ohmygod. they totally should play that at his funeral!
Carie
11.Jun.04 at 1:52 pm
Does that video have like the Reagans in bed???? My friend was trying to get me to remember one that had that in it today, and I had no clue.
minnekeith
14.Jun.04 at 9:47 am
And the Frankie Goes to Hollywood video, “Two Tribes”, where Reagan and Gorby wrestle in the ring.
Ah, good times.
And for the record, I shed more tears for Ray Charles then that dishonest President. Where was the reports on Busting Unions, Iran Contra, huge deficits, etc. etc. ???
FFJ
14.Jun.04 at 10:26 am
as i kid i was convinced that with regan in the white house the cold war was going to end in nuclear winter. i thought he’d be the death of us all. there is a really good piece in the strib’s ox-op section about the regan legend vs the regan facts. check it out if you can.
minnekeith
14.Jun.04 at 11:16 am
I don’t usually read the Strib. You know why it’s called the diaper, right?
But maybe I can track one down. what day?
Thomas
14.Jun.04 at 12:30 pm
I find it disturbing that people are more than happy to pile on all the hurt and pain that has ever been caused onto someone with a conservative view, yet when their holiest of holymen, Clinton, is mentioned in any kind of disparaging tone, they would strap explosives to their collective chests and kill themselves any anyone in a 10 foot radius in defense of the lying, womanizing traitor.
Before you demonize a man who did everything he could to make America great, first make sure your own “stellar” socialist examples aren’t hideously fragile mockeries of the worst kind of career politician.
I’d say the attitude expressed so far could be described as a “vast left wing conspiracy”, but I’d be incorrect on two parts; It’s not “vast”, but more like “half-vast”, and rather than being a conspiracy, it’s a “crush in your face with a liberal jack-boot and expect you to not to say shit about it” theology.
It shames me to think that our founding fathers bravely founded this republic only to see it degenerate into a heaping mass of whining sheep who have so little confidence in themselves and their fellow man that they gladly and pleadingly turn over their opportunities and abilities to some faceless Marxist government that will make them feel “safe”.
Here’s a wake up call: Even in your wettest liberal dream societies, you’re still going to get fucked. Only now, those “in-charge” will fuck you vigorously and relentlessly while denying you a voice to protest.
UH
14.Jun.04 at 12:42 pm
Typical. Someone points out something an (R) president did or said, and the shrieks of “CLINTON! CLINTON!” ring out like crazed baboons howling at the moon.
Do you need a napkin to wipe the froth from your jowls now?
minnekeith
14.Jun.04 at 1:51 pm
Whoa, a little hostile there, Elizabeth.
I never said Clinton was my man, you sir, jumped to a conclusion prematurely.
Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Rumsfeld, Kerry, et al are all slimy and despicable, that’s why they’re politicians.
And when you can’t see “your party’s” faults and revisionism and only see their wonderful, “making America great”, acts of kindness to the rest of us, well, I just think it’s too close to dogma. No wonder the State can’t separate from the Church.
Do you actually think politicians give a lick about you?
I wish you luck with the upcoming election if you get this worked up about a few words about a ex-president.
FFJ
14.Jun.04 at 3:19 pm
the ox-op article is from sunday, 13 june.
here is a link, but you might have to sign up for free to read it.
and yeah…i’m not too much into reading the strib, but this is an opinion piece – not news.
Thomas
14.Jun.04 at 6:06 pm
Clinton isn’t my only example. You had that fine lame duck Carter, who did have the countries best intentions at heart when he so courageously sat on his ass and is remembered for…. for… being president. Then there’s Jack Kennedy who solved the Cuban military crisis by… taking no action. But surely LBJ would be a man of action, right? And action he was! He bravely created the situation in Vietnam with such long lasting impact as to have it fall in someone elses’ lap to resolve. Such “bold” men. I’m a-tremble. And you had such sparking candidates with Dukakis and Mondale; I wonder how those “winners” never made it to the top? Now we are presented with a man of such poor decision making ability, that when he comes to a fork in the road, he takes it. But he can talk angrily and bash those who don’t support the most liberal policies seen since the Russian Revolution, and the bashees are NEVER supposed to defend themselves lest they be labeled as hate mongers. I suppose beating victims, as long as they have a conservative viewpoint and the attacker is a socialist, should shut up and take it because it’s “right” somehow, eh?
When it comes to “sheeple” bad mouthing a Republican, you’ll find that those who would benefit the most from having an “even playing field” also known as “to each their need regardless of how much they work” are those that espouse the most Lenin-esque diatribe their Soviet hearts can muster.
The reason I spouted off on Whitewatergatelyingsackofshit Clinton is that enough people who actually have enough sense not to fall for new age “one world government” bullshit have had the decency, in the past 24 years, to elect Republicans to more subversively steer this country back in the generally “correct” direction. (And yes, it was electoral college votes that made the difference, but a win is a win regardless how you would like to define “is.”) Clinton is the only Democrat the public elected, primarily of his ability to smile and be telefuckinggenic, not because of his ability to ride on the coat-tails of great decisions made 12 years prior to his arrival.
