Large Scale Central

Socialism?

Quote:
... That and a "my way or the highway" attitude toward congress that got him no cooperation at all.
You'd have thought Bush Jr. would have figured that out in 2006. If he had worked better with the Democratic congress, I think he would have stemmed the resentfulness people felt against the Republicans. Instead, we got two more years of "us vs. them" and no compromises which sent approval ratings for both Bush and the Congress to all-time lows. Hard to win an election under those circumstances, no matter who you're running against.

I think if nothing else, the Republicans walk away with a very clear indication that the American people are tired of the same 'ol stuff. Their “brand” is tarnished even in their traditional stronghold areas, and they need to go into this next administration with a clear vision of being careful watchdogs, not obstructionists. If they simply keep fighting the Democrats at every turn, I think they’ll see more losses in 2010.

Later,

K

The republicans EARNED this defeat. they worked hard for it. They learned a bitter lesson last night about the price for supporting radical fundamentalists over moderate fiscal conservatism. what they do about it remains to be seen.

How in the hell did the rank and file republicans think this was gonna turn out!? Hello!? You crapped on the heads of the fiscal conservatives, kicked 'em when they were down, and then laughed at them. And then you are surprised when the fiscal conservatives don’t vote for your guy?

Kevin, Bob:
Really good, simple, accurate analysis. I’m not a republican party member, even though I usually vote for republican (actually conservative) candidates as opposed to democrats.

On Tuesday, I voted for Bob Barr, the libertarian party’s candidate for president. I’m socially pretty liberal, and fiscally very conservative. The so-called neo-cons running the republican party have satisfied neither of these positions.

Over the last 8 years the neo-cons, acting as if they answered to no one, have managed to alienate just about everyone in the U.S. and around the world. Even if one is able to accept the explanation that the WMD scare tactic was really an intelligence error (I don’t), the rest of the so-called Neo-Con platform was way too much to take. Between pandering to the religious fanatics, generally screwing up every kind of government operation (FEMA debacles, Air Force nuclear weapon management, etc, etc.) and all the while allowing a bunch of greedy thieves to drive the country’s economy so far into the red that we will be decades recovering, most of us have well had enough.

One continuing concern is the fact that the lame duck Bush government continues to support Henry Paulson and the band of thieves, leaving them in charge of the various so-called bailouts and recoveries. Paulson’s incestuous relationships with the various banking and investment gamblers and their companies would disqualify him in any other organization. But for Bush & Co. it’s just business as usual as these guys continue to fleece the U.S. Treasury.

Just one example: Michael Alix, formerly the “Senior Risk Manager” at Bear Stearns, (You do remember how well Bear Stearns managed risk?) has now been appointed a Senior Vice President in the bank supervision group of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse!

I’m certain we can expect Bush to give one of his “. . . you’re doin’ a heck of a job,” speeches soon.

On the financial front, I don’t expect much better from President Elect Obama, as he institutes his socialist leaning programs. This afternoon, I did learn from one of his supporters that we will get free gas (I assume she meant ‘gasoline’) and not have to pay our mortgages. That actually would work for me!

BTW Bob: I see you will still have to pay income tax in MA. I was hoping the anti-tax measure would pass. It would be really interesting to see how the pols would run things when money really wasn’t coming in! Might have started a national trend.

We had a couple of ‘roll taxes back’ issues out here: Both designed to stop paying for new sewer treatment facilities or processing. Seems the Kool Aid drinkers in N. California want these tough environmental laws, but don’t want to pay for the equipment required to comply. One issue passed and one failed. I can only assume that will mean the losing city council involved will require city residents to take buckets of effluent home and put it on their gardens as compost. At least their tomatoes will probably grow well!

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Great post Jerry.
I for one don’t believe in handouts for bludgers. I believe in the unfortunate being taken care of but they should be working for it if they can. Certainly not giving them their handouts in cash to waste on non essentials.
There are plenty of vital social works that need doing. No matter which country we are talking about.
I guess you could say it is the pragmatic Judge Judy attitude.

As a Conservative, I think that the so called bailout is wrong headed. Probably the worst financial decision ever made.

On the other hand, I have to ask, what decision would you have made, Tony? I don’t have a clue, as I really don’t know much about how that system works.

My complaint is two fold. 1. These guys made their bed, let them sleep in it. 2. Where will it stop?

To blame this solely on Bush over looks the prominent part that Chris Dodd and Barney Frank played in defeating any attempt at regulation of the morgauge market.

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
Ric,

The largest part of that was the delayed blow back from that stupid war.


HJ,

I don’t know if I can agree totally with your opinion. I believe a large part of his failure was being an “outside of the beltway” upstart that needed to be put in his place by both sides. Peanut Farmers are considered 'white trash" by the inside the beltway gang.

Everything Jimmmmmmy tried was made to look like a failure and then he got locked in the White House by the hostage situation and the fat lady started singing. I feel he is still considered “the crazy little man” by Washington Insiders of both parties. Tolerate him, give him something simple to do and we’ll have big funeral for him when he dies and call him a grand statesman.

Just for kicks I went to read up what the WIKI would have to say regarding the “Peanut Farmer”. Looks like some people have more accurate memories than others. :wink: :slight_smile: And I guess some people value certain things more than others do.

One thing I will keep my eyes open for: the day (twenty years from now) when Shrub Jr. is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. I’m sure it will be a shared award with Cheney, Rumsfeld and Co.

Bush gets all of the blame for the situation the USA finds itself in, because the buck stops with the head honcho.

Just the same as Obama will get the blame if he screws up.

I won’t say it. I promised that I wouldn’t.

