I dont think Durbin should have apologized

[JohnKleeb]

but hopefully maybe the republicans will shut up with their vicious lies about him.

[Mass]

1. I think he felt compelled by the way the Republicans reacted

I did not hear what he said, but it is clear that no other messages from his part could pass because of his reference to the Nazis.

I wished that all the Democrats could take a lesson from that. You can be as efficient and even more without quoting Hitler and the Nazis.

Of course, DU was having him as a god yesterday and is burning him at the stake today.

Have you seen thursday daily show about referencing Hitler so often in speeches and how it loses its strength more and more.

[JI7]

2. it's not nearly as bad as some DU claims it to be

they are acting like he "sold out" and doing the whole martyr crap again about how they were let down and shit.

i don't really have a problem with the apology. and i think it was probably people like Mayor Daley and constituents who were truly offended based on misunderstandings from the media that got him to apologize. i don't think most people really know what he said. as you say, they just see the Hitler and Nazi reference and get outraged at that.

i'm sure most on the Republican side would rather have had him NOT apologize. i can just see some of them getting excited and waiting in line to condemn him for their own benefit. which they can no longer do.

[JohnKleeb]

4. Neither do I

His actions as a whole please me, and I didnt care if he apologized or not, poor Durbin, he got shat on by right wing for his remarks and now he may have to deal with the left because of this. This is why I could never be a politican folks, people are near impossible to satisfy.

[JohnKleeb]

3. Yeah I see how his favorability rating has fallen

I agree with what youre saying too, and I wish people would reframe from the nazi references both left and right.

[paulk]

5. I have to disagree

I think what he said was... ill considered, and an apology was in order.

It's not really that big of a deal. It doesn't mean he lacks a spine, (or certain male appendages, which seems to be the favorite insult over in GD). To apologize for a mistake is a sign of maturity.

He's taken this story off the table.

[JohnKleeb]

6. No we agree more than we disagree

I am not mad at him for apologizing and it is now off the table and hopefully now we can get back on the offensive.

[JI7]

7. yeah

one can disagree about the apology . but some of the things being said about him are just really stupid.

[JohnKleeb]

8. Dont tell me

DLC?
Neo-Con?
Sell-out?
GOP infiltrator?
thats disgusting that theyre insulting him, hes in I think the top 5 courageous Senate Democrats of the past 5 years.

[JI7]

9. it's more like paulk said

saying he lacks certain male appendages. no balls, dickless, etc. and then the whole martyr crap about how he let them down. has no spine and whatever else.

they always make these things far bigger than they really are.

i liked mass's response in one of her threads where she brought up Byrd and how he doesn't apologize but he does vote to send right wingers to the judiciary while Durbin doesn't.

[JohnKleeb]

10. Mass is correct

then, I agree with that sentiment by y'all completely.

[TayTay]

11. It's so silly

I bet the Democratic Senators Caucus today told Durbin that his statement was obscuring the message the Dems wanted to get out this week and that he had to 'take one for the team' and aplogize. I don't think he wanted to, but he's a grown-up and understands when these things happen.

I was really proud of Reid for standing up for him and for Sen. Feinstein for coming to the floor and standing up for Sen. Sweetie. And even John McCain was gracious about it. (Bet the Rethugs hate McCain for accepting the aplogy as soon as it was accepted. They probably wanted to milk it for another few days.) If the Dems are planning on raising other important issues, then this had to be cleared from the media boards. It was a distraction.

(I love Sen. Durbin. He's wicked awesome. I sent him some e-mail love. But he got rolled. The Rethugs are merciless and will take any little misstatement and run it into the ground.)

[JohnKleeb]

12. McCain wont have a chance if he does that

same with Hagel condemning Gitmo Bay. You know the better republicans to me always seem to be the least in your face, the less gung ho about war, like while I recall Hagel supported the war resolution, he wasnt acting like how Bush did. Perhaps because the man understands war.

[elshiva]

17. SEXIST crap! GRRR!

Hate that crap.... Also did not like that comment that "Barbara must have balls in her Boxers" Why must one have the right size male genitalia to get anything done?

[JohnKleeb]

18. Its just a phrase, the meaning behind it is what makes it suck

It's not the problem, the problem is those they call what they call them aren't what they say they are. Durbin, Kerry, etc has done a lot of good since Bush was inaguarated this past January. But what the fuck though hah barbara must have balls in those boxers, frankly I hope she doesnt have balls.

[elshiva]

19. Nope not just a phrase! Sigh! Really very sexist.

Although, I am glad that there a women senators and governors and yes it is progress, there is still so much sexism in politics.

Barbara Boxer is a woman what her genitalia is or is not does not mean she is or is not a good leader. Just a rant because I am tired of these phrases. NO WOMEN WILL NEVER HAVE BALLS, WHAT THE FUCK WE DO THE MENIAL, MESSY JOBS and Get paid less... It's not just words on a page it's the reality they point to...

