OP/ED: The Republican Convention: It's 1968 All Over Again.

You're stronger than your words.

Originally posted by Jack Martin
Also, if you are democrats, you only succeed in strengthening the republican ticket by your abhorrent behavior. If you wish to create an alternative party, I suggest you attend one of our reputable establisments of higher learning to adjust your thought mechanism to the affinity of such.

Another pompous republican.

Thank you,

Mr. Martin, I shall accept that as a compliment. Even though I am not sure

TUT

Originally posted by Jack Martin
You're stronger than your words.

After reading your post I have to agree with JackMartin too.

Inaction is supplication, FIGHT THE POWER!

I found this link very interesting and very relevant to the discussions going on in this forum. It is kind of long, but I think it is worth your time to at least read the quotes and the last couple of paragraphs. It seems like something that could never happen, but if that is the case, then our govt. will eventually destroy itself. Check it out:

wethepeoplesstateoftheunion.blogspot.com...

I don't know how to show the quote that I am responding to in here, but it is to what Relentless said about this link:

wethepeoplesstateoftheunion.blogspot.com...

I'm glad at least one person checked out the link because it raises some very interesting questions. I do know how long and extensive bills that go through congress are and while just letting the people vote on the bills may be a little simplistic, don't you think that there could be a solution similar to that? Maybe, say, congress prepares simplified versions of bills every three months and govt. critics read the full versions to make sure nothing important is omitted from the simplified version and then "we the people" vote on that? This sounds like something that would never happen, but I don't think anyone can say that a Dem OR a Rep is going to change the direction of this country, they are the same thing! Something has to be done to give the power back to the people and this link has the right idea, though it definitely needs to be expanded on.

In 1968 the Democratic party was divided and in search of leadership. Each faction was vying for power... and so violence erupted (a battle between the radical left and the working class). Mayor Daley fell strongly in line with the blue-collar, socially conservative base of the Democratic party... the protestors were solidly behind the left/intellectual end of the party. Due to a leadership vacuum... this devolved into a brawl.

That's what 1968 was. This convention has almost nothing in common with it. The protestors on the outside are not trying to gain influence within the convening party... and those within are locked behind the current power structure. The dynamics, then, are completely different.

The only similarity is that a war is going on. In 1968 out of control protests helped catapult Nixon to victory... and if peace protestors in 2004 start hurling urine filled bags at police officers... those peace protestors will help catapult Bush to victory as well.

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams


The only similarity is that a war is going on. In 1968 out of control protests helped catapult Nixon to victory... and if peace protesters in 2004 start hurling urine filled bags at police officers... those peace protesters will help catapult Bush to victory as well.

Well, well, well,

You have got it. You have it. As was said, "this is a set up". 18 months ago it was decided to hold the Convention in NYC. A rather antagonistic move well thought out in the full awareness of the state of the nation at this time
Do you really believe that a little more violence is an alien thought in this administrations quest for power?
Only in my dreams you see the light!

Tut Tut

I doubt there will be significant violence. In 68 they were primarily dealing with young people. The protesters in New York now are a mixed bag of generations. I would be very concerned if the majority of the crowd were young and drugged-up, reckless types, as was the case in 68.