The Meltdown Will Be Televised

[DarkReign]

I didn't say it was not the peoples fault that people like
the Clintons get elected. I said I have faith that they
will also correct that problem in the future.

If one thing has been proven in this primary it is that
people need to take a bigger part in selecting their
'leaders'. Using the word loosely. I think many, like
you, now understand that they must take part in the
election process or they end up with what we have
today. Three, or maybe four, that have no idea of what
leadership is about. All they have is ego's and
socialist ideas to sustain them.

Get active my friend. Talk to your representative and
tell them what you want. You are absolutely correct
when you say many have turned over their social
responsibilities to the government. Political correctness
is the worst thing that ever happened to this nation
along with all the damn so called social reforms. It
absolutely destroyed the black families of the U.S. and
is well on the way to doing the same with the rest of
the families of this country.

All fair statements. I am politically active in the only arena that I can change, in my community. I attend township meetings, I know the board members, I know what theyre about. Im not sure they know who I am because I have never taken the floor, but theyve received their letters/emails from me.

So, I am trying...at a local level.

The beauty of local level politics is that you can effect change. The downside is obvious....it doesnt change what I feel to be cri cal social issues.

Which brings me to the inevitable conclusion that I am a very small minority. Smaller than any cultural minority in the country. My minority embraces all races and all creeds, but even with that mantra, we are terribly small.

Im of the mind that the American people need to be mind- ed. Check that...mind-raped. Not in the sense that they NEED to agree with me, but in the sense that do NEED a ing opinion.

Of which most Americans do not have.

We here in the political forum seem to be pretty concerned with the state of things, yes? Right or wrong, agree or disagree, we seem to at least care about the direction of this country enough to have debates about it, yes?

Now ask yourself how many times you had some meaningless political conversation with Joe Public at some get together that only revealed how little those around know about the political landscape of this country/country/township.

Then come to this conclusion...

Those mother ers are the majority. They are the ones who decide who the Representative is, who the President is, who the Committee Chief is, the Township Supervisor, the local Judge, the Police Chief, etc.

Ive said it before, I have lived a wonderful life. So much more fortunate than I deserve to be, everyday I thank whoever is listening for my absurdly good fortune.

But if there is a God, I have prayed for only one thing.....to see it all go down in my lifetime. Some people claim to be misanthropes, others can pick each other out of a crowd without saying a word.

[xrayzebra]

These people, McCain/Obama/Bush/Clinton/Carter/Nixon and every other latter half 20th century politician, do not formulate their own ideas.

I must disagree with you on one the people mentioned
above. Richard Nixon. Have you ever read any of his
books? Nixon was an unscruplous SOB but he had a
real grasp of Russian and their objectives. World
expansion. He traced it from the beginning of history
right up to the present. And I think Putin has more
than anything proven some of Nixon's statements.

McCain, I am just not sure what he is good at. Obviously,
he did survive the brutality of being a captive of
NVN for some five years. Which I admire him for. But
his grasp of other aspects of life, I am not certain.
The Clintons, both Bill and Hillary, want only one thing.
Power (and the riches that go with it). They have not
and will not stop at anything to obtain it. Bush, both
of them, are world government people. Bush run in
Texas and on the National ticket as a Conservative
Republican, but both in many ways governed more as
Democrats and Bush II followed elected officials that
were very unpopular, Anne Richards and Bill Clinton.
Carter is a naive socialist who still doesn't get it. He
should just stick to building chairs and houses and
get off the world stage.

Anyhow, getting back to the original thought. Nixon had
a good grasp of world history and foreign affairs. He
just didn't grasp the fact that he couldn't do as many
old time pols did, exactly what they wanted to.

I have a question for you tho. How come such a glum
mood yesterday and today. Not much like you. Old GI
expression, someone in your mess kit?

Or maybe it is all this global warming and you freezing
your butt off and fighting the snow in your part of the
world has given you cabin fever.......

