1 edit
Originally posted by StarValleyWyThe difference is that the Bush-hating started after his incompetence on the job was all too evident.
Yea. Hating Bush seems a bit selfish to me too. I can feel for you.
Does this graph show that people were pre-disposed to hate Bush or started hating him because of what he did?
http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm
Originally posted by PalynkaQuick Recovery! I'm impressed. lol
See edit. 😏
So then you are saying that the opinion of the very same people who don't even know that congress has been controled by democrats since 2006 should matter more than reality?
By reality, I mean that (small portion) which exists between my ears. I have never been a big fan of reactionary politics.
Everything that brought Bush down in the poles was a plus in my mind. He stood on his principles. That alone is a miracle in todays world. You can argue that his principles were wrong, but in order to convince me that you know what you are about, YOUR set of principles must REPLACE the understanding I have between my ears of HIS principles as it exists there.
1 edit
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI'm not arguing about the merits and demerits of Bush. I'm arguing that it is counter-factual to imply Bush-hating was done on the grounds of his political party alone. His actions brought it upon himself.
Quick Recovery! I'm impressed. lol
So then you are saying that the opinion of the very same people who don't even know that congress has been controled by democrats since 2006 should matter more than reality?
By reality, I mean that (small portion) which exists between my ears. I have never been a big fan of reactionary politics.
Everything tha ...[text shortened]... es must REPLACE the understanding I have between my ears of HIS principles as it exists there.
3 edits
Originally posted by StarValleyWyFor crying out loud, why would a conservative want him to succeed? Are they so stupid to not see that success for "socialization" of the culture and nation means that socialism wins and the US is finished forever?
I have been amused since the election to hear all the pseudo-conservative pundits and politicians look into the cameras with their very best puppy eyes and say "I really want Obama to succeed. I am an american, and we can succeed only if he succeeds." John McCain is chief among these fools.
I believe these idiots. And it explains why the Republican ommander in chief. But other than that, I wish a plague upon him and all his government.
Socialist projects are part of American history and have been quite beneficial to our country, e.g., public libraries, social security, the clean air act, etc. There are certain projects which the government is best suited to tackle. Even conservative Republicans have enacted socialist policies, including Nixon and W. Bush.
Obama has voiced time and time again, in his books as well as during the campaign, Americans don't want or expect government to do everything for them. The type of radical socialism which you envision taking place under an Obama presidency is quite simply a hysterical presupposition.
So I can't wait for him to fail. And I'm sure that his success will match that of Jimma Cotta. Oh yea. I do want him to be an "adequate" and competent commander in chief. But other than that, I wish a plague upon him and all his government.
These statements of yours (above) are irreconcilable.
For the sake of my country I hoped that George W. would be a successful president in every way, even though I disagreed with his policies in general. Of course, he turned out to be the worst president in history. That aside, the fact remains that I always wanted him to succeed for the sake of our country. It's alright to criticize those in power, but it's patently anti-American to hope that any given president fail. Especially when failure may mean absolute economic collapse, as in Obama's case.
With all due respect: grow up.
I believe these idiots. And it explains why the Republican party is now officialy dead. Kaput. Fini.
The Republican party won't be officially dead until Sarah Palin becomes its nominee in 2012. At that point, rock bottom will have been reached.
Originally posted by PalynkaHis actions, or the perception generated by propaganda? I liked his actions. He really, really stunk at the propaganda thing. He didn't try, so be definition he failed to convince anyone.
I'm not arguing about the merits and demerits of Bush. I'm arguing that it is counter-factual to imply Bush-hating was done on the grounds of his political party alone. His actions brought it upon himself.
Can you give me a list of his most terrible "Actions" that you hated? The one that I hated the most was the so called Bailout. I see it as a Sellout to socialism because in effect he nationalized the banking and monetary system and destroyed capitalism forever. Or for a generation or two at least.
But I can't HATE him for that. I can just be disgusted and saddened. Because he says he acted on his Principles.
But I can go ahead and hate the "white" half of Obama's genome and all of his principles because I have seen nothing to indicate he has any principles ... YET. I expect he will be developing some principles real soon now that his actions mean something. This is the first time in his life for that you know? He never employed others. He never met a payroll. He never failed a business. It will be FUN to watch how he reacts to his very first opportunities to fail... when he DOES fail.
1 edit
Originally posted by epiphinehasPretty well said, except I will disabuse you of my expectations of a "radical" socialism. I expect it to be completly benign.