Now had the nutless wonders of the world elected Perot and/or Nader to office instead of Clinton, we’d all be far better off. The Republicans may have a better perspective, but I don’t lose sight of the religious influence that infringes on the legitimate rights of members of this Independent Republic. Everyone would be much better off if we voted in the CEO of the most sucessful businesses; The ones who haven’t comprimised their scruples to get to the top either, and despite what you may have gleaned from your Communist primers, people can succeed in America without stepping on “the little guy”.
I’ll stop now pefore Heathen starts to shout, “Help, Help! I’m being repressed! Come see the violence inhertant in The System.”
Bloody peasant.
UH
14.Jun.04 at 10:07 pm
Well, hell, as long as you’ve worked up a good lather…
HILLARY CLINTON ’08!
That oughta keep you hyperventilating for at least another 24 hours or so.
I do hate to see a conniption go to waste.
Julie
15.Jun.04 at 1:09 am
Whoa, Thomas, threatened much?
Does it make you feel big to patronise another persons point of view? By assuming you’re more intelligent than the rest of us ‘pheasants’ and by making your argument personal, your point is completely lost. No one will take the time to consider if you’re making a valid point. They’ll just think you’re an ass.
minnekeith
15.Jun.04 at 7:48 am
If I remember correctly, I was educated in the public school system and attended private, albeit liberal, religious colleges. In all my years I never once read any “Communist Primers”, I never affliated to one party ( I have even voted for Republicans *Gasp*) and I don’t get the Conservitive Rights’ facination with the socialist model and the one world order which they are so scared of.
I agree with your idea of voting a top CEO, but the poeople most qualified to be our President are way too smart to actually want to do it. It returns me to my original point that The right refuses to look at their own leaders, blindly redirecting rage at the ills of the other party instead of correcting their own. Both parties are at fault and if this were a true democracy insstead of a Republic we might see more choices. Until we do I vote who I want and no one tells me who I should, no party, no organization, no one. Well, maybe the wife suggests.
I do know that my life is better when Dem’s are in office. And Bush? Well, a baseball quote puts him best, “He was born on third base thinking his whole life he had hit a triple.”
(Site is down. I was going to link to the audio of that bit)
Thomas
15.Jun.04 at 7:51 am
Julie, I appreciate your feedback. I’m sorry you couldn’t see my argument was referring to the entire group. This comment, however is directed solely at you.
First, I don’t assume I’m more intelligent than everyone; I’m smart, but Jodi collects intelligent people like an amulance draws litigiousness.
As far as my comment on “pheasants” (snicker), please see Monty Python’s: The Holy Grail. especially take note of the scene where Arthur meets the filth collectors and their take on an “autonomous collective”. Also, get a dictionary and look up “humor, wry-sardonic” (also look up “humor, bad” and “humor, poor-taste”, where people have arguably been able to find seeds of my particular take on the genre.)
And finally, anyone can skip right past my comments here on the lunacy of blind faith in political parties, liberal or otherwise, and jump straight to the correct knee-jerk conclusion that I am an ass; I am simultaneously cheeky and an asshole, which collectively defines an ass. Being an ass does NOT preculde the truth and validity of my correct identification of the “Democrats” being a liberal group of sheep who are so afraid of their own decisions, that they automatically assume that a big government agency should be created to save themselves from themselves.
Republicans aren’t much better as they cant divest themselves from the archaic religious overtones that tear themselves asunder, seeing as how many of these “enlightened” religious not only contradict each other, but furthermore many are based on the notion that if you don’t strictly adhere to their interpretation of an ancient tome of generalities, then you’re going to suffer the worst kind of horrors imaginable upon your death. (Meaning they believe the people that they are allied with are “sinners” doomed to the fires of perdition. Such wonderful bedfellows, no?)
Thinking for yourself is the only viable option. If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.
Thomas
15.Jun.04 at 8:09 am
Keith, my life has been better when a more conservative policy has been in place economically. No president in office can be held liable for the financial health of the Country. If you adopt an AIDS baby, you’re not the one who gave the disease to the baby, but you have to deal with all the pain someone else wrought. Conversely, when you adopt a healthy child, you are remembered for how you cared for the health of that child.
Clinton adopted a “healthy” country. Look what he gave us after 8 years of his service. Service, in this case, can be defined as how a bull services a cow.
Bush isn’t the brightest man ever to sit in the white house, but neither was Bill, Jimmy, Lyndon, or even Jack (Joe Kennedy used his family’s prohibition fortune to keep one son’s ass out of the electric chair and another’s ass in the Oval Office; It wasn’t skill or aptitude.) The smartest thing Bush did was to surround himself with the smart people to make all that thinking for him. It does bite him in the butt many times, but I see the results of thie brain trust and I like what’s being proposed and done. I think that even if Kerry does slime his way into the big chair, the Country will have already been steered back where it needs to go to be viable.