[rascal]

It could easily play out at least mostly as spelled out. The Clinton's are arrogant elitists.

The most arrogant elitist president has been Bush.

[Pistons_In_7]

I saw the interview of him saying that, that is on record as it gets folks.

[DarkReign]

Anyhow, getting back to the original thought. Nixon had
a good grasp of world history and foreign affairs. He
just didn't grasp the fact that he couldn't do as many
old time pols did, exactly what they wanted to.

No, I havent read any of Nixon's books. To be honest, when I wrote his name, I knew it was a stretch especially seeing as he was on the forefront of the Cold War, first POTUS to contact and trade with China, etc.

Matter of fact, he probably shouldnt be included in that group thinking about it now.

Unfortunately, I get on a tear and start babbling on with generalities which may be true, then shott myself in the foot with including a person like Nixon.

My point was/is, the political machine we know today is light-years different than the machine of the 60s and early 70s. Presidents are chosen not for their leadership, but their salesmanship.

I have a question for you tho. How come such a glum
mood yesterday and today. Not much like you. Old GI
expression, someone in your mess kit?

Hehe, no more than usual. Basically, Im just not a very happy person. My personal life kicks ass. Seriously. For being a misanthropic athiest, good fortune has follwed me my entire life.

Its the "state of things" that bothers me. Problems in government life are not new. But maybe I am wrong when I imagine in the past (saaaaay, pre 1980) people had a more active interest in politics and government.

I feel those people I drive next to, and wait behind in the drive thru, are all lemmings. Mindless morons with subscriptions to People magazine and a paid enrollment in some celebrity fan club who spend more time distracting themselves from the world than actually participating in it.

So maybe I am like Whott in that sense, the removal of half the gene pool wouldnt bring a tear to my eye.

Or maybe it is all this global warming and you freezing
your butt off and fighting the snow in your part of the
world has given you cabin fever.......

LOL....Another 4" of snow last night (total of ~14"). High of 15 degrees today, -10 with windchill. Love Michigan.

[Holt's Cat]

I wonder who the last president or presidential candidate was who wrote their own speeches. Lincoln famously wrote The Gettysburg Address on a train. Sure, perhaps today's presidents and presidential wannabes due have input on the words, but who actually just sits down and writes out what they are going to say? Not to mention all of our elected representatives at the federal level, as well as governors, mayors, etc...

Our politics these days are inauthentic. You don't know what these people truly believe. Parsing their focus group honed words for truth is a fool's errand. Granted, if anyone manages to misspeak they have the media there with a probe up the politician's ass ready to pounce on anyone who commits a minor gaffe.

I'm not sure where the problem lies. At the end of the day, we have our opportunity to vote, to continue to support this wretched process if we so like. And we do, yet all the while bemoaning what it's become. Then the result is more of the same.

[nkdlunch]

Not a chance in it plays out that way. Whoever leads the popular vote and has more delegates going into the convention will win.

it very well could play that way. and the dems would look stupid once again

[101A]

..
I feel those people I drive next to, and wait behind in the drive thru, are all lemmings. Mindless morons with subscriptions to People magazine and a paid enrollment in some celebrity fan club who spend more time distracting themselves from the world than actually participating in it....

First; your takes in this thread have been a good read.

Regarding this, you're right about many, but I am surprised by the number of people that ARE informed and energized, but you'd never know it. During light conversation I'll drop an obscure reference to feel tham out..and we're off. I expect the blank stare far more often than I get it.

Those of us who actually pay attention (on both sides of the spectrum), need some kind of a handshake.

[101A]

it very well could play that way. and the dems would look stupid once again

The Dems, with one of the most unpopular presidents in history in office, are about to nominate a 1st term senator with very little other experience in life (but, boy, can he SPEAK!), or a polarizing high negative figure as their standard bearer.

They are not real smart, frankly.

[JoeChalupa]

The Dems, with one of the most unpopular presidents in history in office, are about to nominate a 1st term senator with very little other experience in life (but, boy, can he SPEAK!), or a polarizing high negative figure as their standard bearer.

