Francis DiPietro, click
here to update your pages on AuthorsDen.
Blogs by Francis DiPietro
Political Transcript 1 9/1/2004 1:40:33 PM
a dialogue of my recent political debate with another writer who is from Texas Subj: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/22/2004 6:02:35 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: FilmFictionmaker
To: Silverdew7
Hi Frank,
Sorry I haven't contacted you. My mind has been filled up with so much lately that it has sort of slipped my mind to write you. I apologize for not writing you sooner. I have a new job as an insuranace agent, it pays well. But I probably won't be doing it forever. I'm trying to start a novel and been working on a few screenplays. The good thing about this job is I won't feel like I have to wait for my magic beans as you put it. I got burned on a relationship and I haven't been in a very talkative mood. To put it in summary, she turned out to be an con artist but my talking to her made her turn her life around without telling me and now she lives in Ireland as an Equestrian with this multi millionaire horse breeder.
So I have to be careful with women from now on. Been trying to heal from it. So this explains my not emailing you. Again, I apologize. I'm working on making my life more spiritually led , I've been going through some sort of spiritual metamorphosis these days. So you'll find that I'm a much better person lately, not necessarily through the church but through my own spiritual search. I guess I have lost all sense of being shallow. Go through enough and I guess a person would have to change.
How are you doing? How's your wife and family? I want to tell you some good news regarding my screenplays but I'm going to wait until it all is 100% certain before I tell you. I remember you don't like to hear news from me in that area unless it comes true. I don't want it to be misunderstood as lies.
So how do you think this election will turn out in both Presidential and Congressional sense of the word? What happened to Edwards, I haven't seen him once on tv or anywhere since the Convention?
Talk to you soon,
Todd.
Subj: Re: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/22/2004 7:27:41 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Silverdew7
To: FilmFictionmaker
In a message dated 8/22/2004 6:02:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, FilmFictionmaker writes:
Go through enough and I guess a person would have to change.
Hi Todd,
How eternally true is that remark of yours. You live, you learn, and whatever doesn't kill you (eventually) makes you stronger. Welcome to the tougher sections of this road upon which we all must travel—but tough sections of road are also opportunities to demonstrate your skill as a driver (with the scenery and destination to test your skills as navigator).
I wish to respect your Republican bent, but of course I guess you already know I want the Democrats to be in office again. I guess I've already mentioned many of the reasons why. I do believe that your grandfather was one of those (rare, in my estimation) "good" Republicans, and that left a deservedly strong impression. To be fair, we must judge records, not campaigns; actions, not words. I know you are strong in your beliefs and I won't attempt to debate you other than to hope that the best man wins.
My family is doing well—thank-you for asking. Our 18-month old daughter is really becoming quite a wonder and a constant source of joy. For a young man like yourself, it may not be immediately apparent that one should try to picture having offspring with women we consider to be "special", but it may at least be an honest mirror of the true merit of a relationship. And there's nothing wrong with fun (and experience) if you can preserve the most sacred corners of your heart.
As always, hoping the road ahead of you is enjoyable.
Cordially,
Frank
Subj: Re: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/22/2004 11:19:45 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: FilmFictionmaker
To: Silverdew7
Well, as far as President's go, I don't care who is in office just as long the person makes life for us easier and safer. I will have to watch the debates before I make my final decision. But I believe no matter who's in office from now on we are about to face the toughest trials this country has ever faced. I don't think we are through the woods yet, whether it's Bush or Kerry the next 4 years and on are going to be tough. As for my grandfather, you are discussing the one who recently died about 2 years ago and whom was a Coca Cola route driver. He switched to the Republican side after LBJ left office. The other one, who's my mom's dad, he has been Republican his whole life even during the Kennedy Administration which is astounding since I personally think JFK was a better President than some Republicans would like to admit. But as far as my personal political convictions go, I'm a very Moderate Republican with Libertarianism mixed in. So I'm almost an Independent.
