Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 01:03 PMTHE SPARKLING HUSBAND PRIMITIVE, #05 TOP PRIMITIVE OF 2009Original message I am really, really sorry to see Alan Grayson go down to defeat . . . . but. I have zero criticism of of him. I liked his stances on issues. I liked his rhetorical style. I liked his left wing pugnacity. I liked that he was a lightening rod. I liked his impolitic descriptions of that which he didn't favor.He was my ideal prototype of a left wing politician.But just because I liked him didn't mean he was the model of a *successful* politician.He was basically what I would be were I to have been elected instead of him. Or he was what many of YOU would be were YOU elected instead of him.We're "the base". We have ideas and ideals. We're willing to fight for them. We have little tolerance for the right and anything they stand for. We're not so much interested in compromise. We see an asshole for what an asshole is: an asshole. We are unafraid to call an asshole an asshole.Neither was Alan Grayson.It was because of that he got beat. No one should be surprised. Add to that the nature of his district, and I'm actually surprised he even managed to get elected the first time!Go Alan. We hardly knew ye and we need more like ye!
treestar (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 01:49 PMResponse to Original message 15. Why doesn't he get criticized for losing? what must he have done wrong on his campaign? Why don't the usual DU rules apply to him?This is mysterious.Everybody gets blamed for losing the house except one house member who LOST!
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 02:02 PMTHE SPARKLING HUSBAND PRIMITIVE, #05 TOP PRIMITIVE OF 2009Response to Reply #15 17. I am inclined to ignore your posts in my threads, but I will answer you on this one. I will answer you because it is a great object lesson on we "far lefties" want in a politician.He was UNAMBIGUOUS in what he stood for. He fought the good fight, unafraid of the consequences. While he may not have succeeded, his inclination and (for your benefit, particularly) DIRECTION was clear. His actions matched his rhetoric. No one felt he was talking only to get elected.It is about direction and intent.
treestar (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 03:26 PMResponse to Reply #17 21. So it's better they go down to defeat? Not a recipe for success of any kind.You'll be happy when there are no Democrats in the House and all of the principled progressives are just citizens and never officeholders.Let me not hear you say Obama "failed to get his message across" ever, mkay? Grayson failed to get his across and lost.
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 03:42 PMTHE SPARKLING HUSBAND PRIMITIVE, #05 TOP PRIMITIVE OF 2009Response to Reply #21 22. "You'll be happy when there are no Democrats in the House and all of the principled progressives ar" Nice sidestepGrayson lost because he was impolitic. He was loved for his views and his rhetoric, but he was unsuccessful as a politician.You seem to be incapable of nuance, preferring instead to ascribe to me traits that fit your simple worldview. Grayson or Obama. Tit or Tat. All or Nothing. Life is more complex. As usual, you have demonstrated your unwillingness to engage in an actual dialogue, preferring instead to try to score snark points.I ignore you for a reason. You're far too simple to engage in a thoughtful conversation. You have affirmed my view of you.Have a swell day.
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 01:03 PMTHE SPARKLING HUSBAND PRIMITIVE, #05 TOP PRIMITIVE OF 2009Original message I liked his stances on issues. I liked his rhetorical style. I liked his left wing pugnacity. I liked that he was a lightening rod. I liked his impolitic descriptions of that which he didn't favor.
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 01:03 PMTHE SPARKLING HUSBAND PRIMITIVE, #05 TOP PRIMITIVE OF 2009Original messageI am really, really sorry to see Alan Grayson go down to defeat . . . . but. I have zero criticism of of him. I liked his stances on issues. I liked his rhetorical style. I liked his left wing pugnacity. I liked that he was a lightening rod. I liked his impolitic descriptions of that which he didn't favor. He was my ideal prototype of a left wing politician.
We see an asshole for what an asshole is: an asshole. We are unafraid to call an asshole an asshole.
I see he's been hanging around with Ben Burch again.Cindie
Stinky The ClownI will answer you because it is a great object lesson on we "far lefties" want in a politician.He was UNAMBIGUOUS in what he stood for. He fought the good fight, unafraid of the consequences. While he may not have succeeded, his inclination and (for your benefit, particularly) DIRECTION was clear. His actions matched his rhetoric. No one felt he was talking only to get elected.It is about direction and intent.
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-05-10 01:03 PMTHE SPARKLING HUSBAND PRIMITIVE, #05 TOP PRIMITIVE OF 2009Original message He was my ideal prototype of a left wing politician.But just because I liked him didn't mean he was the model of a *successful* politician.
The DUmmies know why he lost. He had two ads on TV that went over the bounds of decency and turned people off. How quickly they forget.
Stinky is absolutely right. Greyson is the prototype DUmmy moonbat. He lies, he is hateful, an idiot, and probably stuffs small mammals up his ass.
The sparkling husband primitive just perfectly described the personality of a left-wing dictator. These idiots always fall for the populist rhetoric right before the iron fist they supported grabs them by the throat.