I pray that traitorous sonofabitch does get elected, though. Like his lying liberal predecessor’s campaign song goes, I can’t stop thinking about tonmorrow.
dweebie
15.Jun.04 at 9:53 am
Someone criticizes a politician and then in response they are labeled, and assumed to believe in the opposing potical party. I don’t like being pigeon holed, assumed to be an idiot, or the fact that we have to polarize in order to discuss something. That’s why it’s really hard to be a lawyer and I’d rather raise children. There’s good and bad on both side of the fence, look at things and each other individually.
Thomas, isn’t that what being a Libertarian is all about?
The other day someone, the author of The Road to Paradise, said “We seem to reinforce our self esteem by feeling superior to others” Sadly it’s all too true.
minnekeith
15.Jun.04 at 10:43 am
Thomas,
Granted, most if not all, politicians are 25 watt types, we need look no further then our own ex-gov (and Calif’s) for proof. But who puts them there? We do.
As the claim that Clinton inherited the good economy from the previous administration is speculative. According to a study commissioned by the American Council of Bishops (Catholic Church), the total number of people living below the poverty level in America doubled under Mr. Reagan.
And what did Clinton do during his reign that was so bad? At least the rest of the world wasn’t pissed at us for starting a war and occupying a country that Reagan helped create.
Yes, you are as good as the people you put around you and I have to admit that W has friends that scare me. Halliburton, Enron Rumsfeld and others.
If you think they are working for your best interests that’s fine, but I really don’t think any of them do. They do it to get re-elected, talk about welfare. The dem’s are sheep and have no clear message and the people who do are lost in the maelstorm, but that is inherit in the system. We elect people we don’t want because we have no choice.
I think George Carlin summed it up best when he said, “Think of how stupid the average person is. What is scarier is that half of the population is stupider then that.”
Or, “the masses are asses”.
dweebie
15.Jun.04 at 10:59 am
Thomas, I think I misspoke, Libertarians as I recall are for even less government intrusion than Repub., some of them must be squirming under all the new “national security” policies which are really hindering some individual rights. I probably was thinking of Independent above.
I remember being young and watching Reagan on tv and my mom just getting irate saying “he’s lying!!!”. She was using her intelligence and that “liberal” women’s intuition. She loved it when Sam Donaldson would pin him down in a fabrication.
Sam admitted after Ronald died, that yes Reagan did have a problem with truth, but he was so darned nice you couldn’t help but like him.
After reading Madeline Albright’s memoir I realize that even with Clinton uncontrollabe libido that he is smart, idealistic, and a really hard worker who stayed up nights getting things done that helped a lot of other countries and our own. I love that he writes his own speeches and rewrites and rewrites. I’d much rather listen to an artist’s self written song than a cover of someone elses. The “thousand points of lights” is a beautiful phrase but it wasn’t Bush, Sr. who wrote that speech. which further points out, it isn’t the figurehead who does aaallll the work in government, there are a lot of individuals making their contributions. How much can we blame or praise the figurehead for what transpired during their term?
Thomas
15.Jun.04 at 12:14 pm
“And what did Clinton do during his reign that was so bad? At least the rest of the world wasn’t pissed at us for starting a war and occupying a country that Reagan helped create.”
Do you, in all honesty, believe that the moment Clinton left office, 22 of Osama’s soldiers flocked to the US, trained how to fly a big jet, and coordinated an attack that was delayed to 9/11? The attack would have happened if Gore, Perot, Nader, or even you were in the office. Our “indulgent” lifestyles (and tolerance of “lifestyle choices”) made us a target, not which career politician was sitting in the chair. If anything, Clinton’s “dumbing down” of our intelligence gathering ability prevented us from having a covert Navy SEAL group eliminate that threat before it was ever realized. Bush furthered that by not resuming vigorous research into America’s threats when he assumed command.
Reagan gave the Iraqi’s teeth, but no greater tragedy and travesty to peace was ever perpetrated on the world than the foolish decision to create the state of Israel against the wishes of the indigenous people there. That was akin to throwing a lit match into a box of gunpowder. We continued to fuel that fire by arming and assisting them, when we clearly had no business being involved. That is where the loathing started. That is the flash point. If you want blame, as many people are fond of in our “great” Republic, then find it there.
UH
15.Jun.04 at 12:55 pm
“First, I don’t assume I’m more intelligent than everyone…
“…the “Democrats” being a liberal group of sheep who are so afraid of their own decisions, that they automatically assume that a big government agency should be created to save themselves from themselves.”
