Quote:
Originally posted by onetime2
Yeah sometimes it burns doesn't it? ;-)
I thought that you didn't agree with regard to the 527 groups though? Our last discussion on this topic ended with your acceptance of them in an "anything to defeat Bush" kind of way.
Not trying to stir things up here, I'm just curious. Did you change your mind on the groups? If so I'd love to hear what shifted the stance. If you still feel the same that's fine but sometimes it's reassuring to hear of people overcoming the partisanship to focus on issues that go beyond Republican and Democrat (or Independent, Green, whatever).
Personally, I think these groups lead to more partisanship and send us down the wrong path in addition to allowing too much influence on the process from large contributors.
|
I honestly don't remember arguing 527 groups, I will say part of me says let them say what they want, part of me says they just add to hate mongering. But they burn themselves out. Like Move On has burnt itself out and noone pays attention to them anymore.
Flipping through today on Faux News there was something I finally agreed with them on. Forget who it was (around 10AM EST), but they were talking about this Swift Group from the thread and he said that Bush should just concede Kerry as a war hero and disassociate himself with the Swift Group and move onto the issues Bush knows he can win on.
His reasoning was that Bush is opening a can of worms, lowering himself to mudslinging and people are going to get sick of hearing about the Swift Group much like they did Move On and then it'll be more hurtful to his candidacy than helpful.
After I watched that they did something else, but it was much more partsan, so like a good American, I flipped to Gilligan's Island.