Leaving the community

I'm not sure I agree... I think Gephardt lost out because of nothing
short of a lack of charisma. I don't think people were paying that much

When Gephardt and Lieberman and other Democrats who are toward the central
of the political spectrum "dropped" out, there was a feeling the GWB was
unbeatable. When they dropped by the wayside, further left of center to
dominate the selection process.

Unfortunately / fortunately depending on one's political perspective, the
DNC has not put forward a candidate who could pull voters from the center
and right of center except for Kennedy and Clinton. Dukas was a "old style"
Eastern Liberal. Gore was an "heir apparent" because he serviced with
Clinton but move to the left of center during the campaign and lost the
center votes he needed.

No party can win the poplar vote unless they can pull voters from the other
side of center from their base. Be too far to the extremes of the spectrum
and they loose the cross over vote.

Judah wrote:

snip


No, I think the biggest problem in this election was simply that there
was not much difference at all between the two candidates, or if there
was, it was so clouded by nonessential issues that the general public was
left to vote on whether they are more comfortable with or without change,
and not much else.

I think you've hit it exactly right.

If there is one thing I that both sides agree on it is the lack of real,
open discourse on real issues. The "two party" system is really just one
big self serving machine.

One thing that will improve the situation is for all of us "we the people"
to work to allow more third party ideas into the debate. It does us all a
great disservice when not all the voices are heard.

I heard some good ideas from several of the third party candidates (and some
pretty looney ones too). Injecting them into the mix might have forced
Kerry/Bush to be more specific. It certainly would go a long way to
"un-polarizing" the country.

snip

--
Frank....H

Jay Honeck wrote:

These people are mad Kerry didn't run a liberal campaign and can't stand
that he "was just as pro-war as Bush."


That is SO ironic.

If the Democrats has nominated a middle-of-the-road guy to run against
Bush -- say, Dick Gephardt -- this election would not have even been close.
The Democrats would have swept the nation, and never by less than 25
percentage points.


Heck, if Bush was anywhere near the middle of the road, I might have
considered voting for him.


I actually had a very unusual experience this election. One of the
minor statewide offices here (Chairman of the State Agriculture
Commission) had two candidates that had almost identical experience
and who held almost identical views regarding the position they were
running for. What really made it strange, though, was the fact that I
agreed with their positions! It's extremely unusual for there to be
one candidate in a contest that I feel I can vote _for_, but two????
I almost didn't know what to do.

Rich Lemert

Jay Honeck wrote:

These people are mad Kerry didn't run a liberal campaign and can't stand
that he "was just as pro-war as Bush."


That is SO ironic.

If the Democrats has nominated a middle-of-the-road guy to run against
Bush -- say, Dick Gephardt -- this election would not have even been close.
The Democrats would have swept the nation, and never by less than 25
percentage points.

Stupidly, they nominated a guy whose political positions were to the left of
Ted Kennedy's, absolutely ensuring a Bush victory.

There were many traditional Republicans out here -- myself included -- who
would have voted for a conservative Democrat in this election. But there
was just no way for any of us to vote for a guy like Kerry.

The moral for the Democrats: Don't ever nominate an ultra liberal to run
for president again.


Agreed. I don't like everything about Bush but there was no way I was
going to vote for a guy claiming he will fight a smarter war on terror
and defend the country at the same time he takes a poll to see how he
should respond to the latest Bin Laden video.

Bush at least has firm beliefs in how things should be handled.

And now I am getting too political so I will end by saying I wish more
of my friends would try flying.

I'm a pro-life, pro-gun, low-tax Republican living in Boston,
Massachusetts

Is the carnage that takes place in an unnecessary war like Iraq, pro-life?
Is there something I don't know and are their pro-life bullets and bombs
that don't kill? Oh wait,,, you DO believe in killing,,,, or don't you???
Oh wait,,, I get it,,,, only if it allows you to control the actions of
women,,, no problem,,, REALLY I understand, now.