So in other words you’re not smarter than everyone, you’re merely smarter than every Democrat, because no rational person could possibly have considered the pros and cons of each political party and made an intelligent, informed opinion to support the Democratic candidate.
“I am simultaneously cheeky and an asshole…”
Well, you’re half right.
minnekeith
15.Jun.04 at 1:56 pm
I agree 09/11 could happen to any president.
So, you said we have no business being in Israel. Then what business do we have being in Iraq?
You can’t have it both ways.
Pour money into the military or engage in discussion? Send the poor young to fight or invest in education? (and try not to think about being on the Halliburton coffers.)
Thomas
15.Jun.04 at 2:10 pm
Wow Heathen, only a card carrying Democrat would have decided to single out only the comments you cared to focused on in that last venom laden message. You knee-jerk liberals certainly learned how to be most vile and hateful from your diametricly opposed sworn enemies, the Religious Right. Let me see if I got this straight:
You say I’m proposing myself to be more smart than a Democrat? No sir! I’m merely less insecure about my own decisions and far more reluctant to let come to fruition your wet dream of “the people” you would control (assuming you’re planning on being the one who is “more equal” than his peers) all lined up neatly in their “function chambers” while their brains are fed your visions of sugarplums by means of the “correct thinking” implants everyone would get upon being birthed from the wombs of the “breeding class”. (To each their ability, right? Those that are more apt to breed should know their role and breed for the good of “the people”. You, as a much smarter individual, would take away that pesky “thinking” from the worker drones… er… populace.) Sorry if my “personality” interferes with your Soylent Green aspirations.
And to take a comment, already self depricating, and further berate me for my damnable “opinion” (I again assume that in your world, if “the people” want an opinion, you’ll be sure to give it to them.) only furthers MY perception of the typical, dyed-in-the-wool socialist attitude you have, laced with the ire and mean-spirited nature you’ve somehow managed to graft onto it.
Were this a schoolyard, I’d be inclined to remind you that in order to correctly identify someone with such assuredness, you must undoubtedly belong to the group of individuals you have so remarkably identified. Unfortunately, you’ve proven that you’ve cornered the market on childish behaviors, so there’s no room for my particular sentiment.
minnekeith
15.Jun.04 at 2:11 pm
Here is another example of W’s choice appointments.
“Wow Heathen, only a card carrying Democrat would have decided to single out only the comments you cared to focused on in that last venom laden message. You knee-jerk liberals certainly learned how to be most vile and hateful from your diametricly opposed sworn enemies, the Religious Right. Let me see if I got this straight”:
If the rest of this is as off-the-mark as your identification of me as a “card-carrying Democrat” and “knee-jerk liberal”, I don’t hold out much hope, but go ahead. Knock yourself out.
“You say I’m proposing myself to be more smart than a Democrat?”
No, I’m pointing out that you say you’re smarter than any Democrat. You reduce them to Cold-War Commie caricatures (“…those that espouse the most Lenin-esque diatribe their Soviet hearts can muster…”), or even further, to animals. Mindless, non-thinking animals. They’re merely “sheep” (or “sheeple”, a cute little nonsense word), rather than intelligent human beings who may have arrived at a different conclusion than you did.
“I’m merely less insecure about my own decisions and far more reluctant to let come to fruition your wet dream of “the people” you would control (assuming you’re planning on being the one who is “more equal” than his peers) all lined up neatly in their “function chambers” while their brains are fed your visions of sugarplums by means of the “correct thinking” implants everyone would get upon being birthed from the wombs of the “breeding class”. (To each their ability, right? Those that are more apt to breed should know their role and breed for the good of “the people”. You, as a much smarter individual, would take away that pesky “thinking” from the worker drones… er… populace.) Sorry if my “personality” interferes with your Soylent Green aspirations.”
Again, can I offer you a napkin? Your continual frothing-at-the-mouth must be terribly uncomfortable.
I’m not interested in controlling anyone. I haven’t mentioned my political beliefs at all. I merely pointed out that whenever anything negative is said about a Republican, the bleats of “Clinton! Clinton!” begin, and continue to become more and more irrational until any polite discourse has been rendered impossible, which your fantasy tirade above so aptly proves.
“And to take a comment, already self depricating, and further berate me for my damnable “opinion” (I again assume that in your world, if “the people” want an opinion, you’ll be sure to give it to them.) only furthers MY perception of the typical, dyed-in-the-wool socialist attitude you have, laced with the ire and mean-spirited nature you’ve somehow managed to graft onto it.”
I didn’t berate you for your “opinion”, I half-agreed with you when you stated that you’re cheeky and an asshole. You’re free to make whatever assumption you wish regarding which half I agree with.
“Were this a schoolyard, I’d be inclined to remind you that in order to correctly identify someone with such assuredness, you must undoubtedly belong to the group of individuals you have so remarkably identified. Unfortunately, you’ve proven that you’ve cornered the market on childish behaviors, so there’s no room for my particular sentiment.”
