Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Now Republicans adopt con-man tactics.

Mar 13, 2004 12:29AM PST

>>AARP, the advocacy group for people over age 50 that opposes diverting Social Security taxes into private accounts, is irked about a new organization with a similar name -- minus one A -- that is advocating the changes. The new group, founded by Republicans, is called Alliance for Retirement Prosperity, or ARP. "Gee, what a coincidence," said John Rother, AARP's policy director. <<
That full story is at AARP upset new group named ARP.

As for the con-man angle? One of their well-known tactics is to "borrow" a well-known and respected group's cachet by chosing a similar name for their own sleazy operation: >>a name similar to a reputable organization's is used -- such as "American Cancer Center" instead of the American Cancer Society.<<
See Telemarketing/Direct Marketing Fraud.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Guess I gotta call George............
Mar 13, 2004 3:34AM PST

Hola Amigo,

Some in your Party are starting to sound and act too much like the Democrats.

Ignore the other side. Don't respond or debate. Stick to your game plan, maintain identity, and forge ahead. If you allow your people to keep looking over their shoulders, they're apt to stumble. It looks as if the Democrats realize they cannot rise to your level, so they're hell bent on pulling you down to theirs. You've set your course, maintain it.

Hasta luego

- Collapse -
...and a follow-up call..........
Mar 13, 2004 6:02AM PST

Hi Mr President,

Forgot to mention earlier, your should establish a mind-set within your camp to never/ever repeat your opponent's message. If he wants his message repeated let him spend his time, effort and money in doing so.

In any message delivered by yourself, or attributed to you, it is fine to comment along the lines...as different from my opponent....or....in contrast to my opponent.... then immediately give your message, don't repeat his message.

Get your message out there in front of the American people, and don't lose trust in them. The American voter can see red from green.

Respectfully,

- Collapse -
Re:...and a follow-up call..........
Mar 16, 2004 1:00AM PST

Hit the nail right on the head. Excellent advice and observations.

We can't compete in lowball tactics with them and nobody should try. It's just not in us and besides, they're experts with years of experience in this sort of thing, born of the need to deceive to gain power.

DE

- Collapse -
But, DE.......
Mar 16, 2004 1:22AM PST

But David, it's such fun to use their own tactics on them and listen to them squeal. At first it was just "tweaking their nose" for a bit of humor. Is is somewhat surprising to see them come back foaming at the mouth like mad dogs.
David, I tried being nice, such as things like mentioning Senatro Byrd's "situation" instead of spelling it out. It finally dawned on me that if you just keep letting a bully have his way with you, he'll just continue his ways. Sooner or later you've got to haul back and slug him one, to show him what it feels like. Financial filings, resignation form an organization, speeches, there's so much raw material. When Kerry is finally forced to stop hiding records and refusing to expalin actions and stands, there will be a lot more posibilities for investigation.

- Collapse -
Re:Re:...and a follow-up call..........
Mar 16, 2004 2:31AM PST

>>they're experts with years of experience in this sort of thing, born of the need to deceive to gain power.<<

You're quite a comedian, DavE. "Dirty tricks" squads have been a standard feature of Republican campaigns since the 60 election, at least (which is as far back as I can recall). When your policies favor the rich and powerful over the average man and woman, you have to rely on dirty tricks and misrepresentation to finagle people into voting against their own best interests! That's why Newt formalized the tactic with his infamous "candidate's manual."

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
One last time--Newt's 'manual' was a knockoff of what the Democrits issue...
Mar 16, 2004 10:03AM PST

to all their candidates and have for years.

Newt simply liked the idea and decided that what worked for the goose would work for the gander.

Dirty tricks actually are party independant although the Democrits excel at them as well as voting from beyond the grave.

When an educated man actually believes that returning a larger percentage of tax dollars to low and middle income tax payers and a smaller percentage reduction to high income tax payers favors the rich it shows clearly that the deceptive dirty tricks of the Democrits worked--he has lost the ability to actually think for himself and follows like the rest of the sheep.

When an educated man really thinks that a rich person owes a far greater percentage of his income than a less afluent tax payer as his "fair share" it shows that the deceptive dirty tricks have worked on him.

When an educated man says and really believes that a non taxed wage earner should get a hefty tax rebate it shows plainly that the deceptive tricks worked and his inability to think for himself is gone forever.

Doesn't have to be though as any real neocon (liberal who saw and faced up to reality) can tell you.