For one thing, I know it's not "ladylike" for me to say such things, but if it's true it must be said. ALSO, if I said it on any other forum I'd get kicked out.

This is not against you Kleeb, just against the sexism of the stupid English language.

[JohnKleeb]

20. I understand why it offends you

I just have a problem with the deeper meaning behind it which is that everyone is spineless who doesnt go their way. Its an outdated phrase anyways about having "balls". The problem with sexism in politics isnt phrases like that though, its that only around 15% of our elected officials are women. In Sweden, the women make up 42% of hte Parliament.

[elshiva]

21. Thank you,you are very enlightened, but language is part of the problem

Similar to the whole "Negro" or "Black" debate. How does the ruling class instutionalize sexism and racism not just in political representation, but by the language...

Thank you for the statistics. That DOES bug me MUCH more really, but language is insult to injury here. Sweden is encouraging...

Also tired of the whole spineless if you don't go my way motif, too.

[JohnKleeb]

22. of course language is a problem

I think the main issue to tackle is the inequality, do you find it as offending as I do that in our nation's history, weve only elected five black people to the senate, sure no problem about the stats, I am telling you it is just wrong as is that theres only been one catholic president but its even worse that never a non white or male.

[elshiva]

23. YES THAT IS OFFENSIVE! Really annoyed at that

especially what happened with the Presidents. IT WAS 2004 AND WHAT ONE WOMAN CANDIDATE AND NO ONE TOOK HER SERIOUSLY! Like it was 1972 all over again! :cry: "People say this is a democracy...But this is not a democracy."--Shirley Chisholm

[JohnKleeb]

27. Its our anglo saxon male dominated culture

I hate it. Been ruling the country for so long, did you know that only one catholic signed the declaration?

[elshiva]

28. Yes, Carroll? Errgh I should know this because he was

a Marylander like me. AND WHEN THE HELL WILL THERE EVER BE A GAY PRESIDENT (of whatever race or gender)?

[JohnKleeb]

32. I dont know that

its bad enough that the papal conclave was more inclusive than a democratic primary. That works both ways though, Catholic pride for that but sad for my country.

[paulk]

33. actually, we've had a gay president...

James Buchanan, 15th President - is considered by many historians to have been gay - and openly at that. Google "gay president" - some interesting reading...

There is also a number of presidential historians who feel that Abe Lincoln was, at the least, bisexual.

Of course - these people lived in a different time. It's hard to see an openly gay person becoming President in the current climate.

anyway - just thought I'd throw that out there - history buff and all that...

[elshiva]

38. Interesting, but as you say not openly gay...

I'd love to see a gay president with a first man in attendance.

[JohnKleeb]

39. We still have much work

Like I am pissed as is thats theres only been one Catholic, no Women, no Black, no Hispanic, no Asian, etc. One good thing I will note about the presidents and their demographic is that many of them were rags to riches which is something that doesnt happen too often in other countries.

[ginnyinWI]

24. you are exactly right!

Women can be just as tough or even tougher than men, and it has nothing to do with anatomy! I too get really annoyed at those kinds of references. I mean come on, what are we in now, kindergarten?
The phrase "having balls" is saying that men are superior because they have them. And it isn't the language's fault, it is the culture that caused the language to evolve that way. They use language as a weapon to keep women in their subordinate place.

Elshiva you don't need to apologize for telling the truth. No offense Kleeb, but women have a right to be sensitive about this.

[elshiva]

25. True, but Kleeb is very enlightened to this subject.

Please read his responses.

[JohnKleeb]

26. oh I understand why its offensive, I just have a big problem

with the inequality. No offense taken, I think its a bullshit thing too.

[ginnyinWI]

29. yeah

I understand that you are basically in agreement, Kleeb. I just wanted to underscore that how something is phrased does make a difference. :)

[JohnKleeb]

31. Thanks

Yeah its a stupid phrase, like guys arent always the courageous ones, and barbara must have balls in her boxers, thats kinda perverted.

[CBHagman]

13. But the Republicans will never stop their lies.

I was brought up in a Republican family and tend to have the attitude that people of good will must work together, whatever their political persuasion. I thought it was politically savvy and rather decent of Orrin Hatch to seek out Ted Kennedy's back in the '80s when the GOP briefly held control of the Senate.

However, I also think it's dangerous to water down your principles and compromise until your efforts have no effect. I believe in compromise, but only to a point.

But this is the Karl Rove/George W. Bush era of the Republican Party, and I suspect it will rival the McCarthy era for sheer ugliness and mendacity. The party leadership obeys the dictums to not merely defeat your enemy but destroy him or her; to never admit mistakes; to keep doing the same thing even when it's clearly dangerous, stupid, or cruel; to punish anyone who stands in your way, even a member of your party; to be divisive; to attribute all virtues to oneself; and, above all, to cultivate a mean and vindictive approach.