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
One thing I will keep my eyes open for: the day (twenty years from now) when Shrub Jr. is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
You guys on the Left just can't stand it unless you get just ONE more below-the-belt parting shot at George Bush, can you? That was a CHEAP shot that was definitely uncalled-for. You will NOT find us to the right of some of you calling our newest President (elect) disparaging names, I can guarantee you. We have far more respect for the office than that.
TonyWalsham said:
Bush gets all of the blame for the situation the USA finds itself in, because the buck stops with the head honcho.

Just the same as Obama will get the blame if he screws up.


He may get the blame, but all that shows is how shallow many of the American voters are who buy that nonsense. They got taken for a ride on this one and will end up paying for it not too far down the line.

If Bush was as universally admired as you think and not guilty of what he is accused, how come he did not feature in the McCain campaign?

Surely such an all American hero would be called upon to help his party in a time of need.

On the other hand, the last ex Democrat President was warmly welcomed by the Democrats on the campaign hustings.

Ron Simpson said:
TonyWalsham said:
Bush gets all of the blame for the situation the USA finds itself in, because the buck stops with the head honcho.

Just the same as Obama will get the blame if he screws up.


He may get the blame, but all that shows is how shallow many of the American voters are who buy that nonsense. They got taken for a ride on this one and will end up paying for it not too far down the line.

Hey Ron,

Reading some of the “other” papers and listening to the eclectic opinions from around the world (CBC Overnight) I’d say he’s the universal “whipping boy” for most of the globe. I guess he’s just a poor misunderstood fella … not the “not so swift guy” who had most of the globe alternately shaking their heads, snickering, laughing out loud or just fuming.
Admittedly that is a real achievement!

TonyWalsham said:
If Bush was as universally admired as you think and not guilty of what he is accused, how come he did not feature in the McCain campaign?

Surely such an all American hero would be called upon to help his party in a time of need.

On the other hand, the last ex Democrat President was warmly welcomed by the Democrats on the campaign hustings.


You are missing the point. It is NEVER necessary to make fun of a President using such a disparaging word as “shrub.” I am not here to defend or even discuss George Bush as President, but I see it as immature to engage in name-calling of someone who occupies such a high office. I have a particular disdain for former President Carter, but you will not find me calling him names.

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
Reading some of the "other" papers and listening to the eclectic opinions from around the world (CBC Overnight) I'd say he's the universal "whipping boy" for most of the globe. I guess he's just a poor misunderstood fella .... not the "not so swift guy" who had most of the globe alternately shaking their heads, snickering, laughing out loud or just fuming. Admittedly that is a real achievement!
It is NO achievement to call a person names. I don't agree with George Bush on much of anything, either. And I certainly don't in the case of Barrack Obama. But you won't find me calling either of them names or otherwise making fun of them. That is just unnecessary and shows no class.

Why not? he’s a pubic figure, a pubiic servant, and the right to free speech includes the right to criticize. He’s the elected President, he works for us. You have zero trouble calling a duly elected US Senator all sort of names, why is it different with the President?

Bush was a disaster–he squandered worldwide goodwill, he showed astonishingly poor jugement dragging us into a pointless war, and then grossly mismanaged it; he ran roughshod over civil liberties and he left us bankrupt. I’m not going to call him juvenile names, but he doesn’t get to skate away from responsibility for his actions.

I think you should feel free to insult Obama all you want. He’s not our King. It’s not criticism that’s the problem, in my opinion, it’s inaccurate criticism.

Ron Simpson said:
It is NO achievement to call a person names. I don't agree with George Bush on much of anything, either. And I certainly don't in the case of Barrack Obama. But you won't find me calling either of them names or otherwise making fun of them. That is just unnecessary and shows no class.
Ron, I find I have to agree with you in regards to the name calling. I myself have used disrespectful terms and shouldn't have. Your point is well taken and I will make an effort to adjust my behavior. However, I have no problem with making fun of the President. Leno and Letterman and how many other talk show hosts do it all the time. All the Jib-Jab videos were hilarious. Ralph
Ron Simpson said:
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
Reading some of the "other" papers and listening to the eclectic opinions from around the world (CBC Overnight) I'd say he's the universal "whipping boy" for most of the globe. I guess he's just a poor misunderstood fella .... not the "not so swift guy" who had most of the globe alternately shaking their heads, snickering, laughing out loud or just fuming. Admittedly that is a real achievement!
It is NO achievement to call a person names. I don't agree with George Bush on much of anything, either. And I certainly don't in the case of Barrack Obama. But you won't find me calling either of them names or otherwise making fun of them. That is just unnecessary and shows no class.
Who said it was an achievement? those are all natural reactions when one witnesses ineptitude and a whole slew of other "traits" at the highest level. Sitting "on top of the world" involves a whole bunch of obligations, George W Bush missed most of them most of the time and the reactions to his "missing" corresponded exactly to those "misses". Some people give pause when the hear [b]Americans[/b] refer to him as the worst president to date!

From our “The Age” newspaper today.

(http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2008/11/07/svCARTOON_NOV8_gallery__588x400.jpg)

mike omalley said:
Why not? he's a pubic figure, a pubiic servant, and the right to free speech includes the right to criticize. He's the elected President, he works for us. You have zero trouble calling a duly elected US Senator all sort of names, why is it different with the President?

Bush was a disaster–he squandered worldwide goodwill, he showed astonishingly poor jugement dragging us into a pointless war, and then grossly mismanaged it; he ran roughshod over civil liberties and he left us bankrupt. I’m not going to call him juvenile names, but he doesn’t get to skate away from responsibility for his actions.

I think you should feel free to insult Obama all you want. He’s not our King. It’s not criticism that’s the problem, in my opinion, it’s inaccurate criticism.


I don’t know about pubic. Not even pubiic. I think that claim to fame is reserved for Mr Clinton. :wink: