You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #28: It picks up on it, put after a day or so puts it back on the shelf [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
Bush_Eats_Beef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
28. It picks up on it, put after a day or so puts it back on the shelf
One of the BIGGEST challenges the Democratic Party will face...or alternatively, we move forward is the CRITICAL need for:

1). Follow-through

2). SUSTAINED intensity

3). Not allowing themselves to be "defined by their opponent."

Karl Rove (DESPITE his lack of a conscience and cut-throat skills) scores an A+ on all of the above. NO one is rattling his cage and going "Come ON, Karl, you need to pay attention and GET INVOLVED here." He's involved. That's how we lost. WE need to become "INVOLVED." He's running the race well before the starting gun is fired.

He's a carnivore. The Democratic Party needs a carnivore. All of the talk about "getting through to the redmecks in the red states?" A carnivore will get through. More than anything, Rove savors the defeat of his's what drives him. A DEMOCRAT needs to sit down with a copy of Machiavelli's "The Prince"...just like Rove did...and walk away with a lesson in life.

"Machiavelli opens The Prince describing the two principal types of governments: monarchies and republics. His focus in The Prince is on monarchies. The most controversial aspects of Machiavelli's analysis emerge in the middle chapters of his work. In Chapter 15 he proposes to describe the truth about surviving as a monarch, rather than recommending lofty moral ideals. He describes those virtues which, on face value, we think a prince should possess. He concludes that some "virtues" will lead to a prince's destruction, whereas some "vices" allow him to survive. Indeed, the virtues which we commonly praise in people might lead to his downfall. In chapter 16 he notes that we commonly think that it is best for a prince to have a reputation of being generous. However, if his generosity is done in secret, no one will know about it and he will be thought to be greedy. If it is done openly, then he risks going broke to maintain his reputation. He will then extort more money from his subjects and thus be hated. For Machiavelli, it is best for a prince to have a reputation for being stingy. Machiavelli anticipates examples one might give of generous monarchs who have been successful. He concludes that generosity should only be shown to soldiers with goods taken from a pillaged enemy city. In Chapter 17 he argues that it is better for a prince to be severe when punishing people rather than merciful. Severity through death sentences affects only a few, but it deters crimes which affects many. Further, he argues, it is better to be feared than to be loved. However, the prince should avoid being hated, which he can easily accomplish by not confiscating the property of his subjects: "people more quickly forget the death of their father than the loss of their inheritance." In Chapter 18, perhaps the most controversial section of The Prince, Machiavelli argues that the prince should know how to be deceitful when it suits his purpose. When the prince needs to be deceitful, though, he must not appear that way. Indeed he must always exhibit five virtues in particular: mercy, honesty, humaneness, uprightness, and religiousness. In Chapter 19 Machiavelli argues that the prince must avoid doing things which will cause him to be hated. This is accomplished by not confiscating property, and not appearing greedy or wishy-washy. In fact, the best way to avoid being overthrown is to avoid being hated."

Remember the TERRIBLE "rebuttal" Tom Daschle gave at the end of Bush's last State of the Union address? People on DU were going CRAZY: "What the hell is WRONG with him? Why doesn't he SPEAK OUT, get PISSED OFF?"

A loss is a loss, but given what I've seen, the loss of Tom Daschle simply makes way for someone better. It's the epitome of the cloud with the silver lining.

That link I provided is worth a Salon day features responses from about a dozen folks like Arianna Huffington, Moby, and Camille Paglia, in addition to Miller.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC