.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
EIB Bumpersticker

Thursday, April 20, 2006

 

Attacking Non-UH liberalism 'Drive-By Media Thinks They Are Responsible For Bush Admin Changes' (Rove makes a good move to focus on '06 elections)

Compared to Der Schlick Meister, the Bush Administration has remained relatively intact. Rarely were any changes in the Clinton Administration ever referred to as a "shakeup." CNN might have noted it once or twice, but of course when the liberal media is your friend, you can almost get away with everything until the spin machine stops moving.

The recent Bush Administration moves to refresh the White House are good. The White House is a tough place to work so change is expected.

The real story should be how little change has graced this White House. And not to mention, I don't think the media has grasped the importance of shifting Karl Rove to getting Republicans elected nationally. For the man who got and kept President Bush elected, his shift to focus on national elections should send shudders down the spine of the DNC. Anyway, if the White House is stumped on a policy issue, all they have to do is call up Karl for the answer.
I believe Rove's new role will breath new life into the GOP Congress. If the GOP Congresses poll numbers are much lower than Bush's 36%, can you imagine what the liberal Congresses poll numbers are -- probably in the low teens. At least Republicans are perceived as "taking action" as compared to the liberals who can only complain and complain.

There is a lifetime till the November elections, and Rove's influence will slowly but surely be felt. And liberals will be blown away come November.

Screw the libs!

Comments:
It's the wrong move for Rove. He should be in front of a firing squad like any other traitor.
 
The Libs hoped to make the whole DeLay charade that they mostly concocted out of nothing more than unproven allegations the focus of the Midterm elections.

Now not only has DeLay denied them the ability to implement this weak strategy, but now they have another Hammer to worry about this November in the person of Rove.

They are left with nothing.

The Dems never have anything to offer other than to say that they are against Bush and the Republicans. The Dems are screwed in the upcoming Midterm elections, I think deep down they know this, they will find out in November in any case.
 
What does any of your bullshit have to do with the fact that DeLay is a dirty, corrupt politician and Rove is a traitor? Neo-Con fools like you are trying to portray those two as victims, but the facts speak for themselves.

Here's a big question for you: If you are so concerned with national security, how can you not condemn the actions of the White House in regards to Valeria Plame? There are some some situations when politics should not come in to play and the identity of a CIA operative is one of them, in my opinion. Maybe you disagree?
 
When's the Libertarian party going to win an election?

Probably when the Green party does.

Both parties are nothing, but wackos.

Missed the Bell = Libertarian = Wacko
 
The funny thing is that the Libertarians will probably win the white house before the Dems do. The Dems are that bad off. The Libertarians have only been around as a party since 1971.

It takes time and our electoral system tends to favor a two party system anyway. The Libertarians embody the ideals that this country was founded on.

I don't agree with all of their platform, I'm more solidly with the republicans on the war and some other issues, such as the gay agenda. I’m more in the Libertarians for Bush crowd who understand how vital it is to win the War on Terror, even if we have to make some sacrifices from a military or even a civil liberties standpoint.

FDR and Johnson took the country so far away from the land of personal responsibility and opportunity that it once was that even the Republicans have had to make a lot of compromises over the years to get elected because far too many people have grown up to believe that the government taking care of so many aspects of their lives is just normal and natural.

Our founding fathers would be horrified if they saw how much the government is in our lives today.

Fortunately the country is starting to move away from this and the Libertarian Party has been growing. It usually gets more votes than all of the other minor parties put together.

Bush is probably one of the most Libertarian Presidents we have ever had in the 20th Century as far as economics goes.

Most of the intervention that he has supported is related to the War on Terror. He could improve in some areas, but he is light years away from scary Kerry, if he would have needed my vote in 2004 he would have had in a minute. He got it gladly in 2000, but 2004 was a very safe year for him in Texas so I used my vote to grow the Libertarian Party instead.

Third parties may not get the White House, but often elements of their platform get adopted by the major parties.

An example would be that the national debt did not even become a campaign issue in 1992 until Ross Perot went on TV and started talking a lot about it.

Third Parties serve an important function by being able to draw attention to some important issues without having to water them down in order to snatch the election like the two major parties often do.