They are not real smart, frankly.

Smart as in electing Bush not once...but twice? Yeah, that was real smart.

[Extra Stout]

Smart as in electing Bush not once...but twice? Yeah, that was real smart.

Who's smarter: the party that manages to get Bush elected twice, or the party that manages to lose to Bush twice?

[01.20.09]

Who's smarter: the party that manages to get Bush elected twice, or the party that manages to lose to Bush twice?

Hopefully America is smarter this year.

[DarkReign]

The Dems, with one of the most unpopular presidents in history in office, are about to nominate a 1st term senator with very little other experience in life (but, boy, can he SPEAK!), or a polarizing high negative figure as their standard bearer.

They are not real smart, frankly.

While I understand what you mean, I disagree with your take on the first term Senator.

I actually think his inexperience is slightly endearing. He is obviously intelligent and educated. He would represent the US quite well in the international arena a whole uva lot better than our current President, IMO.

Clinton is just Clinton. A known quan y. She, like her husband, will stick his finger in the air and move the way the wind blows.

Im seriously waiting....waiting for that guy/gal that can lie and cheat and steal their way up the political ladder, fooling all those around him in his/her party.

The guy who lies in the weeds, eating what is force fed, pandering to those who must be pandered, smiling big for the camera and for the caucus.

Only to be elected and when sworn into office, they'll wipe that ing smile of his/her face and declare in no uncertain terms.

"I am Joe Somebody, I am the President of the United States. This country is going to return to its roots starting today. Its going to be tough, its going to be rough, but I promise you the end result will benefit every generation from here after. No more lobbyists. No more frivilousness. No more pandering. No more."

And go on some political tear of epic proportion. Strong arming Congress through necessary change in political elections, education reform, tax reform, MORE POWER TO THE PEOPLE. Removing government of its nanny role.

Just waiting...and waiting...and waiting. The guy/gal would have to be reeeeeal slick. Slick enough to trick his party, his support people and the money people into thinking he is ready to play ball on an international scale.

Only to them all over and return America to its intended glory. what a ing movie that would be, huh?

, I have dreams about it. Blockading Congress' doors and the like. Not a dictator, a slave driver. Politicians spend more time and effort campaigning than they do legislating. Sad fact of government. That would change immediately.

Taxation and the amount of money the government needs is entirely too much. Thats going to change.

Education in this country is atrocious and it all starts because the government runs the ins ution, thats changing now.

So on and so on...

Riveting drama. CSPAN's ratings would go thru the roof for that State of the Union address.

[DarkReign]

Hopefully America is smarter this year.

That wasnt America's fault. The Dems dropped the ball.....twice.

[101A]

Who's smarter: the party that manages to get Bush elected twice, or the party that manages to lose to Bush twice?

[xrayzebra]

I wonder who the last president or presidential candidate was who wrote their own speeches. Lincoln famously wrote The Gettysburg Address on a train. Sure, perhaps today's presidents and presidential wannabes due have input on the words, but who actually just sits down and writes out what they are going to say? Not to mention all of our elected representatives at the federal level, as well as governors, mayors, etc...

Our politics these days are inauthentic. You don't know what these people truly believe. Parsing their focus group honed words for truth is a fool's errand. Granted, if anyone manages to misspeak they have the media there with a probe up the politician's ass ready to pounce on anyone who commits a minor gaffe.

I'm not sure where the problem lies. At the end of the day, we have our opportunity to vote, to continue to support this wretched process if we so like. And we do, yet all the while bemoaning what it's become. Then the result is more of the same.

HC, I have agree with you. Like I said in another post,
it seems most of our political 'leaders' are more
followers than leaders in 'any' sense of the word. They
have their damn focus groups, polls and researchers
all out there finding out what the 'people' want and
that is what they promise in their speeches. They
even survey (poll) to see where they should go on
their vacations, wear and do so they can be seen. They
measure how much time they get on TV, radio and
news print.