However, I strongly feel that 9/11, Afghanistan, and Iraq was just the beginning. I actually hope Bush doesn't win. If he wins the most ardent Democrats will freak out and claim it is a second stealing of the election. They are already mad about 2000 and God help us if they get mad about 2004 because if that happens we could be looking at some heavy violence, an assassination and possibly a second civil war. God help us if any or all 3 happen. We as a Nation are treading dangerous ground both in a foreign and domestic sense. I do think Bush picked a wrong time in history to go on a crusade. The whole world is on thin ice and this isn't the Reagan years. The world is not the same , it is more dangerous than it used to be and not just because of 9/11. This has been building up ever since the Russians decided to go do battle in Afghanistan back in the 80's. The Living Daylights kind of gave an explanation of how the situation with Afghanistan was like in the 1980's because it was made in 1987 at the tail end of that war. I'm incredibly worried about this country, and currently it has nothing to do with who's in office. The truth is this all would've happened no matter who was in office because anyone in Bush's place would've reacted the same because they would have been given the same info. Basically what I'm saying is the fate wheel has started to go round and we can only sit back and observe because God has all this preplanned and he knows what will and won't happen to this nation of ours. If Bush doesn't get re-elected we're in trouble and if he does we're in trouble. It's a Lose-Lose situation. I just want the world to be safer for the United States sake and for the world's sake.
Todd
Subj: Fwd: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/23/2004 5:22:07 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Silverdew7
To: FilmFictionmaker
Hi Todd,
Those were some deep thoughts for a kid in his 20's. You mentioned that it wouldn't have mattered if Bush hadn't been president ("The truth is this all would've happened no matter who was in office because anyone in Bush's place would've reacted the same because they would have been given the same info"), but I should mention that the people in many of these posts also would have been different. Certainly cabinet members and all personal advisors would have been different, and it is known that there was a "Bush agenda" for attacking Iraq that would not have been so pressing with another administration. Some of his own people did in fact tell him that it was not Iraq, but it is reported that he wanted them to find some way to "make it about Iraq". There is eight minutes of film footage out there, taken right after Bush was informed of the WTC attacks, where he sits and does nothing but look "like a deer in the headlights" as one analyst put it, and added, "Can you imagine any other president just sitting there for eight minutes, hoping someone tells him what to do?"
Anyway, having faith does not mean you have to think that it is all out of your hands. There is no inherent conflict with faith manifesting itself through good deeds, and our actions in turn can help make the world a better place. I know you were speaking of the larger picture, and to me that is why it is so important we have the right people in office.
Cordially,
Frank
Subj: Re: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/27/2004 1:01:03 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: FilmFictionmaker
To: Silverdew7
Frank,
Well, I wouldn't say being a guy in your 20's, I'm 27, makes me a kid. But I guess in some respects I am to some people. Now , I have issue about the remark about Bush sitting there for 8 minutes after hearing the news. First of all, he was at an elementary school reading a story to a bunch of kids. Now, if I had been told this I'd be itching to do something immediately but I wouldn't abandon my promise to a classroom full of kids to read them a story book. He had to do 2 things, deal with those kids by reading them the story and dealing with 9/11. So what if he was in a daze for a few minutes, not many people would be so proactive after hearing that New York City had just been attacked. If it were me I would need a few minutes to collect my thoughts. That's alot to take in given the tragedy of it all. But that doesn't automatically make him ineffective.
But Frank , imagine this analogy, suppose Bush is a brush fire beginning in the Adirondacks (I hope I spelled that right) and the Fire fighters are say (the U.S citizens) and Kerry is a big bucket hanging from the helicopter. But what if in that bucket is oil and not water, then the fire would get worse. What I am saying is this: Bush may be corrupt or has a possibly wrong agenda. But electing Kerry is turning a brushfire into a forest fire. He is an symbolic Mr. Hyde. Kerry helped write parts of the Patriot Act, something so many democrats despise. He voted against giving aid to both the Iraq and Afghanistan peoples. He voted against expanding our military so we could better protect ourselves. In other words, he votes against something simply because a Republican suggest it. Isn't that inherently wrong? I mean, Republicans aren't perfect but remember this : Both Political Parties Have Their Good Points and Bad Points. And John Kerry voted against some very good things Republicans tried and are trying to do. He is even against churches and religion saying, "We must put a stop to all churches and the Republican right in order to better protect the world". This is when he was standing over Ronald Reagan's grave! He basically wants to destroy religion in America, even though the Republican right tends to be religious. He's throwing out the baby with the bath water. I can send you the link to the exact speech he said about Reagan and the church's if you wish me to but I just have no idea who this man, John Kerry, is. I have no clue what he stands for. He's basically telling the American people, "Oh, I can do what he does I'll just be a different face" and forgetting the fact that Bush has already done through his policies what he proposed at the Democratic Convention. This man makes no sense to me. I'm having a difficult time understanding what his views are. He changes his mind at the drop of a hat. At least with Howard Dean you know what he stands for. People who are for John F. Kerry aren't voting for him, they are voting against Bush. This election hardly has anything to do with Senator Kerry. It comes down to the question, "Are you for or against President Bush?". People would vote for Felix the Cat if he was running against Bush instead of Kerry because there is a huge backlash against Bush. I mean , I don't know if you watched the entire Democratic Convention but the first half of it was extremely lackluster. There were so many faces I saw on there that looked bored to tears and uninspired. The only inspiring speakers that came to stage before Kerry and Edwards of magnitude were President Clinton, Barack Obama (which was a pretty interesting speech) and Ted Kennedy and maybe Ron Reagan. But those 4 came at the last few days.