51% of this country did not vote for fascism

Then please tell me what 'HOMELAND' (sounds like FATHERland) to me and the
Patriot Act are about. Let's not forget the TSA, an agency that can put law
into place WITHOUT POSSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. Tell me what detaining
individuals at G. Bay, for close to two years without even telling them what
they are being accused of and not allowing them access to attorneys sounds
like? (this of course is changing due to court challenges). I'm pretty sure
we pledge, "With liberty and justice for ALL",,, that's what I remember,
Jay. Do you do a different Pledge of Allegiance in Iowa?

gay sex a part of grade-school curricula.

When grade schoolers study traditional marriage in their schools, do those
courses talk about the various sexual positions the man and women get in,
and who gets to be on-top and the like? Of course, not. Mentioning that
Paul may love Sandy or Sandy may Love Jill and be a couple is all that's
mentioned - it's called tolerance for differences Jay. Remember similar
arguments about black people and civil rights? God forbid, back then, if
there was a kids book showing an interracial couple mock gasp.

Lastly, Jay,,,, being around a gay person won't 'make' you gay. Otherwise
Cheney would be 'flaming' (he has a lesbian daughter, don't ya know),,, by
the way,,,, when Cheney was asked he said that he couldn't answer for the
president, but for himself he felt that their SHOULD be an opportunity for
the same things that straight married couples (including civil
union/marriage) have and it was clear that he loved his daughter very much.

.." One of my
best friends is a hardcore lesbian environmental journalist

and you STILL are clueless????

who went to
Smith, and I've worked on the staff of one of the alternative newspapers
up
here.
Yikes, Jay,, that makes you gay, then!

Let's just say that when I went to the Halloween party this year, all
the goths, gays, trannies, and just plain weirdoes looked at me like I was
the freak.

Yeah, and one can imagine that it's not fun for the gay/lesbian population
to be walking around amongst us straights and be looked at like weird
freaks...... See this is what I mean about people like yourself,,, they
don't see the connections between their own observations.


--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -
"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
link.net...

"David Brooks" wrote in message
...

That being so, and despite what should be an apolitical setting, I can no
longer in good faith keep company with a group of which the majority, I
know, has elected to deliver the country I love, and chose as my home,
into
the hands of Bush and his repressive, regressive masters.

Get a $&%@!ing helmet, dude.


for the past ten years. Most of the people I know don't understand how an
educated, reasonable person like me could vote for "that chimp
These people are mad Kerry didn't run a liberal campaign and can't stand
that he "was just as pro-war as Bush." Given the choice they'd like us to
pull out of Iraq and beg the UN's forgiveness, raise taxes back to 70% on
Need I say that I think their
policies would devastate this country just as terribly as you think W's
policies will?

Still, I've managed to become and remain friends with quite a few of these
people because I realize that they're not actually bad people, just
misguided. Naturally they feel the same about me. Some of them I'm happy
to
have long debates with over vast quantities of alcohol, others I only talk
about other topics with. Life goes on and is richer for the company of
people who think differently than I do.

, they voted for George W. Bush.
There's a difference if you care to see it.

-cwk.

Methinks you've confused me with another poster, Cecil, as I clearly am NOT
the guy who wrote:

I'm a pro-life, pro-gun, low-tax Republican living in Boston,
Massachusetts

When grade schoolers study traditional marriage in their schools, do those
courses talk about the various sexual positions the man and women get in,
and who gets to be on-top and the like? Of course, not. Mentioning that
Paul may love Sandy or Sandy may Love Jill and be a couple is all that's
mentioned - it's called tolerance for differences Jay.

Ya gotta keep your eye on that top line better...

It 'tweren't me that wrote what you are ascribing to me...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I'm the original poster and I approve this response.

"Cecil Chapman" wrote in message
m...

freaks...... See this is what I mean about people like yourself,,, they
don't see the connections between their own observations.

No, I just don't see them the same way you do. You can SCREAM in capital
letters all you want and decide that I'm suffering from a terminal case of
cognitive dissonance, but that's not a very mature response, now is it?

Perhaps Republicans in Utah are just as touchy as liberals in Cambridge and
Berkeley. All that ideological conformity makes these places into
ideological veal pens. God forbid you ever have to venture outside that
bubble. Just like David Brooks, who decided he can't even deal with being in
the presence of people who voted for Bush.

Best,
-cwk.