If you want to say “Takes one to know one”, just come out and say it. Or did you feel like you needed to try to be clever about it, considering all the labels you’ve attempted to stick to me?
Thomas
15.Jun.04 at 3:21 pm
I think you’re giving yourself too much credit, and an extra “R”.
See when you assumed I was labeling you, you must have meant “shirt”, a garment that requires a label.
Removing the “R”, you can see I don’t think you are anything remotely in need a label at all.
And I’m sorry if you’re upset at my being clever. One of us has to.
ohmygod. they totally should play that at his funeral!
Does that video have like the Reagans in bed???? My friend was trying to get me to remember one that had that in it today, and I had no clue.
And the Frankie Goes to Hollywood video, “Two Tribes”, where Reagan and Gorby wrestle in the ring.
Ah, good times.
And for the record, I shed more tears for Ray Charles then that dishonest President. Where was the reports on Busting Unions, Iran Contra, huge deficits, etc. etc. ???
as i kid i was convinced that with regan in the white house the cold war was going to end in nuclear winter. i thought he’d be the death of us all. there is a really good piece in the strib’s ox-op section about the regan legend vs the regan facts. check it out if you can.
I don’t usually read the Strib. You know why it’s called the diaper, right?
But maybe I can track one down. what day?
I find it disturbing that people are more than happy to pile on all the hurt and pain that has ever been caused onto someone with a conservative view, yet when their holiest of holymen, Clinton, is mentioned in any kind of disparaging tone, they would strap explosives to their collective chests and kill themselves any anyone in a 10 foot radius in defense of the lying, womanizing traitor.
Before you demonize a man who did everything he could to make America great, first make sure your own “stellar” socialist examples aren’t hideously fragile mockeries of the worst kind of career politician.
I’d say the attitude expressed so far could be described as a “vast left wing conspiracy”, but I’d be incorrect on two parts; It’s not “vast”, but more like “half-vast”, and rather than being a conspiracy, it’s a “crush in your face with a liberal jack-boot and expect you to not to say shit about it” theology.
It shames me to think that our founding fathers bravely founded this republic only to see it degenerate into a heaping mass of whining sheep who have so little confidence in themselves and their fellow man that they gladly and pleadingly turn over their opportunities and abilities to some faceless Marxist government that will make them feel “safe”.
Here’s a wake up call: Even in your wettest liberal dream societies, you’re still going to get fucked. Only now, those “in-charge” will fuck you vigorously and relentlessly while denying you a voice to protest.
Typical. Someone points out something an (R) president did or said, and the shrieks of “CLINTON! CLINTON!” ring out like crazed baboons howling at the moon.
Do you need a napkin to wipe the froth from your jowls now?
Whoa, a little hostile there, Elizabeth.
I never said Clinton was my man, you sir, jumped to a conclusion prematurely.
Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Rumsfeld, Kerry, et al are all slimy and despicable, that’s why they’re politicians.
And when you can’t see “your party’s” faults and revisionism and only see their wonderful, “making America great”, acts of kindness to the rest of us, well, I just think it’s too close to dogma. No wonder the State can’t separate from the Church.
Do you actually think politicians give a lick about you?
I wish you luck with the upcoming election if you get this worked up about a few words about a ex-president.
the ox-op article is from sunday, 13 june.
here is a link, but you might have to sign up for free to read it.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/4824536.html
and yeah…i’m not too much into reading the strib, but this is an opinion piece – not news.
Clinton isn’t my only example. You had that fine lame duck Carter, who did have the countries best intentions at heart when he so courageously sat on his ass and is remembered for…. for… being president. Then there’s Jack Kennedy who solved the Cuban military crisis by… taking no action. But surely LBJ would be a man of action, right? And action he was! He bravely created the situation in Vietnam with such long lasting impact as to have it fall in someone elses’ lap to resolve. Such “bold” men. I’m a-tremble. And you had such sparking candidates with Dukakis and Mondale; I wonder how those “winners” never made it to the top? Now we are presented with a man of such poor decision making ability, that when he comes to a fork in the road, he takes it. But he can talk angrily and bash those who don’t support the most liberal policies seen since the Russian Revolution, and the bashees are NEVER supposed to defend themselves lest they be labeled as hate mongers. I suppose beating victims, as long as they have a conservative viewpoint and the attacker is a socialist, should shut up and take it because it’s “right” somehow, eh?
When it comes to “sheeple” bad mouthing a Republican, you’ll find that those who would benefit the most from having an “even playing field” also known as “to each their need regardless of how much they work” are those that espouse the most Lenin-esque diatribe their Soviet hearts can muster.
