• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

None Are so Blind and Deaf . . .

CaptnKirk

Lifer
And to Listen . .

The Bush Administration refuses to face the facts of the situation in America.
The and their (lack of) leadership only pander to those who put them in power.

No foriegn power could inflict the damage on our country that GOP has taken it upon themselves to do -
it will take years to extracate ourselves from the flawed policies that come with serving only the select corporate elite & the Religious Right.

What an embarassment to the world the Republicans have become.
Throwing away 70% of our own population to please the extremists that placed them in power -
grab what you can before the house of cards falls.

<CLIP>

According to John Snow, the Treasury secretary, the global economy is in a "sweet spot." Conservative pundits close to the administration talk, without irony, about a "Bush boom."

Yet two-thirds of Americans polled by Gallup say that the economy is "only fair" or "poor." And only 33 percent of those polled believe the economy is improving, while 59 percent think it's getting worse.

Is the administration's obliviousness to the public's economic anxiety just partisanship? I don't think so: President Bush and other Republican leaders honestly think that we're living in the best of times. After all, everyone they talk to says so.

Since November's election, the victors have managed to be on the wrong side of public opinion on one issue after another: the economy, Social Security privatization, Terri Schiavo, Tom DeLay. By large margins, Americans say that the country is headed in the wrong direction, and Mr. Bush is the least popular second-term president on record.

What's going on? Actually, it's quite simple: Mr. Bush and his party talk only to their base - corporate interests and the religious right - and are oblivious to everyone else's concerns.

The administration's upbeat view of the economy is a case in point. Corporate interests are doing very well. As a recent report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, over the last three years profits grew at an annual rate of 14.5 percent after inflation, the fastest growth since World War II.

The story is very different for the great majority of Americans, who live off their wages, not dividends or capital gains, and aren't doing well at all. Over the past three years, wage and salary income grew less than in any other postwar recovery - less than a tenth as fast as profits. But wage-earning Americans aren't part of the base.

The same obliviousness explains Mr. Bush's decision to make Social Security privatization his main policy priority. He doesn't talk to anyone outside the base, so he didn't realize what he was getting into.

In retrospect, it was a terrible political blunder: the privatization campaign has quickly degenerated from juggernaut to joke. According to CBS, only 25 percent of the public have confidence in Mr. Bush's ability to make the right decisions about Social Security; 70 percent are "uneasy."

The point is that people sense, correctly, that Mr. Bush doesn't understand their concerns. He was sold on privatization by people who have made their careers in the self-referential, corporate-sponsored world of conservative think tanks. And he himself has no personal experience with the risks that working families face. He's probably never imagined what it would be like to be destitute in his old age, with no guaranteed income.

The same syndrome has been visible on cultural issues. Republican leaders in Congress, who talk only to the religious right, were shocked at the public backlash over their meddling in the Schiavo case. Did I mention that Rick Santorum is 14 points behind his likely challenger?

It all makes you wonder how these people ever ended up running the country in the first place. But remember that in 2000, Mr. Bush pretended to be a moderate, and that in the next two elections he used the Iraq war as a wedge to divide and perplex the Democrats.

In that context, it's worth noting two more poll results: in one taken before the recent resurgence of violence in Iraq, and the administration's announcement that it needs yet another $80 billion, 53 percent of Americans said that the Iraq war wasn't worth it. And 50 percent say that "the administration deliberately misled the public about whether Iraq has weapons of mass destruction."

Democracy Corps, the Democratic pollsters, say that there is a "crisis of confidence in the Republican direction for the country." As they're careful to point out, this won't necessarily translate into a surge of support for Democrats.

But Americans are feeling a sense of dread: they're worried about a weak job market, soaring health care costs, rising oil prices and a war that seems to have no end. And they're starting to notice that nobody in power is even trying to deal with these problems, because the people in charge are too busy catering to a base that has other priorities.
 
Sad indeed Capt

But I don't understand though.

The P&N experts and 51% of the Population swear none of this is happening.

You must as dellusional as I Capt.
 
The people got what they elected, and hence, deserved. They will just have to live with their choice of Bush's regime, and its consequences. Americans have NO ONE to blame, but THEMSELVES.

Yes, that means EVERYONE - even the 2/3 of America that DIDN'T go out and vote. Those people could have voted to stop Bush's regime of corruption, but they didn't - and you know who you are out there. Now we all have to live with that.
 
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
The people got what they elected, and hence, deserved. They will just have to live with their choice of Bush's regime, and its consequences. Americans have NO ONE to blame, but THEMSELVES.

Yes, that means EVERYONE - even the 2/3 of America that DIDN'T go out and vote. Those people could have voted to stop Bush's regime of corruption, but they didn't - and you know who you are out there. Now we all have to live with that.