No, I just don't see them the same way you do. You can SCREAM in capital
letters all you want and decide that I'm suffering from a terminal case of
cognitive dissonance, but that's not a very mature response, now is it?


Naw,,, did NOT scream in capital letters grin!

Perhaps Republicans in Utah are just as touchy as liberals in Cambridge
and
Berkeley. All that ideological conformity makes these places into
ideological veal pens. God forbid you ever have to venture outside that
bubble.

Please don't even get me started on Berkeley (sometimes I wish they would be
declared a separate state so that their questionable actions/ideas would be
associated with Californians as a whole.

I was born in Chicago, but from 1 y.o. and on lived in San Francisco. I'm
fully aware that venturing outside California is quite different, but that
doesn't make the observation that bigotry exists any less true. I know when
I've been in the South, I was surprised that many of the old attitudes have
never left, just that they've gone a little more underground (regarding
blacks). It IS like night and day between California and some other states
regarding attitudes towards same-sex unions - I was just trying to point out
that having a gay person or couple in your neighborhood isn't going to 'turn
you' or your children gay. Just isn't going to happen. Not necessarily
true in your case,,, but I have noticed that those who are most vehement
against gays often turn out to be people who are struggling with their
certainty about their own sexuality.

Unfortunately, the gay citizens that get the most tv coverage here in San
Francisco are those that are more flamboyant in costume and dress during Gay
Pride celebrations. You'd find that most of the gay couples in our
neighborhood (as well as yours,,,, they likely stay 'hidden') just dress
like you and me, kiss a loved one on the way to work and aren't wearing pink
feathered costumes and a headdress. :0) I guess all I was saying is that I
don't understand the intolerance; I don't worry that my wife, my marriage or
child are at risk because of Gay people. I WILL say that the only persons
that worry me most in regards to my 9 year old stepson are Catholic Priests.
I DO keep my eye on them (though I understand that most are just fine - but
I watch out as much as possible)... but that is another issue altogether.

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -
"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
nk.net...
I'm the original poster and I approve this response.

"Cecil Chapman" wrote in message
m...

freaks...... See this is what I mean about people like yourself,,, they
don't see the connections between their own observations.

Just like David Brooks, who decided he can't even deal with being in
the presence of people who voted for Bush.

Best,
-cwk.

My totally amazed comments are in you text...



"Cecil Chapman" wrote in message
om...
No, I just don't see them the same way you do. You can SCREAM in capital
letters all you want and decide that I'm suffering from a terminal case
of
cognitive dissonance, but that's not a very mature response, now is it?


Naw,,, did NOT scream in capital letters grin!

Perhaps Republicans in Utah are just as touchy as liberals in Cambridge
and
Berkeley. All that ideological conformity makes these places into
ideological veal pens. God forbid you ever have to venture outside that
bubble.

Please don't even get me started on Berkeley (sometimes I wish they would
be
declared a separate state so that their questionable actions/ideas would
be
associated with Californians as a whole.

I was born in Chicago, but from 1 y.o. and on lived in San Francisco. I'm
fully aware that venturing outside California is quite different, but that
doesn't make the observation that bigotry exists any less true. I know
when
I've been in the South, I was surprised that many of the old attitudes
have
never left, just that they've gone a little more underground (regarding
blacks).

I used to have a gijrlfriend who was from SF and extremely liberal. I used
to kid her that the only time she ever actually saw a black person was when
she went to Oakland. I'm afraid you may be a victim of that same syndrome.

If you were to actually talk to a black person you would find that there is
far less prejudice in the South than in the North. Oh, you might see a
Confederate flag or two in the South but it is more a symbol of Southern
pride than racism. When civil rights came, Southerners adopted them far
quicker than did non-Southerners. Because white Southerners actually knew
black people. As I have discussed with some of my black friends, in the
South you know who doesn't like you because of your color. They flip you off
or yell at you, but you know who they are and you ignore them. But, in the
North (for example), everybody smiles and shakes your hand at the same time
they're putting restrictive covenants on their neighborhoods so black people
can't buy houses there, and they pass laws banning "alley basketball"
because they don't want black kids hanging out on their block.