But like I said, I'll give Kerry a chance to prove himself. I'll wait for the debates. But know this: this nation is in one of the most interesting ones in history because I think whoever gets elected in November won't be able to stop the events that have been set in motion. Sure Kerry or Bush can do their best to stop it and/or make wise decisions as a result of the events that will happen over the next 4 years, but half of life is luck and the other half is fate. Osama Bin Ladin has been pissed at the USA for nearly 20 years, that's a long time to hold a grudge. You can't stop events in history from happen, but you can alter them so they won't hurt as bad. An example would be World War II. There was no stopping WWII but if we stopped Hitler earlier in the game maybe it wouldn't have lasted so long. Who ever gets elected in November has to keep his eyes peeled and remained on his toes so to speak because things are building up like an out of control virus. The entire Muslim/Mid eastern world practically loathes us now, we have to ease the tensions. If you personally want me to vote for Kerry show me examples of how I can fully trust him because right at this moment I do not.
With Respect,
Todd
Subj: Re: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/27/2004 4:58:16 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Silverdew7
To: FilmFictionmaker
Hi Todd,
You raise good points, and so I will respond with just one: When Bush was running I was very unfamiliar with him, but being from Texas you told me something like, "Trust me, he'll be okay and do a good job" in one of your older emails. Well, now the shoe is on the other foot, and having lived in Massachusetts for 29 years, I can tell you that Kerry will do a good job. "Waffling" on some issues is something which most candidates are accused of (except maybe the really scary hardliners), and it's hard to avoid in the world of politics. As for religion, it should have little bearing on democracy and government (we don't want a 2112 scenario, after all), for these should be founded upon fairness and justice, and it seems to me that in this day and age, you just can't get that from the average Republican, for to me, too many of their decisions are based on what they think God wants. If it comes down to bad scenarios, I don't want somebody who thinks that pressing the red button will just send them to heaven in office. It's too much like other, Allah-like religiously motivated things. But enough.
Ah, well, that was lively...lol.
Cheers,
Frank
Subj: Re: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/27/2004 6:59:51 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: FilmFictionmaker
To: Silverdew7
Frank,
Few points I want to make :
1. How on earth was I supposed to know Bush would do something that totally doesn't make any sense. Yes, the weapons of mass destruction haven't been found yet. But Saddam Hussein is on trial, Oday and Qusay Hussein (both murderous rapists/torturers) are dead, and Iraq is pushing towards self rule and democracy. It has its troubles like all countries that start over from scratch do. When America defeated the British in the American Revolution , America wasn't exactly considered safe until the early 1820's.
2. You make a good point that America is heading towards a Theocracy (government based on a religion) but I believe the best Presidents are the ones who make it a personal experience and don't talk about it all the time. Washington, Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Nixon, Ford, Carter and Ronald Reagan were all like this.
3. Kerry might do a good job. I just know he can't afford to do a bad job, this country can't afford it. But he can't be too sensitive in regards with the war on terror. Because they want to drive us into the ground, to destroy us.
I really do think we have a rocky 4 years ahead of us. The President in 2005 to 2009 may be Kerry but it'll be how he reacts to that rocky road that'll test him. But things will go as destined to be.
