There must be a DNC policy manual out there that contains guidelines for “Managing People Who Won’t Play in Our Sandbox.” It probably contains a list of the uncool kids. You know, the ones who get picked last for the pick-up baseball game. I’m sure there are also sections dedicated to the “kids with cooties”, “those who color outside the lines” and “the kid who dresses funny”.
Yeah, I was THAT kid...
The reason I am putting it in these terms is because politics today has become downright childish. The whole “Nanner, Nanner, Boo, Boo…I won and you didn’t!” mentality has gotten out of hand.
Another unattractive aspect of all of this is the divert and destroy tactics being used against those who choose to color outside the lines. If you want to divert attention from the fact that you candidly stated that Americans need to share the wealth, destroy the person who asked you a question. If you wish to divert attention from the fact that you over-glorified your military record, attempt to destroy your opponent by accusing him of secretly funding the organization who exposed you.
The latest victim of the divert and destroy tactics is Firefighter Ricci. Sotomayor made a bad decision. SCOTUS reversed it. Period? End of story? NO! Let’s divert attention from the borderline racist statement she has made (more than once, so don’t give me that “her words were misconstrued” crap) and destroy one of the plaintiffs in the case against “reverse racism”. Why doesn’t the administration just go for broke and attack the characters of the other 19 plaintiffs in that case?
When someone attacks your ideas or your words, it is unnecessary and unwarranted to attack their character. As a matter of fact, it is just downright wrong. Attack an idea with an equal or better idea.
I have just one final question for the DNC…How the hell did Al Franken become one of the “cool kids”?
Sstorm0730's Blog 
First off, I reject that the Dems were always the “cool” kids. It seems more so that the Reps were always the kids that got everything they wanted and were really spoiled. The Dems, and/or Libs, were the ones that never played sports, sat on the edge of the school yard during lunch, and played Uno on Friday nights.
Next, the “reverse racism” comment was also made directly at Sotomayor.
Also, Sotomayor didn’t make any mistakes on that case, she upheld the law as it stood. It took the Supreme Court to overturn precedence, which she stated it would in her judgement. The system worked exactly as it should have.
Also, Mr. Ricci has filed three lawsuits against his employers and threatened a lot more, including the one concerning firefighters. Might, possibly, Ricci be looking for some easy money by filing those lawsuits?
“Attack an idea with an equal or better idea,” should be said to the RNC, who can’t seem to come up with any good ideas but continuously say, “No,” to any new ideas.
I think Franken became cool after he wrote “Lies(And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them): A fair and balanced look at the Right”. That’s a great book.
I’ll see your idea, and raise you one…Ricci is not the only plaintiff in that case. Regardless of whether he brought 0 or 100 suits in the past, it is not supposed to have any bearing on the case currently before a judge. Prior bad acts can be used in criminal trials. This was not a criminal case.
I am not saying that Ricci is perfect, nor Joe the Plumber. My point is that this propensity to beat things to death (and, yes, both parties have been guilty of it) is not accomplishing anything and is of no benefit to the American people. Honestly, it doesn’t matter if Sotomayor is approved or not. She will merely be a liberal replacement for a liberal judge. The next appointment will be the one that can potentially shift the balance in the Supreme Court.
By the way…I played Uno on Friday nights, had to write a term paper in order to pass phys. ed because I wouldn’t play tennis and spent my lunch hour getting high (the 70’s were a wonderful decade), and I used to be a Republican.
We’ve all witnessed the methods in which Sarah Palin was completely demonized. You can view any video on Youtube with her in it and then read the comments; some of the most ‘ungodly’, perverse statements I’ve ever seen. Simply attacking her intelligence, the way she combs her hair, the names of her children, etc.
The bottom line is: talking someone ‘down’ doesn’t elevate the ‘talker’… it only shows the lack of real substance in their argument. Just listen to Bill Maher sometime for a perfect example.
Great post Katrina!
Thanx, Steve.
I don’t think Sarah Palin has had it rough with the media at all, not in the slightest. Secondly, she never even had the courage to go into the lion’s den and be interviewed by someone on MSNBC, contrary to Obama going on the O’Reilly Factor. Secondly, Bill Maher is a comedian, that’s what comedians do; you can’t compare comments made by him, or Letterman, to comments made by Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, or O’Reilly who all falsely claim to be journalists. Talking someone ‘down’ doesn’t elevate the ‘talker’… but it sure is fun when the person is as self-centered as Sarah Palin.
I have to disagree with you on one point, Godless. I watch Glenn Beck (okay, insert snarky comment here 🙂 ) and he repeatedly states ” I am NOT a Journalist, but I AM a thinker…” As far as Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity and O’Reilly go, I have no idea what they claim to be.
You must have been sleeping during the campaign Godless. I will concede the fact that Bill Maher is a comedian. Perhaps he should stick to just trying to be funny.
Glenn Beck is honest about one thing! That’s fantastic!
What bad treatment has she gotten from the media? Give one example.
Whew! I have you…in writing…agreeing with me. As far as Sarah Palin, we all have our opinions as to who mistreated or mislead whom. I think the biggest culprits in the “Bash Sarah” campaign were John McCain’s campaign staffers.
What they did was uncalled for. As much as I respect John McCain for so many other things, I am sorry to see that he lost control over the people who worked for him. Win or lose, you need to keep a united front. It reflects poorly on his decision-making abilities and judgment when his choice for Second in Command is ripped apart by his staff. Not that Obama’s judgment was any better…but, watching Joe self-destruct is at least entertaining.