If more of the Libertarian ideals were adopted we would all have less government and much more wealth. Our civil freedoms are important, but so are our economic freedoms. Liberals will never understand this, they want to take their Robin Hood approach and steal from the most productive members of our society and give to their cronies and the idle instead.

Anonymous=Ted Kennedy=Democrats=Neocommunists=nutjobs.
 
nice stalling, but what about rove and delay?
 
The Libertarian Party is a joke--end of discussion.

Besides, you just don't want to admit you're a neo-con and that you have no heart.
 
America has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. She goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She well knows that by once enlisting under other than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition. The fundamental maxims of her policy would change from liberty to force. -John Quincy Adams, from a speech given in 1821 while serving as U.S. Secretary of State.
 
UH Profs Criticize Award to Delay
Friday October 31, 2003


Several UH Professors have criticized the Alumni Organization's Award to Tom Delay. This was submitted to the Daily Cougar but NOT published by them.

Submitted to the Daily Cougar but NOT published by them. If you want to ask them why they're keeping this story quiet, call (713) 743-5360, fax (713) 743-5384 or email dcougar@ mail .uh.edu.
---------------------------------------------------
"Honoring Delay Sends the Wrong Message"

This coming Saturday night the Houston Alumni Organization will honor Representative Tom Delay of Sugarland, class of 1969, at its "Red and White Ball." Tables for the event have been reserved by, among others, the Colleges of Engineering, Law, Optometry, Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, the African American Studies Program, the School of Graduate Studies, and many other university offices.

Is Tom Delay really worthy of this honor? Is it appropriate for UH, a publicly-funded, diverse, community-oriented institution, to pay its respects to a politician whose career has been marked by anti-democratic actions, support for the rich, disregard for diversity, opposition to environmental safeguards,rejection of racial, gender and sexual-orientation equality, and preference for private wealth over the public good.

While preaching against the evils of "big government," Delay has, from Washington D.C., taken control of the Texas redistricting issue, effectively disenfranchising millions of Texans in order to expand Republican Party control, and intervened against Houston's attempt to develop a light rail system. Delay also advocates huge tax cuts for the rich, wants to further militarize a racist drug war, and believes Social Security should be privatized. He has rejected virtually every attempt to preserve our environment, opposing fuel efficiency laws, fighting clean air and water standards, and favoring oil drilling in Alaska. He also opposes a woman's right to choose and even rejects funding for family planning. Delay too wants to ax welfare and replace it with church-based charity programs. Tom Delay's conception of the public good, simply put, means that the state supports government power while steamrolling over the rights and needs of those outside the centers of power and money.

But it is his views on issues and principles that are supposed to be inculcated by American universities that is most troubling with regard to this honorific. Though UH is the most racially and ethnically diverse urban school in the U.S. , Delay aggressively opposes Affirmative Action programs to enable women, African Americans, and Mexican Americans to enter universities and the work force. Delay is simply hostile to public education, favoring prison construction over schools, advocating a voucher system for religious education, and calling for school prayer. Delay's mission, as he has put it, is to build a "God-centered" nation with a government promoting prayer and the teaching of religious values based on the "Judeo-Christian ethic."

Nor has Tom Delay used his influence in any observable way to enhance the mission or facilities of the University of Houston. When UH honors Tom Delay, it rejects its own mission and ideals, indeed the very basis of higher education; it rejects the values of diversity, tolerance, equality and free enquiry. In honoring Delay, UH insults the rest of us.



Gerald Horne, John and Rebecca Moores Professor of African American History
Martin Melosi, University Distinguished Professor, Department of History
Tom O'Brien, Professor of History
Sue Kellogg, Associate Professor of History
Karl Ittmann, Associate Professor of History
Janice Harper, Assistant Professor of Anthropology
Bob Buzzanco, Associate Professor of History
Andrew Chesnut, Associate Professor of History


I think that about sums Tom DeLay. And you assholes support him?

What a joke.
 
Dear disgruntled professor,

That isn't a "story," it's a guest column. To dispel your illusions, that is not news, it is opinion.

