Democrats are "Angry" - Republicans are "Comatose"

[kentuck]

In the interest of balance, just a bit of perspective on the propaganda that was in the NY Times yesterday and on C-SPAn this morning. Are the Democrats the "angry" Party? I hope so. But, the bigger question should be: Are the Republicans "comatose"?

Where are the fiscal conservatives? Do they exist? Certainly not in the Republican Party. This Administration has spent more and put us farther in debt than almost all the other Presidents combined. That is not a petty example. That is real money that our children and grandchildren will have to pay for and which we are starting to pay for now.

The Republicans have enmeshed us in an unnecessary war that they say we will be fighting for the rest of our lives. They are spending us to oblivion on defense contracts and on corruption. They are taking our freedoms under the guise of "protecting" us. Please stop "protecting" me.

If the Democrats are "angry", then there is still some hope. If Republicans are not angry with what has happened and what is going on with our country, we can only assume they are either "comatose" or dead. And that is what should be reported in the NY Times and on C-SPAN....

[peace frog]

1. How about "smug" and "self-satisfied"...

... in addition to "superior", "condescending", "arrogant", "dismissive"... I could go on all day.

[Sammy Pepys]

2. I think the Democrats are flailing right now

In need of some major direction...perhaps through new leadership.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

3. Damn straight we are angry

and we ARE looking for new leadership right now!

[kentuck]

4. In my opinion, Democrats should not run from the "angry" label...

They should wear it with pride and whip the Repubs over the head with it. How could anyone still be breathing and not be angry??

[zbdent]

5. Repukes are not comatose

everything is going as planned . . . all the social programs are being cut because there's no money for them (war, yaknow) due to lack of funds coming in (tax cuts for wealthy, yaknow) . . .

[kentuck]

6. The Republican leadership is not comatose....

But many of the average Republican voters don't have a clue, in my opinion.

[zanne]

7. They piss us off, then call us angry. nt

[jarab]

8. I find it a little demeaning to discover

that we have lost both houses of Congress, Executive and the Judiciary to a comatose party!

I really think we're comatose, and they're angry - but that they have defined it the other way because they're the best at manipulation.

If "angry" should have gotten us to where we are now, I cannot see anything to cheer about.

I find it difficult to admit that we're doing things wrong to find ourselves so comatose. Oh, sure, we like to blame Rove or the MSM or the stupid American voters; if an on-line poll goes against our wishes, it's obviously "freeped"! Diebold was the perpetrator when all else fails!

When we finally admit that our candidates and our strategies are "asleep", to put it mildly, only then might we seek resuscitation.

Damn! We've lost the country to a comatose party! What a downer!

(I do see your point, kentuck. I don't believe the anger in this little corner of cyberspace is indicative of the Democratic voter or our "leadership". Our screamers will be put front and center by the other side to emphasize their point, and, along with others, Dean's victory speech will get him 15 more minutes of "fame".)

Perhaps we should for starters use the O'Reilly clip where he's screaming and cutting the mike. Let the voter make the MSM/Republican association. Now, that was anger.

...O...

[kentuck]

9. You may be right, O...

But the objective of the "angry" Party label is purely political, and the Repubs are winning that argument, with the assistance of the NY Times and media like C-SPAN and others. After all, if you are angry, you are "unstable", you are not fit to lead. It's the same strategy as the "flip-flop" they used on Kerry. This is how they start their campaign - to see if it sticks. And it might.