And always, always, always they attribute the ugliest aspects of their souls to their opponents, regardless of who those opponents are.

I suspect some members of the party are privately sickened by this and would gladly return to the pre-Rove system. But they are in charge now, and I guess they don't quarrel with a system that works.

They have brought additional bloodshed on the word, additional suffering to the neediest, genuine acrimony in the nation's capital, and hordes of demonstrators to the streets of the world.

They will do anything to win, and one of their primary techniques is to criticize and condemn, no matter how off the mark the criticism is.

On edit: And I doubt this was ever about the troops. The GOP was jsut fine with the hate-fest last year in New York in which sniggering covention-goers wore Band-Aids with purple hearts to mock John Kerry. Mind you, John McCain did not participate in the hate-fest, but where were the other party members who stood up on principle to refuse to attack John Kerry? Maybe they didn't do it because that's what the party is now -- an attack machine.

I also noticed DeLay is just fine with attacking veterans, as is Saxby Chambliss.

And a portion of the American people lap it up. To be honest, I hope God punishes this country for countenancing such a morally sick situation.

My dear Kleeb, the Republicans will do this as long as they can get away with it. May the day come soon when they don't.

[TayTay]

14. This is true

This bunch of bastards are morally bankrupt, understand nothing but brute force and believe that the end justify the means. They are bullies and will never stop. They can only be kicked out of power forcefully. Like with McCarthyism, the only way is to expose them for what they are.

The tide is turning. As with all arrogant bullies, these guys are now starting to believe their own lying bullshit. Terry Schiavo, endless war in IRaq without political cost, tampering with social programs that have worked for generations. They are over-reaching and it is costing them.

[CBHagman]

15. I hope the tide is turning.

The polls seem to indicate that, but it's hard to judge whether enough people in this country are on to what the GOP is doing.

Fiscally speaking, the administration and the Republican Congress can't maintain what they're doing. In terms of monetary, trade, and foreign policy, too, things could blow up in their faces.

The problem is that innocent people are being harmed, and unfortunately we're not done with that yet.

We particularly need real journalists to shine a light on what's being done. Unfortunately, The Washington Post no longer can fill the role it had during the Nixon administration.

[karynnj]

16. McCain DID participate in the hate fest

he personally didn't wear a purple heart band aid or give a Zell Miller anti Kerry speech. He stood before a crowd of people, many with the band aids and other ways of mocking Kerry. If he had a conscience he would have said this was beneath Republicans and asked for people to remove them. Instead he tacitly accepted them and gave a speech praising Bush, basking in their applause. Anyone who spoke to the crowd without commenting is complicit.

In McCain's case, this lack of action is galling as Kerry at least 3 times came to McCain's defense. (When Bush attacked him and when an Arizona Democrat attacked him, Kerry very quickly got all the Senate vets to sign a letter supporting McCain. He also defended McCain when he was attacked while on the MIA/POW committee and is credited by McCain of helping him control his temper.)

[CBHagman]

37. Yes, that is true about McCain.

I compare McCain to a parent who lets a beloved child ride in a car with a driver who has been drinking. He knows it's dangerous and foolish, but he still doesn't intervene. In that, I think he's an enabler.

I also recall that McCain made an extremely nasty joke about Chelsea Clinton, her mother, and our then-attorney general, Janet Reno. And I didn't notice the (insert very bad word here) Washington Times or Republican leadership calling for an apology, though I do think McCain eventually did make one.

Holy crap, we've got more nice, gracious, forgiving people in the Democratic Party. Am I just imagining that? I mean, look at Bill Clinton entertaining Jesse Helms at the White House, even if the nasty old racist did imply Clinton would be shot upon going down to the Carolinas. Look at Hillary escorting Mrs. Gingrich (the mother, not one of the multiple wives :evilgrin:) around the White House. Those mean 'cans don't deserve us, huh? :-)

[LittleClarkie]

30. I'm hearing now that maybe Daley had more than a small hand in this

I think Daley's hairy cat fit over Durbin's words had more of an impact than the Republicans, esp considering how much political power Daley likely wields. If I'm right, then all I can say is, thanks alot Daley.

[saracat]

34. But his apology wasn't to the Repugs but to holocaust survivors and others

He also apologized to the military but not the repukes!

[JohnKleeb]

35. good for him

I wasnt mad at him and in fact I think in retrospect he did the right thing 100%.

[rox63]

36. When I first heard that he apologized

I was a little pissy about it. But the repugs were using Durbin's comments as another distraction from the actual important stuff going on. So he probably apologized in order to take the issue off the table, so we could try to get back to the important business at hand.