The reason I spouted off on Whitewatergatelyingsackofshit Clinton is that enough people who actually have enough sense not to fall for new age “one world government” bullshit have had the decency, in the past 24 years, to elect Republicans to more subversively steer this country back in the generally “correct” direction. (And yes, it was electoral college votes that made the difference, but a win is a win regardless how you would like to define “is.”) Clinton is the only Democrat the public elected, primarily of his ability to smile and be telefuckinggenic, not because of his ability to ride on the coat-tails of great decisions made 12 years prior to his arrival.
Now had the nutless wonders of the world elected Perot and/or Nader to office instead of Clinton, we’d all be far better off. The Republicans may have a better perspective, but I don’t lose sight of the religious influence that infringes on the legitimate rights of members of this Independent Republic. Everyone would be much better off if we voted in the CEO of the most sucessful businesses; The ones who haven’t comprimised their scruples to get to the top either, and despite what you may have gleaned from your Communist primers, people can succeed in America without stepping on “the little guy”.
I’ll stop now pefore Heathen starts to shout, “Help, Help! I’m being repressed! Come see the violence inhertant in The System.”
Bloody peasant.
Well, hell, as long as you’ve worked up a good lather…
HILLARY CLINTON ’08!
That oughta keep you hyperventilating for at least another 24 hours or so.
I do hate to see a conniption go to waste.
Whoa, Thomas, threatened much?
Does it make you feel big to patronise another persons point of view? By assuming you’re more intelligent than the rest of us ‘pheasants’ and by making your argument personal, your point is completely lost. No one will take the time to consider if you’re making a valid point. They’ll just think you’re an ass.
If I remember correctly, I was educated in the public school system and attended private, albeit liberal, religious colleges. In all my years I never once read any “Communist Primers”, I never affliated to one party ( I have even voted for Republicans *Gasp*) and I don’t get the Conservitive Rights’ facination with the socialist model and the one world order which they are so scared of.
I agree with your idea of voting a top CEO, but the poeople most qualified to be our President are way too smart to actually want to do it. It returns me to my original point that The right refuses to look at their own leaders, blindly redirecting rage at the ills of the other party instead of correcting their own. Both parties are at fault and if this were a true democracy insstead of a Republic we might see more choices. Until we do I vote who I want and no one tells me who I should, no party, no organization, no one. Well, maybe the wife suggests.
I do know that my life is better when Dem’s are in office. And Bush? Well, a baseball quote puts him best, “He was born on third base thinking his whole life he had hit a triple.”
Bloody peasant indeed. http://www.montypython.net/
(Site is down. I was going to link to the audio of that bit)
Julie, I appreciate your feedback. I’m sorry you couldn’t see my argument was referring to the entire group. This comment, however is directed solely at you.
First, I don’t assume I’m more intelligent than everyone; I’m smart, but Jodi collects intelligent people like an amulance draws litigiousness.
As far as my comment on “pheasants” (snicker), please see Monty Python’s: The Holy Grail. especially take note of the scene where Arthur meets the filth collectors and their take on an “autonomous collective”. Also, get a dictionary and look up “humor, wry-sardonic” (also look up “humor, bad” and “humor, poor-taste”, where people have arguably been able to find seeds of my particular take on the genre.)
And finally, anyone can skip right past my comments here on the lunacy of blind faith in political parties, liberal or otherwise, and jump straight to the correct knee-jerk conclusion that I am an ass; I am simultaneously cheeky and an asshole, which collectively defines an ass. Being an ass does NOT preculde the truth and validity of my correct identification of the “Democrats” being a liberal group of sheep who are so afraid of their own decisions, that they automatically assume that a big government agency should be created to save themselves from themselves.
Republicans aren’t much better as they cant divest themselves from the archaic religious overtones that tear themselves asunder, seeing as how many of these “enlightened” religious not only contradict each other, but furthermore many are based on the notion that if you don’t strictly adhere to their interpretation of an ancient tome of generalities, then you’re going to suffer the worst kind of horrors imaginable upon your death. (Meaning they believe the people that they are allied with are “sinners” doomed to the fires of perdition. Such wonderful bedfellows, no?)
Thinking for yourself is the only viable option. If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.
Keith, my life has been better when a more conservative policy has been in place economically. No president in office can be held liable for the financial health of the Country. If you adopt an AIDS baby, you’re not the one who gave the disease to the baby, but you have to deal with all the pain someone else wrought. Conversely, when you adopt a healthy child, you are remembered for how you cared for the health of that child.
Clinton adopted a “healthy” country. Look what he gave us after 8 years of his service. Service, in this case, can be defined as how a bull services a cow.
Bush isn’t the brightest man ever to sit in the white house, but neither was Bill, Jimmy, Lyndon, or even Jack (Joe Kennedy used his family’s prohibition fortune to keep one son’s ass out of the electric chair and another’s ass in the Oval Office; It wasn’t skill or aptitude.) The smartest thing Bush did was to surround himself with the smart people to make all that thinking for him. It does bite him in the butt many times, but I see the results of thie brain trust and I like what’s being proposed and done. I think that even if Kerry does slime his way into the big chair, the Country will have already been steered back where it needs to go to be viable.
