I can't say I remember any hoodlums interupting the democratic convention speakers, but it has happened several times at the republican convention. I thought this was the party that is open minded and inclusive. Since when did the democratic party and many of the leaders in the party come to think that everything is America's fault? Since when did the democratic party become the hedonistic anti-american party that embraces extreme left and shuns traditional values? The party that my grandfather and dad was so into has become a party that they no longer recognize. I have voted more against people and parties than for them, and now I have to vote against the democratic party that has become a hateful party, more so than the extreme right that hated Clinton. Rather than stand for something they have come to blame Bush and America for everything. They wish for the economy to tank or something bad to happen in order to hurt Bush no matter what it does to the country, and I think the quest for power has clouded their judgement.
There was a grand total of 3 arrests during the entire week of the DNC in Boston. Trust me, if the DNC didn't happen, that same area (Fleet Center) would have yielded 3 arrests in a few hours of the first day. Compare this to the RNC...almost 2,000 arrests for the week. The only speech I got to watch was President Bush's, and there was at least 2 protesters hustled off during that speech. I've heard that there were others, especially during Cheney's speech. No protester disrupted the inside of the DNC in Boston. Common sense will tell you; DNC protestors = Will most likely vote Republican RNC protestors = Will most likely vote Democrat It's interesting to see that the "tolerant" and "compassionate" party protestors (Democrats) were arrested at a rate of about 650 times that of the Republicans.
Liberal definition of tolerance: Be tolerant of everything...anything...all things.............ummm, except a conservative worldview.
It’s long been my observation that protests are a poor metric by which to gauge support for/against a position. It is a skewed measurement for one simple reason; the ratio of active protesters to likely voters is much higher on the left side of the spectrum than on the right. For whatever reason, conservatives do not tend to voice their opinions through marches and sit-ins. When was the last time you saw a bunch of Republicans in suits lock arms and march down the street singing “we shall over come”? It’s just not how they express themselves. By the same token, how many hard-core anarchists (I’m thinking of the groups that typically protest everything even remotely connected to the WTO), actually show up at the polls? I’m guessing it’s less than the voting rate of the general population. Either way… I strongly encourage folks to protest vigorously and show their outrage at the system by staying at home and not voting on November 2nd… That way my vote counts for more! Cheers (vote early and vote often), Tony
Of course the other way to look at it is that there are many in the Democratic Party who feel passionate, and yes, outrage. What you see as intolerance, others see as justified anger. The right to do it, peacefully, at least, is fundamental in this country. Frankly, I get a little worried when things get too quiet. Perhaps the Republicans should be making some noise. What do they feel passionate about? What makes them angry (other than angry Democrats)? Frankly, I'd like to see the Repubs get worked up about something. Instead the party spends its time concocting nasty, mean spirited smear campaigns, and accusing liberals of being “anti-American,” all from the comfort, I have to assume, of their living rooms. The irony is that protests from the left are quintessential American. By and large they aren't "hoodlums." It seems that conservatives would like everyone to shut up and go along with the program. It's a little strange if you think about it, but it's hard to imagine Republicans feeling the passion, anger, or need to go out on the streets and protest anything, other than when the extreme right wing goes out and throws rocks at gays and the like. Isn't that a little weird? The right likes to ridicule the left for the apparent hypocrisy of being the party of "inclusion" when the left seems to be intolerant of the right. There’s a meta level of tolerance (or intolerance) that the right sort of forgets about: there’s nothing hypocritical about being intolerant of intolerance? I think that's the way most liberals feel. Yeah the left is angry. After four years of being hijacked by Bush it feels very justified.
That is so damn funny, and typical. The right and the centrist are angry, at the terrorist, where the anger should be channeled by anyone with some common sense whether R or D. Where are all the republicans bursting into the democrats convention interupting speeches and acting like idiots? Why don't these protestors line up outside of the Saudi embassy, or the French embassy protesting? Was the French not in Saddams pocket? Does that not make you more angry than Bush finally taking this evil tyrant down? I think most of these people are showing their ass just to be showing their ass rather than really being angry. Personally, whether I agree with everything Bush has done really means little as long as he is ridding the world of these evil people, and taking care of things on their soil and not ours. I would much rather have whachos complain about me punching someone in the mouth first that had said he was going to punch me in the mouth than to walk around missing teeth and crying he hit me. I am all for taking it to them, and having them on the run no matter who is in the white house. I am not so sure Kerry would be the guy to do that, but if he wins I hope he does.
Liberals are more likely to be angry right now because Democrats are the opposition party. Bruce, if you can think back to '94, I think you'll remember--or at least I remember, maybe it's a Southern thing--being surrounded by people who would just love to tar and feather Clinton, and will tell anyone who'll listen all about it. Rifles, Confederate flags, and dogeared copies of None Dare Call It Treason. It was an interesting time. As for the protests and arrests, I don't remember a half million conservatives descending on Boston to protest the DNC. That, and not the ideology of native Bostonians or Democrats and general, is the atmosphere that created the 2,000 arrests. For many people, I'm sure being able to say they got arrested while protesting the Bush administration would be a badge of honor. I'm pretty sure that most, if not all, of the 2,000 people who were arrested wanted to be arrested as a form of protest against Bush's both real and perceived restrictions on civil liberties. Personally, I think the world would be a better place if these people all protested in a peaceful, intelligent, exemplary way, then went home and volunteered for get-out-the-vote efforts in heavily Democratic districts. But then I'm not sure I have much more in common with most of the folks who stood outside of the RNC convention than I have with the folks who stood inside it. Cheers,
I'm sure it was, but I'd also bet that it didn't result in almost 2,000 arrests. You have illustrated my point perfectly. The protestors, such as they were, at the DNC were either total whacko anarchists, or very polite, law-abiding anti-Kerry people (much more the latter). We had very little trouble with the whackos because of their small numbers, and very little trouble with the anti-Kerry people because they cooperated with us fully. I actually was wrong on the final arrest number. There were 3 arrests outside the Fleet Center, with 1 inside, when a portly delegate refused to leave the building and sat on a police officer's hand. So, there were 4 arrests for the week. Simple logic will tell you that liberal protesters will target the RNC rather than the DNC. Compare the arrest numbers; DNC = 4 protestors arrested RNC = 2,000 protestors arrested Am I still supposed to think that the Democrats have the "tolerant", "diverse", and "compassionate" party???