Todd
Subj: Fwd: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/28/2004 5:26:16 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Silverdew7
To: FilmFictionmaker
Howdy Todd,
Amen to that last part. In one way or another, though, the world has always been a dangerous place...the predators have just gone from other species to our own. If it ever switches to other species again (barring an AI revolution), then it might be aliens, so let's just deal with what we have...lol.
Trepidation on the eve of dangerous times is natural, and as I'm sure you know, it would be unfair to ourselves if we allowed that trepidation to limit our presidential choices to someone who at least hasn't gotten us all killed yet versus a presidential newcomer. Nader seems to have become a Republican tool, whether he knows it/likes it or not, and the choice between the devil you know and such could also be wrongfully tempting to voters. Some people may vote for Bush for no other reason than the fact that he's somewhat religious, and that is doing a great disservice to true democracy. As if religious people aren't also all too human (all those priest scandals, and the old saying that beside every nunnery is an orphanage). Not to mention the staggering national debt versus the record reductions in our debt during the Clinton years. It would strongly seem that for people like you and me, a Democrat in office would have more of a positive impact on our lives...even if that Democrat gets slandered by his opposition (and another old phrase which I'm sure will ruffle your feathers: "Republicans seem to believe that any lie will become the truth as long as they repeat it often enough." —I'll understand if you want to dust off a few similar Democratic old chestnuts.)
Ah, the banter...lol.
--Frank
Forwarded Message:
Subj: Re: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/28/2004 7:28:49 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: FilmFictionmaker
To: Silverdew7
Frank,
Let me clarify something. I believe who ever we have as President will be our President for the next 4 Years. I don't believe God plays favorites. The only thing God basically puts a hand in everything is the generation they are born into and a little good luck blessed upon them so they can be President, but the people still decide.
Nader isn't just a Republican tool, he's a Democratic tool too. Basically he's an equal opportunity tool. That couldn't of sounded good,lol. But people will vote for Bush for several reasons: They are dissatisfied with Kerry and think he's not up to the challenge, they like Bush because he's a Christian, they might vote on him based on philosophy (a conservative yet republic view), maybe there is one issue they feel strongly about that they disagree on. There is no one reason Republicans as a whole will or will not vote for Bush on. Same goes for John Kerry.
Not all Christians are scandal mongers, by the way. You shouldn't brand a whole theology/religion simply because their are a few perverted morons( pedofile priests,nuns) who don't know how to keep their pants zipped. Try and not to generalize categories of people. We are all individuals and no two people think alike. Yes, the debt reduced during the Clinton years but Clinton was notorious for taking credit for things he did not earn. First of all, he had a little to do with the reduction , but congress had to pass it. He isn't solely responsible for this. He had to get along with Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole and several key Republicans and Democrats in order to get the economic bill passed. It was a group/team effort. A truly American effort. I remember when he was running for re-election in 1996 a lie he told in Ohio to a bunch of supporters while he was doing a stump speech. I was watching him speak on CSPAN and he took credit for the Berlin Wall falling down. The Berlin Wall! He wasn't even running for President when it fell. Reagan said, "Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall" and when Reagan left office it fell during the beginning of Bush Sr.'s term. I like Clinton, I think he's a nice guy, he was just corrupt. He's the kind of guy you'd invite to a party but not the kind of guy you'd want for your boss. By the way, Clinton kept the national debt down long enough so it wouldn't be an embarrassment when he got out of office. It was kind of like stalling. He probably said to his advisors: "Just keep it down long enough for my term to end".
To assume a Democrat is the only type of person who can make a positive difference in our lives is completely ludicrous. I can think of plenty of Republicans that would make good Presidents. Examples of these would be: Rudolph Giuliani, John McCain, J.C. Watts, Liz Dole, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Arnold Schwarzeneggar (if they ever passed a bill to allow him to run), maybe George Pataki. Republicans are pushing for Giuliani to run for President in 2008. I don't know how he feels about it so far but he'd be great. Who better than the hero of 9/11 to run for President? Republicans know that in 2008 that Hillary Clinton running for President is a given. So they are looking for a superstar type to counter her. There have been plenty of real good Republican Presidents and they are : Reagan, Lincoln, Eisenhower, Ford, Nixon (minus Watergate), McKinley, Taft, Grant, and Coolidge. I know what you are going to say, Nixon was a bad guy. He wasn't a bad guy, he was corrupt like Clinton. But that doesn't mean he didn't do any good things. He did his best to end the Vietnam War after LBJ left an escalated Vietnam war in his lap. That's not to say Watergate is excusable, it's very unexcusable, but you can't scratch a person's good deeds over one criminal act. There are many good Republicans who do alot of good for the country , who never screw up and who are never in a scandal. The problem is they never get any credit they deserve. McCain is a prime example of this.