- Collapse -
Re: One last time--Newt's 'manual' was a knockoff of what the Democrits issue...
Mar 16, 2004 12:07PM PST

Ed, Newt's candidtaes manual is widely available on the web. I challenge you to produce a similar document from a reputable site (Newt's manual was originally available at GOPAC, though they'vge since taken it down). You're blowing smoke as usual. I'll give you a head start -- here's a Democratic Precinct Chairperson's manual; I dare you to find a section about how to villify the opponent to make him sound like an unpatriotic coward, as Newt's manual does: link

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Smoke this Dave...
Mar 17, 2004 4:27AM PST
"Our mission is to steal the most talented young people in Kansas from the evil clutches of Republicanism!"

That is about "vilifying an opponent" much more so than "Go Negative Early." (I never saw anything about how to make anyone but an unpatriotic coward look like one--care to elaborate with specific passages?)

For every State Democrat PRECINCT COMMITTEEPERSON MANUAL you want to link to I can find and link to an equally innocuous Republican one or even a Green Party one--it proves nothing (although the quote above shows what young Democrits ate being taught.).

Find the DNC handbook for Democrats running for Congress if you want to compare anything. They guard it fairly well because they have seen how their playbook can be used against them. All one has to do is look back over the years to see who most often initiated attack ads and negative campaigning and one will see that in the vast majority it was the democrat candidate with the guidance of the DNC. That is history Dave and immutable despite your best efforts.

I doubt seriously if you have ever even seen the "Newt Gingrich manual for Republicans running for Congress" despite your claims of Widely available on the net. Care to post a link for all of us?

PS - if I linked to the Democrits training manual it would be on the DNC site so your reputable criteria would eliminate that.
- Collapse -
Re: Smoke this Dave...
Mar 22, 2004 12:35PM PST

Hi, Ed.

That's hyperbole for the faithful -- it's not an election ad. And "evil clutches" isn't to be taken seriously. OTOH, pounding home day-in and day-out messages like "liberals are cowards and traitors" or "feminists are man-hating lesbians" is deadly serious, and done with malice aforethought. You, Clay, Anne Coulter et al. accuse Dems of this routinely, but without proof -- somewhat like the "smear of the minute" against Kerry! Newt's manual, OTOH, speaks for itself.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Proof?
Mar 24, 2004 5:41AM PST

For starters it was a response to what you posted and what your link led to. Don't like it? Not to be taken seriously? Think again Dave. As a young socialist you believed and still believe their propaganda.

Regarding the rest all you have to do is look around and let the evidence speak for itself. Kerry and Jane were certainly not conservatives. The vast majority of lesbians are indeed man hating liberals and you think Kerry's own words are smears.

Linl to this "Gingrich's manual" you keep saying is so readily available--the one you never read and simply accepted accusations about. (Helpful hint, it was NOT called "Gingrich's Manual".)

You really resent the fact that he stole a page from the Democritic campaign manuals and turned it against you. Think back to who historically demonized anything and you will see a Democrit behind it--that was their party strategy and that is what Gingrich borrowed. He didn't invent it but he saw something democrits used successfully and what do you know, it worked against them too.

- Collapse -
Yes, proof!
Mar 24, 2004 5:54AM PST

Ed, we're gonna have to see the research to back up the statement The vast majority of lesbians are indeed man hating liberals.

Thanks,

Dan

- Collapse -
Re: Yes, proof!
Mar 24, 2004 12:32PM PST

Hi, Dan.

Hey, that was posted by a conservative -- didn't you know they don't need no stinking proof!? They stand for truth, justice, and the American way, while liberals stand for lies, disloyalty, and the Russian way -- just ask Newt!

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Re:Re: Yes, proof!
Mar 24, 2004 11:25PM PST

Oh, I realize that, comrade. It's just that in general, over all, not singling out any instance, when someone spouts a narrow minded, ignorant, homophobic, hateful statement, it's nice if they at least pretend to back it up. But that's just my personal preference.

Dan

- Collapse -
All Liberals don't 'stand for lies' but YOU TWO don't help...
Mar 25, 2004 3:20AM PST

dispell the image.

When proofs are offered you you are "too busy" or have some other excuse so you can keep making your erroneous statements.

Maybe we should have a poll--then you would believe because you tend to believe the mighty and omnicient "POLL GOD" without question.

Tell us about your past as a young socialist Dave. Tell us how it has no influence on your politicval views today--we could use a hearty laugh.