Which makes me very tempted to hope these nut cases fulfill their political aims even unto the highest. The pendulum will swing back as far and as fast as the fanatical right pushes it. And when it does, if the Democrats serve the people instead of special interest, it will keep unhinge and break through the wall and this clown act of human selfishness will be over.
 
Yet two-thirds of Americans polled by Gallup say that the economy is "only fair" or "poor." And only 33 percent of those polled believe the economy is improving, while 59 percent think it's getting worse.
The administration can't possibly educate intelligence into the masses. The economy is actually in a decent way, dollar notwithstanding, and by all accounts does seem to be getting better. People see gas prices go up and think it's getting worse.
they're worried about a weak job market
Although unemployment is low, let them be worried :roll: (and please no comments about benefits running out, so that the current unemployment number isn't accurate. I've heard it before).
war that seems to have no end
I agree with that!

Anyway, I really hope that the democrats can find a reasonable head for the next elections. The republicans have massacred PR on the world stage for America, and some mending is definitely needed, because who can really say what repercussions this administration's lack of social development will have going forward?

It's so difficult to avoid hubris when you're at the top of the hill, but Americans need to try harder.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
The people got what they elected, and hence, deserved. They will just have to live with their choice of Bush's regime, and its consequences. Americans have NO ONE to blame, but THEMSELVES.

Yes, that means EVERYONE - even the 2/3 of America that DIDN'T go out and vote. Those people could have voted to stop Bush's regime of corruption, but they didn't - and you know who you are out there. Now we all have to live with that.

Which makes me very tempted to hope these nut cases fulfill their political aims even unto the highest. The pendulum will swing back as far and as fast as the fanatical right pushes it. And when it does, if the Democrats serve the people instead of special interest, it will keep unhinge and break through the wall and this clown act of human selfishness will be over.

I worry that they aren't trying to push the pendulum farther to the right, but want to move the whole damn clock to the right.

 
The flaw in this analysis is that the author assumes Kerry would have been any better. Exchanging one idiot for another hardly guarantees improvement.
 
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
The people got what they elected, and hence, deserved. They will just have to live with their choice of Bush's regime, and its consequences. Americans have NO ONE to blame, but THEMSELVES.

Yes, that means EVERYONE - even the 2/3 of America that DIDN'T go out and vote. Those people could have voted to stop Bush's regime of corruption, but they didn't - and you know who you are out there. Now we all have to live with that.

I would say ESPECIALLY the 2/3rds who didn't go out and vote. Honestly, if you only want ONE reason to go vote, it's so you can have bitching rights. If you didn't bother to vote for SOMEONE, then sit down and shut the fvck up, you've got NO legitimate right to complain.

Jason
 
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
The flaw in this analysis is that the author assumes Kerry would have been any better. Exchanging one idiot for another hardly guarantees improvement.

The way things are going I would rather have an idiot who leans to the left then one who leans to the right.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
The people got what they elected, and hence, deserved. They will just have to live with their choice of Bush's regime, and its consequences. Americans have NO ONE to blame, but THEMSELVES.

Yes, that means EVERYONE - even the 2/3 of America that DIDN'T go out and vote. Those people could have voted to stop Bush's regime of corruption, but they didn't - and you know who you are out there. Now we all have to live with that.

Which makes me very tempted to hope these nut cases fulfill their political aims even unto the highest. The pendulum will swing back as far and as fast as the fanatical right pushes it. And when it does, if the Democrats serve the people instead of special interest, it will keep unhinge and break through the wall and this clown act of human selfishness will be over.

Say what? If we had basic, rational human SELFISHNESS we wouldn't HAVE this mockery wherein the religious right and big special interests override things like protection of our borders and basic privacy.

Selfishness isn't what's corrupting, it's what's MISSING. We have too FEW people concerned with their own interests, all willing to give it up to the handful of powergrabbers who ARE willing to take it.

The Democrats can't and WON'T save you. They aren't INTERESTED in saving you. They are interested in exactly the same thing as the Republicans: Keeping themselves in POWER.

America needs a colon cleansing where we can get RID of the D's and the R's alike. The people, though, are too STUPID to see it.

Jason

 
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
The flaw in this analysis is that the author assumes Kerry would have been any better. Exchanging one idiot for another hardly guarantees improvement.

The way things are going I would rather have an idiot who leans to the left then one who leans to the right.

And that's exactly the flawed thinking that keeps us trapped between the D's and the R's. DUMP both, vote for someone, ANYONE else.

Jason
 
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
The people got what they elected, and hence, deserved. They will just have to live with their choice of Bush's regime, and its consequences. Americans have NO ONE to blame, but THEMSELVES.