[b]For crying out loud, why would a conservative want him to succeed? Are they so stupid to not see that success for "socialization" of the culture and nation means that socialism wins and the US is finished forever?
Socialist projects are part of American history and have been quite beneficial to our country, e.g., public libraries, social securi alin becomes its nominee in 2012. At that point, rock bottom will have been reached.[/b]
Hence more durable, dangerous and devastating. See Europe.
All in all, thank you for your post. I think you are extremely naive about "cause and effect" as it relates to the economy of the world.
People buy. People sell. People produce and people make a living off of production.
Government can buy. Government can not sell or produce; by definition they have no productive funding mechanisms. Their ONLY "income" and "funding" is taxation. So their income is by definition "confiscation". At what point does confiscation begin to erode freedom of the individual? Are individual rights to be protected from government intrusions in the form of confiscation?
Originally posted by StarValleyWyAgain, you delve into his merits/demerits.
His actions, or the perception generated by propaganda? I liked his actions. He really, really stunk at the propaganda thing. He didn't try, so be definition he failed to convince anyone.
Can you give me a list of his most terrible "Actions" that you hated? The one that I hated the most was the so called Bailout. I see it as a Sellout to socialism be ...[text shortened]... FUN to watch how he reacts to his very first opportunities to fail... when he DOES fail.
What I'm saying is that his approval ratings at some point in his career went through the roof. This goes completely against your claim that you are somehow comparable to Bush-haters, because they also hated Bush from the start. As I've shown, this is false.
I perfectly accept that you don't like what Obama stands for. What I'm saying is that most Democrats actually gave Bush the benefit of the doubt, so you're not comparable to them.
1 edit
Originally posted by Palynkalol
Again, you delve into his merits/demerits.
What I'm saying is that his approval ratings at some point in his career went through the roof. This goes completely against your claim that you are somehow comparable to Bush-haters, because they also hated Bush from the start. As I've shown, this is false.
I perfectly accept that you don't like what Obama st st Democrats actually gave Bush the benefit of the doubt, so you're not comparable to them.
I only talked about the "Bush Haters" like moveon.org etc.
ON 9/12 these people were hating Bush. Didn't you notice them?
I think it was and is an orchestrated and well paid for "hate". It became genuine, but it was nothing more than a supreme triumph of propaganda.
The average "bush hater" is not compitent to brush his own teeth.
You are saying that somehow... "approval ratings" mean something. Why are they important and WHAT do they mean? I see no value in "opinion" as it is nothing more than a purchased commodity.
Should the "average" person ever learn that there are three branches of government (in the US) and be capable of explaining "checks and balances of government" then PERHAPS... but not too likely -- I will accept the notion that the "opinion" of the masses has meaning.
Nothing I am saying pertains to any group. Because I don't "Do" the "group thing". I speak only from my perspective and principles. Frankly, should more than two or three people in any one group begin to BELIEVE what I say, I will quickly find a way of leaving that group. There is nothing more ruinous to the soul of conscious beings than groupthink.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyThere are many people with original and unique thoughts in this world. Most of them are insane.
lol
I only talked about the "Bush Haters" like moveon.org etc.
ON 9/12 these people were hating Bush. Didn't you notice them?
I think it was and is an orchestrated and well paid for "hate". It became genuine, but it was nothing more than a supreme triumph of propaganda.
The average "bush hater" is not compitent to brush his own teeth.
You ...[text shortened]... e is nothing more ruinous to the soul of conscious beings than groupthink.
Originally posted by PalynkaYou are correct. My own case is probably a prime example in one sense. I did rebuild myself from the depths of nothingness at one point in time.
There are many people with original and unique thoughts in this world. Most of them are insane.
That's why I don't take myself too seriously. Too many moving parts in every brain for something not to be working right.
That is why I prefer to be the "loner". If I screw up it matters not in the least.
btw... the REASON I want Obama to fail is that perfect people are rather dangerous. I really believe that failure is the key to maturity and growth. But that is just my opinion. I don't trust perfect people.
Originally posted by StarValleyWySo if he misses a three-pointer in the White House's new basketball court, then he wouldn't be perfect and you could trust him again? Everybody's happy! 🙂
You are correct. My own case is probably a prime example in one sense. I did rebuild myself from the depths of nothingness at one point in time.
That's why I don't take myself too seriously. Too many moving parts in every brain for something not to be working right.
That is why I prefer to be the "loner". If I screw up it matters not in the least. ...[text shortened]... the key to maturity and growth. But that is just my opinion. I don't trust perfect people.