It is like this stupid 'rebate' they are 'giving'. No way
in the world is it going to help boost the economy.
To late for that, and if it is so damn good, why don't
they just cut taxes permanently and really boost the
economy. Two big things wrong with it. one, they
are not giving us anything. They are returning money
that belong to us to begin with. Second, anyone with
half a brain knows why they want to 'boost' their
standings with the voters, it is an election year and
the whole of congress in the gutters when it comes
to the public's opinion.

[01.20.09]

That wasnt America's fault. The Dems dropped the ball.....twice.

You are partially right. But the fact that so many Americans bought into Bush's rhetoric for a second time? That WAS America's fault.

[xrayzebra]

While I understand what you mean, I disagree with your take on the first term Senator.

I actually think his inexperience is slightly endearing. He is obviously intelligent and educated. He would represent the US quite well in the international arena a whole uva lot better than our current President, IMO.

Clinton is just Clinton. A known quan y. She, like her husband, will stick his finger in the air and move the way the wind blows.

Im seriously waiting....waiting for that guy/gal that can lie and cheat and steal their way up the political ladder, fooling all those around him in his/her party.

The guy who lies in the weeds, eating what is force fed, pandering to those who must be pandered, smiling big for the camera and for the caucus.

Only to be elected and when sworn into office, they'll wipe that ing smile of his/her face and declare in no uncertain terms.

"I am Joe Somebody, I am the President of the United States. This country is going to return to its roots starting today. Its going to be tough, its going to be rough, but I promise you the end result will benefit every generation from here after. No more lobbyists. No more frivilousness. No more pandering. No more."

And go on some political tear of epic proportion. Strong arming Congress through necessary change in political elections, education reform, tax reform, MORE POWER TO THE PEOPLE. Removing government of its nanny role.

Just waiting...and waiting...and waiting. The guy/gal would have to be reeeeeal slick. Slick enough to trick his party, his support people and the money people into thinking he is ready to play ball on an international scale.

Only to them all over and return America to its intended glory. what a ing movie that would be, huh?

, I have dreams about it. Blockading Congress' doors and the like. Not a dictator, a slave driver. Politicians spend more time and effort campaigning than they do legislating. Sad fact of government. That would change immediately.

Taxation and the amount of money the government needs is entirely too much. Thats going to change.

Education in this country is atrocious and it all starts because the government runs the ins ution, thats changing now.

So on and so on...

Riveting drama. CSPAN's ratings would go thru the roof for that State of the Union address.

No doubt about it, you are a Conservative. I will never
live to see that day, but you just might. Keep
believing and working toward that goal. It can happen.
We almost had it during my lifetime with Ronald.

[DarkReign]

HC, I have agree with you. Like I said in another post,
it seems most of our political 'leaders' are more
followers than leaders in 'any' sense of the word. They
have their damn focus groups, polls and researchers
all out there finding out what the 'people' want and
that is what they promise in their speeches.

.....

Second, anyone with
half a brain knows why they want to 'boost' their
standings with the voters, it is an election year and
the whole of congress in the gutters when it comes
to the public's opinion.

Isnt is weird that there are so few issues we can agree upon, yet what I feel to be the single biggest issue we are all in agreement?

Our government, in its current iteration and procedure, is a ing sham.

Until that changes, nothing will.

[101A]

While I understand what you mean, I disagree with your take on the first term Senator.

I actually think his inexperience is slightly endearing. He is obviously intelligent and educated. He would represent the US quite well in the international arena a whole uva lot better than our current President, IMO.

Clinton is just Clinton. A known quan y. She, like her husband, will stick his finger in the air and move the way the wind blows.

Im seriously waiting....waiting for that guy/gal that can lie and cheat and steal their way up the political ladder, fooling all those around him in his/her party.

The guy who lies in the weeds, eating what is force fed, pandering to those who must be pandered, smiling big for the camera and for the caucus.

