Disturbing Trend Among Dems

originally posted by: thestillborn1
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well, we could go back a long time ago but let's start with the Carter administration. Do you remember his failings?

Do you remember his successes? Comprehensive Energy Policy for US, Camp David Accords, reduced the Federal deficit, etc.

Do you remember the treasonous actions of the Reagan Campaign (and Ollie North) in keeping Americans hostage in Iran?

a reply to: xuenchen

What's an example of NPR "propaganda"?

Specifics, if you would. Thanks!

a reply to: xuenchen

Take a 2nd look and a better listen for a week or 2.

A "week or 2"?
Seriously?

I've been listening to NPR for 30+ years.

They are the most professional, level-headed, intelligent, and thoughtful (articulate, too!) station on the airwaves.
Bar none.

How much have you listened to them?

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: amazing

Yes we are talking about making fun of someone's looks. Comparing Bush to a chimp springs to mind immediately. Why suddenly we are only allowed to talk about current occupants of the WH? Democrats criticized Bush nonstop, not just his looks but the way he speaks, his IQ, his past, his this his that.....
I'm really no fan of Bush either, but the concept is the same.

I see what you're saying and I've also made fun of Trumps hair, but when I sit back and think about it. That's wrong. And I'll stop doing it. Just because someone did it to bush doesn't make it okay to do about Obama or his beautiful wife Michelle.

a reply to: Moresby

I have a theory on this. Take note of WHO gets made fun of for their appearance.

The Pauls look pretty odd to me, but I haven't heard anyone go after them. Their appeal is substantive and attacks on them also tend to be.
John McCain bears more than a passing resemblance to the Nazi scientist after he drank from the false Holy Grail in Indiana Jones but I've never brought that up before.

But Chris Christie is running a superficial bully campaign- he loves to call people weak when he obviously hasn't lifted anything heavier than a cannoli in a bit. I go after him bad for that and so do plenty of people. You can't undermine what Christie has said to his supporters with reason because reason is not what's shaping their decision. If you run on image, your image is going to be attacked, and that's fair comment.

Donald Trump is another leader of the pack. He's running on branding. So his opponents have to challenge his branding of himself with a brand image that undermines his arguments.

If the Republicans want to have a mature intelligent discussion of political agendas based on their merits, all they have to do is start one, and anyone he keeps making yo momma jokes after that is going to look stupid and unelectable.

originally posted by: The Vagabond
a reply to: Moresby

I have a theory on this. Take note of WHO gets made fun of for their appearance.

The Pauls look pretty odd to me, but I haven't heard anyone go after them. Their appeal is substantive and attacks on them also tend to be.
John McCain bears more than a passing resemblance to the Nazi scientist after he drank from the false Holy Grail in Indiana Jones but I've never brought that up before.

But Chris Christie is running a superficial bully campaign- he loves to call people weak when he obviously hasn't lifted anything heavier than a cannoli in a bit. I go after him bad for that and so do plenty of people. You can't undermine what Christie has said to his supporters with reason because reason is not what's shaping their decision. If you run on image, your image is going to be attacked, and that's fair comment.

Donald Trump is another leader of the pack. He's running on branding. So his opponents have to challenge his branding of himself with a brand image that undermines his arguments.

If the Republicans want to have a mature intelligent discussion of political agendas based on their merits, all they have to do is start one, and anyone he keeps making yo momma jokes after that is going to look stupid and unelectable.

This basically makes my argument for me. You offer a load of excuses which basically come down to this: It's fine to make fun of someone's personal appearance if you don't like their politics, behavior or level of success.

a reply to: Moresby

Not at all. I'm saying that people who argue with ideas are countered with ideas but people who avoid saying anything meaningful and seek popularity based on image are mocked because they are false and it is easy to break their façade.

Chris Christie and Donald Trump, the primary victims of the moment, are gimmick candidates. There is no policy discussion to have- the only arguments they've made for anyone to counter are "I'm smart and rich" and "I'm tough" respectively.

People who want to have substantive political debates on the issues like Rand Paul don't take the same kind of flak on nearly the same level.

originally posted by: The Vagabond
a reply to: Moresby

Not at all. I'm saying that people who argue with ideas are countered with ideas but people who avoid saying anything meaningful and seek popularity based on image are mocked because they are false and it is easy to break their façade.

Chris Christie and Donald Trump, the primary victims of the moment, are gimmick candidates. There is no policy discussion to have- the only arguments they've made for anyone to counter are "I'm smart and rich" and "I'm tough" respectively.

People who want to have substantive political debates on the issues like Rand Paul don't take the same kind of flak on nearly the same level.

This makes zero sense. But thanks for playing.

a reply to: Moresby

If you're going to be a hollow-posting troll at least don't quote something that's already right above your one liner.
I'll be waiting for you to explain exactly where the beef is with Chris Christie without it coming out sounding like a fat joke. It's harder than you think.