And despite what you may believe, professors don't get any more right to the pages of the DC than students.

There are many students who are angry that we have not published their badly written rants.

Get off your high horse and deal with the fact that you're not all that good of a writer. You can knock us for the quality of some of the things we print, but even we have standards when we can afford to have them.

Have you submitted anything this semester, or decided to keep your shoddy writing to yourself and the books you require your students to buy?

We don't keep the lids on stories regardless of who they would hurt or help, and you are obviously far out of touch with students and the work they do.

Nobody is out to get you, but maybe UH should look into the value of your teaching. Aren't facts important in that discipline?

Then again, I'm probably asking the wrong person.

Love,

A student who is disgusted by your hubris
 
I didn't write it. I found it on the web when I was looking for something else. I just thought it was a funny thing to post on this crappy blog.

WiN - 2005 - 4 SPJ Mark of Excellence Awards

Daily Cougar 1991 to the Present - 3 SPJ Mark of Excellence Awards

The results speak for themselves.

If the writing is so bad then why in one year does WiN win more SPJ awards than the Cougar in fifteen?

Pick up the pace, Salinas. I hope Kirsten Young cans your ass. You're a shitty editorialist that writes a majority of the time mindless blather.
 
swing and a miss. nice try, aaron.
 
I really don't care who you are. Though, I know Salinas is one of the writers who chimes in.
 
Looks like arron and Salinas are having a lover's quarrel. The libs are against everything, even each other. You guys are committing ideolgical suicide. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
 
For the record ... I have never "chimed" in on here before. I've visited this place in the past to get quotes from archives and to laugh at the absurdity of it all. I never even check on the comments, I usually just read the first opinion. I came here today to see if my challenge was accepted. If I do "chime" in again, I'll leave my initials ( though I suspect someone may now write something dumb and use my initials, but whatever).

I'd like to use you , Aaron ( I'll call you this name as if I know you, but I'm just using it so you know who this is directed at), as an example of how none of this has nothing to do with politics for you guys anymore. Maybe at one time you cared, but it's pathetic how pretentious you are. I don't care if you criticize my columns. While I care for everything I write about, I don't care about the way people will perceive me as a writer. Obviously you do though. I mean who else, besides Stephen Colbert ( to mock arrogant people), touts awards ? By the way, no offense, but I dont even know what "WiN" is. I tried to google it and nothing came up.

It's not just you though, obviously. In these last couple of blogs I've seen people in here talk about getting "into people's heads," and it struck me as weird. Why would people care to get inside the minds of other people they don't know. I would understand wanting to change minds, or have people be more open to your opinions...but it didnt seem to be about that. It's almost as if a lot of you just don't feel relevant enough in your own lives and you use politics as a vehicle to give your life more meaning by hoping you can affect other people mentally.

Maybe it's because I don't own a computer and I'm not living a pseudo life of anonymity on the internet ( and if you enjoy that, good for you, whatever floats your boat) but I really dont get why a lot of you take yourselves so seriously on here. While I would understand why you would take issues seriously ( I do as well), this writing for self aggrandizement stuff is kind of ridiculous.

The personal attacks are pretty lame as well. While my boxing challenge still stands ( because I love boxing and everything that is involved in the training for a match) I hope you all realize that I was mocking the ridiculousness and stupidity of this blog. I mean it is really, really creepy and sad that people you have never met would write about you as if they had ( or believe they have carried on conversations with you before...), but none of the comments really bother me because a.) I don't take myself too seriously. b.) The only opinions that matter to me are those of my friends and family.

There are a hell of a lot more important things in this world than obscure blogs and college newspaper columns, folks. Come back to reality.
 
"none of this has nothing", switch that to anything.

Thanks,

ds
 
I guess they finally got into your head enough that you put your initials on your post and tried to pretend that you don't read this.
 
Uhhh...how could I pretend I didnt read this when I wrote a column about it. Think about that for a second anonymous...person. Besides that, if my head was gotten into I probably would have stopped writing columns because I was so terrified of their wrath. Apparently I havnt. As I said, the reason Im still reading here is because I'm waiting for an answer to my challenge. It doesnt seem like it is coming however.

D.S.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?