- Collapse -
Don't be scared of them, go out and ask them and you will have your proof. (NT)
Mar 25, 2004 3:14AM PST
- Collapse -
I'm not and I have.
Mar 25, 2004 3:26AM PST

The one who I thought was going to be as you narrow mindedly described. It turns out that the man she really hates is her father. When he found out that she was a lesbian he beat her pretty badly and kicked her out of the house. 16 year old girls remember that kind of thing.

I could probably get her dad's email address; I'd think you two would really enjoy corresponding.

The other lesbians I've asked this of were kind of amused at the idea. They professed no special negative feelings for the half of the population they have no interest in having sex with. That seems pretty normal to me.

Ed, do you hate the half of the population you don't want to have sex with?

Dan

- Collapse -
Didn't note you mentioning any Lesbian FEMINISTS there...
Mar 25, 2004 3:45AM PST

Go forth and try again. Don't let your natural fear show and they won't scent it and attack--maybe.

- Collapse -
And didn't note you backing up your claim....
Mar 25, 2004 4:47AM PST

...that most lesbians are man-hating liberals.

Let's say that there are 140 million women in the US. This would make around 14 million of them lesbians (I don't know the exact numbers but I'll base it on the commonly used figure of 10% of the population). How many of those 14 million are "man-hating liberals?"

- Collapse -
Possible Ed answers
Mar 25, 2004 5:09AM PST

1)


2) Bush isn't responsible.

3) Cigar

4) Read all of TFF 364, Dave. Don't just skim it this time.

Wink

Dan

- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Mar 25, 2004 5:14AM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Mar 25, 2004 5:16AM PST
- Collapse -
I was about to delete that one myself, thanks.
Mar 25, 2004 5:53AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Oh, Ed
Mar 25, 2004 6:15AM PST

It's painfully obvious that you're projecting your own fear of lesbians. Lesbians are just people, Ed. They won't attack you. OK? Will you sleep better now?

BTW, where's your support for this claim of knowing the thoughts of lesbians? We'll all find that interesting.

Dan

- Collapse -
Since I was curious...
Mar 25, 2004 6:31AM PST

I polled the four lesbians that are friends of mine. 3 registered Republicans - 1 independant. Not scientific but interesting Happy

- Collapse -
But Patrick!
Mar 25, 2004 6:38AM PST

What about the Ed's 'man hating' delusion?

Did you find any support for it? And don't forget the feminist, sorry, FEMINIST issue?

Thanks,

Dan

- Collapse -
My friends
Mar 25, 2004 6:49AM PST

Don't hate men - they just prefer women bed partners - come to think of it I do too Happy At least one has Feminist tendancies but i don't know exactly what the qualifications for full FEMINIST status are Happy

- Collapse -
FEMINISTS
Mar 25, 2004 10:13PM PST

They hate men, non-feminist women, puppies and kittens, and never shave their arm pits.

Dan

- Collapse -
FEMINISTS
Mar 25, 2004 10:17PM PST

Oops!

They hate America, too. I almost forgot to list that one because it's so obvious.

Dan

- Collapse -
Re:Since I was curious...
Mar 25, 2004 10:32AM PST

That's impossible. Ed says so. Your friends are clearly lying as part of a massive left-wing lesbian conspiracy.

Devil

- Collapse -
Re:Since I was curious...
Mar 27, 2004 2:30AM PST

Hmmmm... if the Republican party is so hostile to Lesbians, this poll result is truly interesting!

I don't think Ed would be able to find any definitive studies to back up his assertions, but most anecdotal observations probably do for anyone willing to take off the PC glasses. One of the reasons many women turned away from feminism was that lesbian issues seemed to overtake the movement. Sorry, I could care less if someone is a lesbian or not, but if 2% of women are homosexual, it makes no sense that so much of NOW's agenda is controlled and geared towards that small minority. After all, the majority of issues important to heterosexual women -- pregnancy, maternity leave, etc. -- have no bearing on the lesbian woman unless she chooses extraordinary measures to create a family.

I have a fair number of gay friends. I think it is fair to say that the male ones really love women, they just prefer to sleep with men for some reason. All the ones I know have a lot of female friends, mostly heterosexual. They seem to love women for who they are more than your average heterosexual man if you ask me! This just isn't the case for the lesbians I know. I wouldn't go so far as to say that they hate men, but they don't seem to like them very much. They seem to only see men as chauvinist oppressors. They don't seem to associate much with men, straight or gay, except for at rallies for gay issues. This is just my anecdotal observations, but surely worth as much as anyone else's.

Evie Happy