. Sadly, the truth is that people like Wakie and JFern and others of that ilk are the RULE in modern politics and not the exception, and the Casey campaign was merely an extension of that Democratic Party mentality. The ideologues in their party are so utterly convinced that they are right and that our side is either stupid or evil, that they can rationalize ANY behavior no matter how despicable.

So I would tell you, with much regret I might add, that decent guys like you need to either embrace this sort of "sausage making" politics, or get out of the business the way I did. Go find a nice girl, make a bunch of money, raise some decent children and isolate yourself as much as possible from the influence of the Left Wing thought police who will try to brainwash your children into being good little socialists.

And if you and/or Phil want to talk with me more about this, feel free to post or please send me Private Messages since I'm pretty reluctant to start posting here again since this forum has long ago turned into a VERY unfriendly place for anyone on the right side of the political spectrum.

Mark D.

PS--Reading this thread has again illustrated for me the painfully obvious conclusion that the young European posters here are VASTLY more impressive than the young American posters. People like Gustaf, Al and others...I may not agree with them on every issue, but they are so much more rational and coherent than the young Americans who share their political views.

[Wakie]

Ahh .... the lovely irony of this posting is delicious.  At once Mark sings the praises of Lee Atwater for engaging in dirty politics but criticizes Democrats for engaging in them.  Hypocritical?  Absolutely.  Either you condemn this behavior universally or you condone it universally.

Are push polls dirty?  I'd say so.  Are personal shots taken at a candidates under-18 child dirty?  I'd say so.  Is it dirty to jam the telephone lines of your opposition?  I'd say so.  Republicans did all of these.

Is it dirty to create a list of gay staffers?  Yes.  But then again it is also dirty to publicly condemn homosexuality yet have a homosexual on your staff.


Funny that in one paragraph Mark argues that

"ideologues in their party are so utterly convinced that they are right and that our side is either stupid or evil, that they can rationalize ANY behavior no matter how despicable"

but in the very next one says

"isolate yourself as much as possible from the influence of the Left Wing thought police who will try to brainwash your children into being good little socialists."

In other words, according to Mark, Democrats are so ridiculous because they refuse to recognize that Republicans could be well-intentioned and perhaps have a good idea.  But yet Democrats are also evil and stupid.  Hypocritical?  I'd say so.


But remember, I'm the bad guy.  I'm evil.  I'm not decent and honourable like the young man who came here the day after losing an election and posted a foul-mouthed tirade.  Ok, right.

[Alcon]

Mark, if you would check your private messages, I would appreciate it.  When you last left, it was because you misinterpreted one of my posts to be offensive (I forgot how) and it's been bugging me periodically since.

[HardRCafé]

Second of all, I was never rude, unless you equate being a skeptic with being rude.

I struggle to figure out why Deano963 is taken more seriously than opebo.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

This thread is why I am not a Rethugican, even if I disagree with Democrats on many many many many issues.

*is disappointed when you call us Rethugicans*

[Gustaf]

Second of all, I was never rude, unless you equate being a skeptic with being rude.

I struggle to figure out why Deano963 is taken more seriously than opebo.

Well, that's probably because you're too dumb to understand his genius.

[TheresNoMoney]

While it's true that I used to work for Lee Atwater and greatly admired the man and his tactics, I assure you we never did anything quite as despicable as what was done to Soulty's friend. But even if we had, it would have been justified in my mind because our tactics were always in response to those sort of tactics being used against us.

You've got to be kidding me!! The Republican party runs the most vicious and negative campaigns in the history of politics. 92% of the ads run by the Republican party in the 2006 federal elections were negative ads against their opponents!!

They run ads that morph Max Cleland (a Vietnam veteran who lost three of his four limbs in the war) into Osama Bin Laden!! They accuse their Democratic opponents of being communists and homosexuals. They jammed the phone lines of the Democratic GOTV here in NH in 2002.  How can you defend that type of stuff?

[afleitch]

republican extremist who is probably a closested homosexual anyway...

They keep the GOP ticking over to an extent that no one would quite believe....

[TheresNoMoney]

Republicans never have done well congressional or on the state level, and it comes with a reason.

Sure they did, 1994-2004 they did very well.

[HardRCafé]

(a Vietnam veteran who lost three of his four limbs in the war)

How long are you going to trot that out?  He lost four years ago, and everyone he has campaigned for since has also lost:  Knowles, Hackett, Duckworth.

He did not lose his limbs in combat, and he lost because his voting record was way out of step with his state.  And this is a thread about Pennsylvania, not Georgia.

[TheresNoMoney]

How long are you going to trot that out?

It was one of the most disgusting ads in political history. Are we supposed to forget? 

He lost four years ago, and everyone he has campaigned for since has also lost:  Knowles, Hackett, Duckworth.

Wrong, he has campaigned with way more candidates than just those three, many who have won.  Heath Shuler is a recent example.

Luckily, the American public has started to catch on to the Republicans endless negative smear tactics. Campaign ads like the infamous "Hitler ad" against Tim Kaine and George Allen's bringing up Jim Webb's fiction novel have backfired on them.

[HardRCafé]

Didn't Santorum lose because he was out of step with his state?

Yes.

[HardRCafé]

I would have voted for Bob Casey however.

So, for all the nice talk, in the end, it makes no difference.

[Gabu]

I have always liked Santorum personally, but his politics suck.

But I am curious, was there really voter fraud in Pennslyvania?

There's always voter fraud wherever there are elections, but unless you're in either Chicago or South Carolina, you can't attribute a 17% margin to voter fraud.

[Nym90]

I have always liked Santorum personally, but his politics suck.

But I am curious, was there really voter fraud in Pennslyvania?

There's always voter fraud wherever there are elections, but unless you're in either Chicago or South Carolina, you can't attribute a 17% margin to voter fraud.

Even there I don't think you could.

Good points earlier in this thread about how you can't have it both ways. Two wrongs don't make a right; political tactics like this are universally despicable, and trying to pretend that one side "started it" and thus it's ok for us to do it too is not only ridiculous on its face but also morally wrong in my view. I say lead by example, and reject the politics of personal destruction.