Only to be elected and when sworn into office, they'll wipe that ing smile of his/her face and declare in no uncertain terms.

"I am Joe Somebody, I am the President of the United States. This country is going to return to its roots starting today. Its going to be tough, its going to be rough, but I promise you the end result will benefit every generation from here after. No more lobbyists. No more frivilousness. No more pandering. No more."

And go on some political tear of epic proportion. Strong arming Congress through necessary change in political elections, education reform, tax reform, MORE POWER TO THE PEOPLE. Removing government of its nanny role.

Just waiting...and waiting...and waiting. The guy/gal would have to be reeeeeal slick. Slick enough to trick his party, his support people and the money people into thinking he is ready to play ball on an international scale.

Only to them all over and return America to its intended glory. what a ing movie that would be, huh?

, I have dreams about it. Blockading Congress' doors and the like. Not a dictator, a slave driver. Politicians spend more time and effort campaigning than they do legislating. Sad fact of government. That would change immediately.

Taxation and the amount of money the government needs is entirely too much. Thats going to change.

Education in this country is atrocious and it all starts because the government runs the ins ution, thats changing now.

So on and so on...

Riveting drama. CSPAN's ratings would go thru the roof for that State of the Union address.

On Obama; yes he'll be popular with the Demo/socialiast govt's of Europe, no doubt. I guess that will improve our standing internationally. Meh.

Problem I see with THAT amount of inexperience is how much he will have to rely on the people around him to set/carry out the agenda. That's what we got with Bush & the control Cheney apparently had over him (at least until '06). The ONLY thing we know about Obama is he speaks well. PERIOD. He hasn't sponsored legislation; or been a leader in congress on anything. We know he votes hard left (which would be counter to your dream of having a smaller govt. wouldn't it?) We KNOW he wants every troop out of Iraq no matter what, as soon as possible, surge/progress be damned. What it looks like is we've got a candidate who talks about bringing people together with great rhetoric while he tracks an agenda that specifically endears himself to the base of his party while he seeks the nomination for President.

, maybe he's a natural at this politics, after all.

[DarkReign]

You are partially right. But the fact that so many Americans bought into Bush's rhetoric for a second time? That WAS America's fault.

Agree, to a point. The strategy of "fear mongering" is a powerful tool. You still see the effects of that strategy today.

What strategy have the Dems come up with that will have as lasting of an effect as that? When have they ever?

My point is, Gore was an OK candidate. Kerry was born to lose.

Bush appeals to a broader audience than either of them.

With no issues to speak of, that fact right there should have been a warning to Dems. But they, like they usually do, cant get their own house in order, what makes one think they can get the US in order?

Mind you, the Republican party isnt a Bush party. Just look at some of the posts of lifetime Republicans here alone! Out of control spending? Thats a Democrat. Increasing the size and scope of government? Thats a Democrat.

Starting a foreign war. Meh....could be either, but I would associate such things with a Republican.

So really, how conservative is Bush? My answer is "not at all".

[DarkReign]

On Obama; yes he'll be popular with the Demo/socialiast govt's of Europe, no doubt. I guess that will improve our standing internationally. Meh.

Problem I see with THAT amount of inexperience is how much he will have to rely on the people around him to set/carry out the agenda. That's what we got with Bush & the control Cheney apparently had over him (at least until '06). The ONLY thing we know about Obama is he speaks well. PERIOD. He hasn't sponsored legislation; or been a leader in congress on anything. We know he votes hard left (which would be counter to your dream of having a smaller govt. wouldn't it?) We KNOW he wants every troop out of Iraq no matter what, as soon as possible, surge/progress be damned. What it looks like is we've got a candidate who talks about bringing people together with great rhetoric while he tracks an agenda that specifically endears himself to the base of his party while he seeks the nomination for President.

, maybe he's a natural at this politics, after all.

Like I said, he may be the guy lying in the weeds. I dont know that yet.

But I will if he wins his nomination. I will when its him vs McCain and the issues are out, front and center, no playing nice.

