Touchdown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 12:01 PM
Original message |
What is so wrong, or hateful about this statement? |
|
"What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States" (Boston Globe, April 3, 2003).
He is running for President, right? If he wants to change the course of the nation, then why is he supposed to say that the Regime we have now is "USA is A-OK!"? Repgs are being sooooo sensitive these days. Can anyone with enough insight here, tell me what is so awful and inappropriate about this?
|
MAlibdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 12:04 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Well regime doesn't refer to the Bush Administration in a poli-sci context |
|
It refers to the system of government. In the US that would be the United States under the Constitution
|
Mayberry Machiavelli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
8. Merriam Webster definition of "regime": |
|
Main Entry: re·gime Variant(s): also ré·gime /rA-'zhEm, ri- also ri-'jEm/ Function: noun Etymology: French régime, from Latin regimin-, regimen
2 a : mode of rule or management b : a form of government <a socialist regime> c : a government in power <predicted that the new regime would fall> d : a period of rule
According to definition 2b it is the system of government. But by 2c or 2d, it means the specficic folks in power. So I disagree with your interpretation, since I think it is clear that Kerry was referring to the Dems replacing Bushco rather than overthrowing our system of government.
Of course the Repubs will say anything that will allow them to appear outraged.
|
slackmaster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 12:04 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Who said there was something wrong or hateful about it? |
|
Edited on Sun Mar-28-04 12:04 PM by slackmaster
Seems appropriate to me.
:shrug:
|
Touchdown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Repugs say it's hateful and devicive.... |
|
and it's un-American to say that about a president during a time of war.:puke:
|
shekina
(305 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Tell the repugs to fuck themselves |
slackmaster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. I don't pay much attention to them |
|
Thanks, I hadn't heard any specific examples of anyone saying that.
|
maggrwaggr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. they'd know, wouldn't they? |
|
Edited on Sun Mar-28-04 01:02 PM by maggrwaggr
they invented political hate speech, and they agressively market it to the American people. It's profitable.
"Ann Coulter? Your paycheck is here."
|
Mayberry Machiavelli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
9. This "don't change leaders in a time of war" thing is frequently |
|
repeated by all the various right wingers in the various media. The problem with this is, that a "war on terrorism" BY DEFINITION can never have any end, so these bozos would love to hold onto the White House and Congress forever by this reasoning. Yeah, right.
|
Toots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I can't believe the regime would be upset because Senator Kerry |
|
our chosen leader wants them gone. Now why would that upset them? :crazy: They are going to say everything that comes out of a Democrat's mouth is offensive to them.:shrug: Kind of how I feel about them. Them even saying that the statement is offensive is offensive to me. Their whole party is offensive to me and should be to any thinking American.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 01st 2024, 04:21 AM
Response to Original message |