I pray that traitorous sonofabitch does get elected, though. Like his lying liberal predecessor’s campaign song goes, I can’t stop thinking about tonmorrow.
Someone criticizes a politician and then in response they are labeled, and assumed to believe in the opposing potical party. I don’t like being pigeon holed, assumed to be an idiot, or the fact that we have to polarize in order to discuss something. That’s why it’s really hard to be a lawyer and I’d rather raise children. There’s good and bad on both side of the fence, look at things and each other individually.
Thomas, isn’t that what being a Libertarian is all about?
The other day someone, the author of The Road to Paradise, said “We seem to reinforce our self esteem by feeling superior to others” Sadly it’s all too true.
Thomas,
Granted, most if not all, politicians are 25 watt types, we need look no further then our own ex-gov (and Calif’s) for proof. But who puts them there? We do.
As the claim that Clinton inherited the good economy from the previous administration is speculative. According to a study commissioned by the American Council of Bishops (Catholic Church), the total number of people living below the poverty level in America doubled under Mr. Reagan.
And what did Clinton do during his reign that was so bad? At least the rest of the world wasn’t pissed at us for starting a war and occupying a country that Reagan helped create.
Yes, you are as good as the people you put around you and I have to admit that W has friends that scare me. Halliburton, Enron Rumsfeld and others.
If you think they are working for your best interests that’s fine, but I really don’t think any of them do. They do it to get re-elected, talk about welfare. The dem’s are sheep and have no clear message and the people who do are lost in the maelstorm, but that is inherit in the system. We elect people we don’t want because we have no choice.
I think George Carlin summed it up best when he said, “Think of how stupid the average person is. What is scarier is that half of the population is stupider then that.”
Or, “the masses are asses”.
Thomas, I think I misspoke, Libertarians as I recall are for even less government intrusion than Repub., some of them must be squirming under all the new “national security” policies which are really hindering some individual rights. I probably was thinking of Independent above.
I remember being young and watching Reagan on tv and my mom just getting irate saying “he’s lying!!!”. She was using her intelligence and that “liberal” women’s intuition. She loved it when Sam Donaldson would pin him down in a fabrication.
Sam admitted after Ronald died, that yes Reagan did have a problem with truth, but he was so darned nice you couldn’t help but like him.
After reading Madeline Albright’s memoir I realize that even with Clinton uncontrollabe libido that he is smart, idealistic, and a really hard worker who stayed up nights getting things done that helped a lot of other countries and our own. I love that he writes his own speeches and rewrites and rewrites. I’d much rather listen to an artist’s self written song than a cover of someone elses. The “thousand points of lights” is a beautiful phrase but it wasn’t Bush, Sr. who wrote that speech. which further points out, it isn’t the figurehead who does aaallll the work in government, there are a lot of individuals making their contributions. How much can we blame or praise the figurehead for what transpired during their term?
“And what did Clinton do during his reign that was so bad? At least the rest of the world wasn’t pissed at us for starting a war and occupying a country that Reagan helped create.”
Do you, in all honesty, believe that the moment Clinton left office, 22 of Osama’s soldiers flocked to the US, trained how to fly a big jet, and coordinated an attack that was delayed to 9/11? The attack would have happened if Gore, Perot, Nader, or even you were in the office. Our “indulgent” lifestyles (and tolerance of “lifestyle choices”) made us a target, not which career politician was sitting in the chair. If anything, Clinton’s “dumbing down” of our intelligence gathering ability prevented us from having a covert Navy SEAL group eliminate that threat before it was ever realized. Bush furthered that by not resuming vigorous research into America’s threats when he assumed command.
Reagan gave the Iraqi’s teeth, but no greater tragedy and travesty to peace was ever perpetrated on the world than the foolish decision to create the state of Israel against the wishes of the indigenous people there. That was akin to throwing a lit match into a box of gunpowder. We continued to fuel that fire by arming and assisting them, when we clearly had no business being involved. That is where the loathing started. That is the flash point. If you want blame, as many people are fond of in our “great” Republic, then find it there.
“First, I don’t assume I’m more intelligent than everyone…
“…the “Democrats” being a liberal group of sheep who are so afraid of their own decisions, that they automatically assume that a big government agency should be created to save themselves from themselves.”
So in other words you’re not smarter than everyone, you’re merely smarter than every Democrat, because no rational person could possibly have considered the pros and cons of each political party and made an intelligent, informed opinion to support the Democratic candidate.
“I am simultaneously cheeky and an asshole…”
Well, you’re half right.
I agree 09/11 could happen to any president.
So, you said we have no business being in Israel. Then what business do we have being in Iraq?
You can’t have it both ways.