Yes, that means EVERYONE - even the 2/3 of America that DIDN'T go out and vote. Those people could have voted to stop Bush's regime of corruption, but they didn't - and you know who you are out there. Now we all have to live with that.

Why is "everyone" to blame? What about those who DID get out and vote for (and possibly contribute to and compaign for) Kerry? Why are those people blameworthy?

Why is it my fault that I'm surrounded by a population of the apathetic, the greedy, the ignorant, and the fanatical?

My suffering is already bad enough. Don't try to make it worse.

 
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
The flaw in this analysis is that the author assumes Kerry would have been any better. Exchanging one idiot for another hardly guarantees improvement.

The way things are going I would rather have an idiot who leans to the left then one who leans to the right.

And that's exactly the flawed thinking that keeps us trapped between the D's and the R's. DUMP both, vote for someone, ANYONE else.

Jason

Yes, let's put 500 canidates on the ticket and then see what whoever get's elected can get done (talk about flawed thinking). How do you propose to get rid of the current political parties? As far as I can tell they will have to be voted out and that hasn't happened yet, but if you have an idea, I'm all ears.

Besides, whoever the D"s and R's nominate for the next presidential election will be left of the idiot we currently have.

 
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
The flaw in this analysis is that the author assumes Kerry would have been any better. Exchanging one idiot for another hardly guarantees improvement.

The way things are going I would rather have an idiot who leans to the left then one who leans to the right.

Prove it.

Elect me as President in 2008.
 
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
The flaw in this analysis is that the author assumes Kerry would have been any better. Exchanging one idiot for another hardly guarantees improvement.

The way things are going I would rather have an idiot who leans to the left then one who leans to the right.

And that's exactly the flawed thinking that keeps us trapped between the D's and the R's. DUMP both, vote for someone, ANYONE else.

Jason

Yes, let's put 500 canidates on the ticket and then see what whoever get's elected can get done (talk about flawed thinking). How do you propose to get rid of the current political parties? As far as I can tell they will have to be voted out and that hasn't happened yet, but if you have an idea, I'm all ears.

Besides, whoever the D"s and R's nominate for the next presidential election will be left of the idiot we currently have.

I wouldn't propose putting 500 candidates on the ballot, please don't put words in my mouth, especially if they're stupid. There are a *small* handful of viable political parties, including Libertarian, who would be VASTLY preferable to the D's or the R's. If one of them got a decent candidate with plenty of money to campaign against the status quo, they would have a good chance, I believe, of getting a SINCERE candidate into the oval office. Look how close that nujob Ross Perot came! It CAN be done, but it's going to take some work.

In either case, waiting around for either the Democrats or the Republicans to save the country i foolhardy. Neither party is *interested* in saving the country.

Jason
 
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
The flaw in this analysis is that the author assumes Kerry would have been any better. Exchanging one idiot for another hardly guarantees improvement.

The way things are going I would rather have an idiot who leans to the left then one who leans to the right.

And that's exactly the flawed thinking that keeps us trapped between the D's and the R's. DUMP both, vote for someone, ANYONE else.

Jason

Yes, let's put 500 canidates on the ticket and then see what whoever get's elected can get done (talk about flawed thinking). How do you propose to get rid of the current political parties? As far as I can tell they will have to be voted out and that hasn't happened yet, but if you have an idea, I'm all ears.

Besides, whoever the D"s and R's nominate for the next presidential election will be left of the idiot we currently have.

I also doubt how much more "left" they will be. Bush is pretty goddamn left for a Conservative. Much like a Lefty, he hasn't met a spending measure he didn't like!

Jason
 
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
The people got what they elected, and hence, deserved. They will just have to live with their choice of Bush's regime, and its consequences. Americans have NO ONE to blame, but THEMSELVES.

Yes, that means EVERYONE - even the 2/3 of America that DIDN'T go out and vote. Those people could have voted to stop Bush's regime of corruption, but they didn't - and you know who you are out there. Now we all have to live with that.

Why is "everyone" to blame? What about those who DID get out and vote for (and possibly contribute to and compaign for) Kerry? Why are those people blameworthy?

Why is it my fault that I'm surrounded by a population of the apathetic, the greedy, the ignorant, and the fanatical?

My suffering is already bad enough. Don't try to make it worse.

Yep, you are to blame. You should have worked harder to get your candidate elected, if you truly felt he/she was the best person for the job. Since your candidate didn't win, that makes you a slack-ass loser. Try harder next time.



PS - *My* candidate didn't win either, but I'm not going to sit around all day and whine about how stupid everyone else is for not voting the same way I did.
 
Back
Top