How screwed are we in November?

Goebbels was right, if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people (in this case reality impaired lefties) will eventually come to believe it.

I thought McCain's people cooked this up?

Team McCain (with an assist from the media) made it up, Ms. Banana is one of the sad few who has heard the accusations repeated so many times that they unquestionably believe in the story's truthfulness.

Funny in the sense that it is comical? No.

Funny in the sense that it is not to be expected? Not that either. It is a long-predicted sociological phenomenon.

People do not naturally go for responsibility. Free lunches are much more interesting. The average person has little or no understanding of economics, foreign policy, or the workings of the government. They simply vote for those who promise them what sounds the best. Perception is significantly more important than content.

I happen to like democracy. It has allowed greater freedom and prosperity for a larger number of people than any other system in the history of the world. But it contains the seeds of its own destruction, and I do not expect it to last. Within five hundred years, I expect there will be basically no governments beyond a relatively local level that rely on anything that can truly be called democracy. The concept of a republic might survive, but not unlimited democracy.

So it is not unexpected, but it is hardly a reason for a historian/sociologist to rejoice. Fiscal and social irresponsibility will inevitably be followed by a decline in economic power (America is already seeing that), then a decline in general well-being (there are signs that that is soon going to come and may even be showing up already in many parts of the West), and finally by collapse of the economy as a whole. That in turn will be followed by the demand of the people for someone to "do something" and they will follow whatever leader can put things in order. The French rejoiced when a military dictator took over, put an end to their First Republic, and brought order to the country. So will Western democracy as a whole finally give in, not only willingly but with rejoicing, to dictatorship.

All because the people figured out quickly enough that they could vote themselves a free lunch.

Yet the people cropping up on our place of economic power are "more irresponsible" socialists and communists.

^ Oh, I don't disagree with that assessment at all. I simply say that it is not "funny," either in the sense of being comical or in the sense of being peculiar. We are exactly on the path towards decline that has long been predicted. I find nothing funny about that.

Actually, they aren't. TRUE conservatives haven't had a majority of votes in both houses of Congress, pretty much EVER. The closest they got was 1995-1998....not coincidentally the Congress that balanced the budget.

But what happened between 200 and 2006? They spent like drunken kennedy's under Bush and grew government.

Let's see, around that time Newt was forced out and old Denny Hastert took over.

And you have to love Garamet mocking Reagan while she has an Obama for president avatar.

Unless you're in the military - then you might only be slightly invading Iran.

One more to add...


"I fucked up so bad, let 'em see me pick my nose!"

Because Carter was that bad?

Aww, poor baby. Did you read that while your G-String was yanked up too tight?

I still think he's a fantastic person, and if he were President, the country would experience real growth once again. However, my idealism clashed with my pragmatism and it was the realism that won out. Ron Paul's not going to become the President. I would happily eat my words if he does, but every card is stacked against him.

So I had to try and find someone else whom I felt was a reasonable candidate.

Thank you, Asyncritus. I would consider that list eminently reasonable. Why is it so hard to put into practice, or find a leader willing to do that?

You know, despite some of his policies, I've always had a fondness and respect for Reagan. I don't think they make them like that anymore, regardless of what the candidates today may tell you. In fact, I get sick and tired of the constant "I'm Just Like Reagan!™" comparisons they make. They're not like Reagan, not at all. They're ineffective communicators, they have bloated government platforms, and they spend without mercy on the taxpayer's wallet. I lean liberal, but I know how strong and effective a leader he was, regardless of his policies.

If conservatives are waiting for another Reagan, I'm afraid it might be a long wait.


J.

One more to add...


"I fucked up so bad, let 'em see me pick my nose!"

What a gold digger.

I have a fondness and respect for my grandfather, but I've no desire to be driven in a vehicle by him.

Non-sequitur. Your grandfather wasn't an elected President of the United States. There is a difference.


J.

I think you fail to see the point he's making.

Just because you respect someone doesn't mean they are the best for whatever job they go for.

Because there aren't enough people willing to vote for me.

Believe me, I did not fail to see the point he was making. It's still a non-sequitur. If we go by his comparison, does this mean that all grandfathers cannot drive? You see, his statement cannot follow logic since it appeals to the stereotypical idea that older citizens cannot drive. One piece of evidence to the contrary and the whole analogy falls apart. Now, if we accept your statement as an explanation of his, then it is further in error. The Presidency cannot be compared to a simple driver's test. There is a great deal more involved, and to make such a simple comparison implies an ignorance of the process involved. Being a grandfather and driving poorly does not equate to, neither does it follow, the requirements one must meet when vying for the Presidency of the United States.

I do not respect Ronald Reagan as one would a grandfather. I respect him as a President. I realize Diacanu's comment was tongue in cheek, however it was still in error.

J.

I'd vote for you, but then they would come and take my Liberal License. I worked very hard at being wishy washy to get that license.





J.

Because they lost a working majority of true conservatives, not to mention a dynamic true conservative leader....

Just because Republicans have a BARE majority of votes does NOT mean CONSERVATIVES do.

You DO realize that, on domestic policy, you'll never find two major party candidates who are more opposite from each other than Paul and Obama, right?

I realize that, but there is no one appealing on the Republican side of the aisle. McCain? Not a chance. Maybe the John McCain from 2000/2004, but not this one. Romney? Pfft. On the Democrat side there's Clinton and Obama. I made my choice between the two. Perhaps it is best if this time around, a Democrat gets into office. It will give Republican party the time they need to regroup, and perhaps, just maybe, they'll figure out that most people don't want what they're currently offering.


J.

Paul and Kucinich?

I don't think we're screwed at all. But I'm an Obamamaniac.

Obama IS Kucinich, only with style.

We survived eight years of Dubya.

I doubt four years of Obama will kill us.

Goebbels was right. Even further right than you.

Don't see anything showing that McCain or anyone else made this up, though.