Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Your point seemed to have been, don't bring non-pols into this - Hollyweird is full of outlanders and we shouldn't be judged by them. My point, as to Moore, was that he's been accepted into the mainstream inner circle of demdom, and most certainly represents that philosophy, and that group. How is this non-responsive? My other examples were Moveon/Soros/.org, another main player, and . . . others I don't remember now. All pertinent and relevant. At least the ones I remember . . .
|
I don't think so. If you are supposed to be the ticket of bi-partisanship and your job is to come to agreements on issues that the two parties might otherwise argue about and you don't even try because you control Congress and don't need to, I don't think your criticism can be that you didn't because Michael Moore was invited to the fucking convention.
The Administration is not dealing with Moore when it comes to the operation of the government. It is not dealing with Moveon.com. It is not dealing with Soros. It is supposed to be dealing with the elected officials that occupy the seats on the other side of the aisle. If you're telling me that they really wanted to be the ticket that brings back bi-partisanship but refused to try because the other side didn't agree with them then your argument couldn't be more weak.
TM