I never said I was going to vote for him (nor did you say I was, btw). But if this Dem race is down to Clinton vs Obama, which it is, then I know who I am pulling for.

Honestly, McCain isnt off my radar yet. Paul was the first time in my life that I knowingly threw away my vote at the primary. Did I agree with Paul on everything? Nope, not even close.

But my concerns are more domestic than foreign, and he seemed to be the only one addressing those issues first and foremost, while the other candidates rambled on and on about Iraq, Terrorism, energy and other issues that dont increase jobs, education and personal wealth for every American with 4 able limbs and a will to work for a living.

Summary, Clinton is not my candidate one way or the other. I'd vote for McCain in a nanosecond if Clinton gets the nomination....without even listening to another debate or promo.

I dont hate Clinton, not personally anyway. I just dont think shes radical enough. Shes a staus quo pick that comes attached with the single biggest add-on to government expense in the history of this country with no true way of paying for it. No, she would prefer WE pick up the ing bill.

Instead of proposing a HealthCare plan that also changes the taxation method in this country, she wants to keep the current standard and just...ADD ON more money to an already bloated government?!

. You. . (not you, her.....lol)

The only way America, IMO, could afford a nationl health plan is if we downsize government to a proportion more befitting its intended scope. Health plan is great, if you eliminate Social Security and Medicare, axe all non-essential programs of government (not the military, do not touch the military in ANY way).

You see where that logic is taking me, yes? I am pro-healthcare, I really am. But I know without a ing doubt that a national healthplan is IMPOSSIBLE to afford without MAJOR, unprecedented changes to federal expense.

And if you had to go that far, why not go further and change the way we are taxed?

I am of the mind that the entire government should be fired, today, right now (excluding military). If you werent elected, youre out of a job...unless elected officials want to pay you out of their salary. Administrative personel in Congress shall be retained to answer the phones, compose the email and faxes, and do the office work and keep the books.

Otherwise, hit the ing street.

All government programs tthat do not do one of the follwoing:

1) maintain order and safety (military, intelligence, etc)
2) maintain infrastructure (roads, buildings, etc)

Shall be terminated TODAY. We are starting over, ladies and gentlemen.

, this post got waaaaaaaaaay off topic....whoops...

[JoeChalupa]

I've always like McCain and quite frankly don't really understand why the republican party cannot get behind him.

[Mr. Body]

Mind you, the Republican party isnt a Bush party. Just look at some of the posts of lifetime Republicans here alone! Out of control spending? Thats a Democrat. Increasing the size and scope of government? Thats a Democrat.

Starting a foreign war. Meh....could be either, but I would associate such things with a Republican.

So really, how conservative is Bush? My answer is "not at all".

You need to come to terms with the fact that Bush was the perfect Republican candidate, and not just because he welded together the evangelicals and the business conservatives (not to mention the neo-cons), but because he did exactly what is in the GOP platform. He did exactly what Reagan did, except without any skill in fixing the problems. Reagan cut taxes when it was expedient, following the Laffer Curve, then raised them again when he was about to bankrupt us all. Government spending went through the roof under Reagan and then it shot somewhere into outer space with Bush. None of this is a mistake: Republicans are not fiscal conservatives. They claim they are, but clearly they are not. I realize you enjoy the rhetoric, but you need to look at the policies. The reason why conservatives are running away from Bush at the moment is because he's such an embarrassment, incompetent, and pretty much evil. They were cheering him along every step of the way - the foreign disaster, the tax shifts and the first tax rebate that was about as inefficient a use of a gov. surplus as you can imagine - and they will cheerlead the next GOP guy who comes down the pipe, who will be doing the same exact thing.

This IS the GOP platform: out of control spending (with very little to show for it), growing income disparity, and irresponsible foreign policy.

[JoeChalupa]

Some of my republican friends are even saying that with McCain some will say it is just another 4 yrs of Bush. Even they want a change. Dare I say they may become Obamacans?