Pour money into the military or engage in discussion? Send the poor young to fight or invest in education? (and try not to think about being on the Halliburton coffers.)
Wow Heathen, only a card carrying Democrat would have decided to single out only the comments you cared to focused on in that last venom laden message. You knee-jerk liberals certainly learned how to be most vile and hateful from your diametricly opposed sworn enemies, the Religious Right. Let me see if I got this straight:
You say I’m proposing myself to be more smart than a Democrat? No sir! I’m merely less insecure about my own decisions and far more reluctant to let come to fruition your wet dream of “the people” you would control (assuming you’re planning on being the one who is “more equal” than his peers) all lined up neatly in their “function chambers” while their brains are fed your visions of sugarplums by means of the “correct thinking” implants everyone would get upon being birthed from the wombs of the “breeding class”. (To each their ability, right? Those that are more apt to breed should know their role and breed for the good of “the people”. You, as a much smarter individual, would take away that pesky “thinking” from the worker drones… er… populace.) Sorry if my “personality” interferes with your Soylent Green aspirations.
And to take a comment, already self depricating, and further berate me for my damnable “opinion” (I again assume that in your world, if “the people” want an opinion, you’ll be sure to give it to them.) only furthers MY perception of the typical, dyed-in-the-wool socialist attitude you have, laced with the ire and mean-spirited nature you’ve somehow managed to graft onto it.
Were this a schoolyard, I’d be inclined to remind you that in order to correctly identify someone with such assuredness, you must undoubtedly belong to the group of individuals you have so remarkably identified. Unfortunately, you’ve proven that you’ve cornered the market on childish behaviors, so there’s no room for my particular sentiment.
Here is another example of W’s choice appointments.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/15/opinion/15KRUG.html
This has been fun, but I have to go to work.
“Wow Heathen, only a card carrying Democrat would have decided to single out only the comments you cared to focused on in that last venom laden message. You knee-jerk liberals certainly learned how to be most vile and hateful from your diametricly opposed sworn enemies, the Religious Right. Let me see if I got this straight”:
If the rest of this is as off-the-mark as your identification of me as a “card-carrying Democrat” and “knee-jerk liberal”, I don’t hold out much hope, but go ahead. Knock yourself out.
“You say I’m proposing myself to be more smart than a Democrat?”
No, I’m pointing out that you say you’re smarter than any Democrat. You reduce them to Cold-War Commie caricatures (“…those that espouse the most Lenin-esque diatribe their Soviet hearts can muster…”), or even further, to animals. Mindless, non-thinking animals. They’re merely “sheep” (or “sheeple”, a cute little nonsense word), rather than intelligent human beings who may have arrived at a different conclusion than you did.
“I’m merely less insecure about my own decisions and far more reluctant to let come to fruition your wet dream of “the people” you would control (assuming you’re planning on being the one who is “more equal” than his peers) all lined up neatly in their “function chambers” while their brains are fed your visions of sugarplums by means of the “correct thinking” implants everyone would get upon being birthed from the wombs of the “breeding class”. (To each their ability, right? Those that are more apt to breed should know their role and breed for the good of “the people”. You, as a much smarter individual, would take away that pesky “thinking” from the worker drones… er… populace.) Sorry if my “personality” interferes with your Soylent Green aspirations.”
Again, can I offer you a napkin? Your continual frothing-at-the-mouth must be terribly uncomfortable.
I’m not interested in controlling anyone. I haven’t mentioned my political beliefs at all. I merely pointed out that whenever anything negative is said about a Republican, the bleats of “Clinton! Clinton!” begin, and continue to become more and more irrational until any polite discourse has been rendered impossible, which your fantasy tirade above so aptly proves.
“And to take a comment, already self depricating, and further berate me for my damnable “opinion” (I again assume that in your world, if “the people” want an opinion, you’ll be sure to give it to them.) only furthers MY perception of the typical, dyed-in-the-wool socialist attitude you have, laced with the ire and mean-spirited nature you’ve somehow managed to graft onto it.”
I didn’t berate you for your “opinion”, I half-agreed with you when you stated that you’re cheeky and an asshole. You’re free to make whatever assumption you wish regarding which half I agree with.
“Were this a schoolyard, I’d be inclined to remind you that in order to correctly identify someone with such assuredness, you must undoubtedly belong to the group of individuals you have so remarkably identified. Unfortunately, you’ve proven that you’ve cornered the market on childish behaviors, so there’s no room for my particular sentiment.”
If you want to say “Takes one to know one”, just come out and say it. Or did you feel like you needed to try to be clever about it, considering all the labels you’ve attempted to stick to me?
I think you’re giving yourself too much credit, and an extra “R”.
See when you assumed I was labeling you, you must have meant “shirt”, a garment that requires a label.
Removing the “R”, you can see I don’t think you are anything remotely in need a label at all.
And I’m sorry if you’re upset at my being clever. One of us has to.