» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society
Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Custom Search
This is a topic from the Current Politics and Religious Topics forum on inthe00s.
Subject: Flags?
Written By: Don Carlos on 08/30/04 at 7:31 pm
It's about 8:30 pm est, and I'm watching the RNC on C-span. Guess what! I have yet to see a real American flag!!!?? I see a map of the US with stars and stripes, but that IS NOT a flag. Nor have any of the delegates waved a flag. I did see an elephant waving its nose at me, somewhat threateningly. Some delegates were wearing "flag like" stuff, but NO FLAGS, even during the official portrate, which they just took. What's that about?
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: danootaandme on 08/30/04 at 8:52 pm
It's about 8:30 pm est, and I'm watching the RNC on C-span. Guess what! I have yet to see a real American flag!!!?? I see a map of the US with stars and stripes, but that IS NOT a flag. Nor have any of the delegates waved a flag. I did see an elephant waving its nose at me, somewhat threateningly. Some delegates were wearing "flag like" stuff, but NO FLAGS, even during the official portrate, which they just took. What's that about?
I noticed that the hall was not quite full, and the raw entusiasm was lacking. But, you have to give them credit for strategically placing the 5 African Americans who showed up.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 08/30/04 at 10:07 pm
I don't know, I haven't seen the GOP convention, sweet baby Jesus will not let me watch!
:P
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: danootaandme on 08/31/04 at 6:00 am
I don't know, I haven't seen the GOP convention, sweet baby Jesus will not let me watch!
:P
My thirteen year old is curious, very good. But it is so hard, so very hard. :-\\
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: CatwomanofV on 08/31/04 at 9:07 am
I noticed that the hall was not quite full, and the raw entusiasm was lacking. But, you have to give them credit for strategically placing the 5 African Americans who showed up.
I noticed that too
Cat
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 08/31/04 at 6:20 pm
I have seen the hi-lites on the news. Even that was a test of my temper. I just despise the very sight of Rudy Giulliani, the smiling fascist who made the buses run on time.
>:(
Of course, the pundit panels feature prominently the conservative African American (former) Congressman J.C. Watts, and isn't "Watts" an ironic name for black right-winger?
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Dagwood on 08/31/04 at 7:02 pm
My thirteen year old is curious, very good. But it is so hard, so very hard. :-\\
But, look at it this way. When your 13 yr old decides where he (boy right?) leans then it will be an informed decision. It really bugs me when someone is a Repub or a Dem just because the parents are...no other reasons.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: danootaandme on 09/01/04 at 5:39 am
But, look at it this way. When your 13 yr old decides where he (boy right?) leans then it will be an informed decision. It really bugs me when someone is a Repub or a Dem just because the parents are...no other reasons.
I am a case in point. I have mentioned before I was brought up in a straight ticket repub family, politics and
baseball. I was actually taught not to like democrats, but I was also taught that you have to look past the rhetoric. That is why I am not voting for Bush. ;)
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: philbo on 09/01/04 at 9:20 am
Of course, the pundit panels feature prominently the conservative African American (former) Congressman J.C. Watts, and isn't "Watts" an ironic name for black right-winger?
Am I missing something? Why is "Watts" ironic for a black right-winger (or is it as simple as the sentence "Watts a black man in the Republican party?"
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: CatwomanofV on 09/01/04 at 9:43 am
I am a case in point. I have mentioned before I was brought up in a straight ticket repub family, politics and
baseball. I was actually taught not to like democrats, but I was also taught that you have to look past the rhetoric. That is why I am not voting for Bush. ;)
I was brought up very similar. I used to vote Republican until I "saw the light" so to speak. Actually, I started following politics and looking into the issues. I have said this once before, I am an idependent and vote for the "lesser of two evils" because USUALLY there is not too much differance between the Republican and Democratic parties. (Should that be Repocrat or Demublican?)
Cat
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: CatwomanofV on 09/01/04 at 9:54 am
Am I missing something? Why is "Watts" ironic for a black right-winger (or is it as simple as the sentence "Watts a black man in the Republican party?"
In 1965 there was a race riot in the Watts area of L.A.
This gives a brief explanition of what happened.
http://www.pbs.org/hueypnewton/times/times_watts.html
There are several other referance to it if you want to look it up.
I hope this helps.
Cat
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: philbo on 09/01/04 at 12:31 pm
OIC... thanks, Cat - that rings a bell, but I didn't remember it as being the Watts area of LA.
Yes, it is a delightfully ironic name :D
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 09/01/04 at 2:29 pm
OIC... thanks, Cat - that rings a bell, but I didn't remember it as being the Watts area of LA.
Yes, it is a delightfully ironic name :D
More than just the terrible 1965 riot and conflageration, the name "Watts" has been synonymous with black ghetto, crime, poverty, and deprivation ever since.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Don Carlos on 09/01/04 at 2:57 pm
To be "fair and balanced" I have to report that on Tuesday night I did see graphics of the flag on or near the podium.
I wonder why GWB2004 hasn't said anything? Maybe he is in NY? He is SO much fun to goad ;)(although always within the "rules" I hope). ;D
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: danootaandme on 09/01/04 at 6:40 pm
To be "fair and balanced" I have to report that on Tuesday night I did see graphics of the flag on or near the podium.