I don't if you have noticed but numerologically speaking, there are only certain ways a Democratic gets in based on math. Let's start with the Lincoln Presidency since that's when the rivalry between Republicans and Democrats truly began. About every 13 years a Democrat gets in office. Here's the listing of Presidents at 13 year intervals after Lincoln and they are in reverse order: Clinton, Carter, LBJ, Truman, FDR, Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt, Arthur, Johnson. If this trend continues then a Democrat won't be elected again until 2013. If Bush is re-elected then the theory will be proven correct.
The other thing that is true about Democratic Presidents is the 2 term Presidents. About 45 or 50 years have to pass before a Democratic President has a 2 term Presidency. Clinton had 2 terms, subtract 50 from 1991 and you get 1941 which equals FDR, a three term President which is basically a 2 term President. Before that was his cousin Teddy who served two terms. So Teddy Roosevelt is basically the start of the 50 yr interval theory on 2 term democratic Presidents. 2 term Presidents for Democrats weren't very common before Teddy. 1991 +50=2041. I realize both these points, on the 13th year intervals and the 50 year theories, are argument for debate but they are relevent for the 20th and 21st centuries.
Okay, I'm off my rant,lol.
Talk to you later,
Todd
Subj: Fwd: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/29/2004 1:22:50 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Silverdew7
To: FilmFictionmaker
Hey Todd,
Whoa, Nelly! Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican, not a Democrat (his successor Taft was his former VP—and pretty much of a pantload as far as presidents go...TR eventually turned on him—, and then came Woodrow Wilson, who was a Democrat)...unless my memory does not serve correctly, as I currently don't have time to check the books.
Next up: I did not say or imply that "all Christians are scandal mongers", merely that they are ALL as human as the rest of us, with mistakes and moments of weakness and everything from which we cannot escape. The problem is when the unpious fein piety.
As for "Clinton liking to take undue credit", I think you mean Gore, who was known for this, claiming he had invented the internet and all. I was not watching the 1996 CSPAN broadcast from Ohio in which you claim Clinton tried to take credit for tearing down the Berlin wall, but if he said such a thing, perhaps as governor he had strongly urged such an effort. I really don't know.
What I do know is that America had its best period of overall prosperity during Clinton's eight years (meaning prosperity I've personally seen in my own lifetime, not all-time), and I really do think that anyone who tries to spin that some other way is either brainwashed, a fool, or a Republican with an unhealthy agenda.
I do most wholeheartedly agree that there are plenty of Republicans who would make a much better president than Bush, and on that note of unison I will conclude another missive.
Cordially,
Frank
Subj: Re: It's Me , Todd
Date: 8/29/2004 9:41:58 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Silverdew7
To: FilmFictionmaker
Hi Todd,
Had the time so confirmed my correction to your presidential statement regarding TR being a democrat. Republican vs Democratic presidents are pretty even, with 18 R and 17 D. Here's the list:
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
Martin Van Buren
James Polk
Franklin Pierce
James Buchanan
Andrew Johnson
Grover Cleveland
Woodrow Wilson
Franklin Roosevelt
Harry Truman
John Kennedy
Lyndon Johnson
Jimmy Carter
Bill Clinton
Whig presidents
William Henry Harrison
John Tyler
Zachary Taylor
Millard Fillmore
Republican presidents
Abraham Lincoln
Ulysses Grant
Rutherford Hayes
James Garfield
Chester Arthur
Benjamin Harrison
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
William Taft
Warren Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Dwight Eisenhower
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford
Ronald Reagan
George Bush
George W. Bush
Presidents belonging to no party
John Quincy Adams
Whew, that was a big long list.
As for religion and presidents, two of our greatest presidents had no church affiliation at all. Do you know who they are? (okay, so I'm a tease)