And do you know where the new "Black Mecca" is? A place where the government
is predominantly run by blacks? A place where black business thrives? A
place where black Americans can live in peace, prosperity, and equality
alongside their black neighbors. It's Atlanta. That's in Georgia; about as
far "down South" as you can get. Yea, the South is a really prejudiced
place!




It IS like night and day between California and some other states
regarding attitudes towards same-sex unions - I was just trying to point
out
that having a gay person or couple in your neighborhood isn't going to
'turn
you' or your children gay. Just isn't going to happen. Not necessarily
true in your case,,, but I have noticed that those who are most vehement
against gays often turn out to be people who are struggling with their
certainty about their own sexuality.

Have you not read anything lately? That stupid catch-phrase came out in the
60's, when queers first started to come above ground as part of the queer
rights movement. It was bogus then and it is bogus now.




Unfortunately, the gay citizens that get the most tv coverage here in San
Francisco are those that are more flamboyant in costume and dress during
Gay
Pride celebrations. You'd find that most of the gay couples in our
neighborhood (as well as yours,,,, they likely stay 'hidden') just dress
like you and me, kiss a loved one on the way to work and aren't wearing
pink
feathered costumes and a headdress. :0) I guess all I was saying is that
I
don't understand the intolerance; I don't worry that my wife, my marriage
or
child are at risk because of Gay people. I WILL say that the only persons
that worry me most in regards to my 9 year old stepson are Catholic
Priests.
I DO keep my eye on them (though I understand that most are just fine -
but
I watch out as much as possible)... but that is another issue altogether.

At this point, we don't know how many people are "born gay" and how many
adopt a gay lifestyle for whatever reason, including an inability to cope
with their straight sexuality. Showing the "gay lifestyle" as an attractive
choice is probably not a good idea for a pubscent child who is wrestling
with their own sexuality.

Since you find no perils in associating with gays, why don't you start
dropping your own child off in the Castro on Saturday afternoons. I'm sure
some of the boys over there will be happy to teach him a lot of fun things.

With regard to priests, always remember this: it's cheaper to pay than to
fight, and you don't get near as much publicity. And you will notice that a
lot of these so-called "victims" suffer from a lot of mental problems. I'll
agree that some may have stemmed from abuse, but a lot of these problems do
not. And you are dealing with a lot of "recovered memories" and other very
shaky memories. But any time "child molestation" comes into play there is
just no way for the accused to win.






--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -
"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
nk.net...
I'm the original poster and I approve this response.

"Cecil Chapman" wrote in message
m...

freaks...... See this is what I mean about people like yourself,,,
they
don't see the connections between their own observations.

Just like David Brooks, who decided he can't even deal with being in
the presence of people who voted for Bush.

Best,
-cwk.

It is a sad day but it will look better tomorrow. And some of us try to
keep to the forum topic most of the time.

Welcome to feeling like a disenfrancised minority. But picking up your
marbles and going home really isn't a viable life strategy - especially over
politics (or sex or race).

Get a good night's sleep or 5 and hope to see you again.

"David Brooks" wrote in message
...
One thing - one of so very many things - I learned in my five years of
flying is that partisan politics does not fit into the cockpit. Most of my
flight instructors have, I know, been to the right of me politically. I
had
a most enjoyable flight with CJ - although he has since earned my undying
enmity by unapologetically using the term "Final Solution" in connection
with me and people like me, an astonishing thought coming from an avowedly
religious man, but telling and apt.

But now it seems the nation has, albeit by a slim margin, re-elected a
weak,
hypocritical, murderous coward. Three years ago, when some writers on the
left started talking about fascism, I thought that an absurd stretch. No
longer. The parallels are not precise - they never are - but the broad
sweep
and many of the components of a new fascist state are in place. The 48%
who
didn't vote for this disaster keep knocking on my consciousness, but they
are now feeble and impotent. The thugs are in charge.

That being so, and despite what should be an apolitical setting, I can no
longer in good faith keep company with a group of which the majority, I
know, has elected to deliver the country I love, and chose as my home,
into
the hands of Bush and his repressive, regressive masters.

So long. Thanks for all the conversations. You guys have made me a better
pilot.

-- David Brooks