I wonder why GWB2004 hasn't said anything? Maybe he is in NY? He is SO much fun to goad ;)(although always within the "rules" I hope). ;D
I've been thinking the same thing. Come back littleG, we miss you. :-\\
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 09/01/04 at 8:36 pm
To be "fair and balanced" I have to report that on Tuesday night I did see graphics of the flag on or near the podium.ÂÂÂ
I wonder why GWB2004 hasn't said anything? Maybe he is in NY? He is SO much fun to goad  ;)(although always within the "rules" I hope). ;D
He's probably got his eyes glued to the boob tube, cheering the speeches and shaking his fist at the protesters!
:)
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 09/01/04 at 8:39 pm
C-Span 2 is showing the 1984 Democratic Convention, you know, Mondale/Ferraro. Oh, God, what a loser that ticket it was. Why would anybody want to watch THAT? It's like eating last week's lumpy oatmeal!
:P
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Dagwood on 09/02/04 at 7:09 pm
They've been showing alot of older conventions. I saw one from the 50's, too. It was actually pretty interesting.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: CatwomanofV on 09/02/04 at 7:48 pm
Again, I am not watching. Any flags?
Cat
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Dagwood on 09/02/04 at 9:32 pm
Tons of flags being waved right now.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 09/02/04 at 10:38 pm
Yeah, there are tons of flags. We might as well just admit it. The Republicans love their country, and the rest of us are with the terrorists!
::)
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: danootaandme on 09/03/04 at 5:17 am
Yeah, their are tons of flags. We might as well just admit it. The Republicans love their country, and the rest of us are with the terrorists!
::)
Becareful, they also do not like backtalk and sarcasm from the lower classes.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Don Carlos on 09/03/04 at 7:36 am
They've been showing alot of older conventions. I saw one from the 50's, too. It was actually pretty interesting.
I remember some from the 60's, even then, the outcome wasn't always a forgone conclusion. Pledged delegates were only pledged for the first vote, and sometimes it took several voites to nominate.
Of course I knew there would be flags. Republicans have historically done a better job wraping themselves in it than Dems. I started this to pull GWB's chain ;)
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: philbo on 09/03/04 at 7:40 am
Becareful, they also do not like backtalk and sarcasm from the lower classes.
...and they might take what Max said as a confession ;)
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Dagwood on 09/03/04 at 7:55 am
I remember some from the 60's, even then, the outcome wasn't always a forgone conclusion. Pledged delegates were only pledged for the first vote, and sometimes it took several voites to nominate.
Of course I knew there would be flags. Republicans have historically done a better job wraping themselves in it than Dems. I started this to pull GWB's chain ;)
I figured you were doing that. I am surprised he hasn't been here with pictures, as defensive as he gets. This thread made me actually turn on the convention (I admit they both bore me. Just alot of "our guy is great" crap and no real solutions to problems in what I have seen)...there weren't alot of real flags in the first days. Just flags on the screen and hats, toys, signs etc.
The older conventions sound a lot more interesting. I have heard there were even fist fights.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: danootaandme on 09/04/04 at 6:14 am
I have heard there were even fist fights.
To put it mildly :o
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 09/04/04 at 3:59 pm
Becareful, they also do not like backtalk and sarcasm from the lower classes.
But Bush made it perfectly clear, you're either with "us" or you're with the terrorists. Furthermore, we have heard over and over that "we" must stop partisan bickering and get behind our President for the good of the country. If the enemy sees us as divided, he will see us as weak and vulnerable, and attack. Furthermore, we are not supposed to criticize the president in a time of war. We are supposed to just roll over and LOSE, like the honorable Wendell Wilkie did in 1940! Thus, by challenging the Presidency of George W. Bush, we are aiding and abetting the terrorists
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Don Carlos on 09/04/04 at 4:12 pm
I figured you were doing that. I am surprised he hasn't been here with pictures, as defensive as he gets. This thread made me actually turn on the convention (I admit they both bore me. Just alot of "our guy is great" crap and no real solutions to problems in what I have seen)...there weren't alot of real flags in the first days. Just flags on the screen and hats, toys, signs etc.
The older conventions sound a lot more interesting. I have heard there were even fist fights.
Actually I noticed (as did the NY Times) a big difference. The Dems certainly tauted Kerry, but said little to attack Bush. The Repubs on the other hand, slammed Kerry in every speach that I heard.
Richard Daily Sr. Chicago cops smacked Dan Rather around a bit on the Convention floor as he tried to interview hizhonor. Thats the one I remember.
Subject: Re: Flags?
Written By: Don Carlos on 09/04/04 at 4:14 pm
But Bush made it perfectly clear, you're either with "us" or you're with the terrorists. Furthermore, we have heard over and over that "we" must stop partisan bickering and get behind our President for the good of the country. If the enemy sees us as divided, he will see us as weak and vulnerable, and attack. Furthermore, we are not supposed to criticize the president in a time of war. We are supposed to just roll over and LOSE, like the honorable Wendell Wilkie did in 1940! Thus, by challenging the Presidency of George W. Bush, we are aiding and abetting the terrorists
So (he says tongue in cheek) instead of sending a check to the Kerry campaign, I might as well send it directly to Osama.