Politics
- Started
- Last post
- 33,755 Responses
- ukit0
- ********0
Why democrats suck.
http://debby6669.blogspot.com/20…
"ignoring the American people isn't why democrats suck. Not directly, anyway. Republicans ignore the will of their constituents just as much as democrats do. Democrats suck because they lack the courage of their convictions, which makes them weak. When democrats are all claiming that they can't get a public option done because they're waiting for someone else to take the lead, they're telling you that they're weak. Americans hate weakness.
George W Bush showed us that Americans want a leader. We don't even care if that leader is smart, honest, or even qualified. Dick Cheney got every half baked, ill conceived bill that he wanted through congress with nothing resembling a 59 vote majority. And he never whined about having a hard time getting something through. They pushed through a war, an occupation, and a trillion dollars in tax cuts for really fucking rich people with the greatest of ease. And you know what? They never even had to demonstrate that they had any intentions of paying for these things in order to get them through. That was some serious leadership, and it demonstrated strength. And because they seemed so strong, they got less scrutiny. You see when you're weak it tends to make people want to pick on you more. But more than that, it makes people trust you less.
Democrats become more and more untrustworthy every time they claim to want to do something for the American people, but can't get it done because of some insurmountable obstacle. We don't trust you because you seem as if you're either lying or weak. More accurately, you seem like you're lying meekly. Americans don't mind being lied to as long as it's done with conviction. But no one likes someone that lies like a pussy. "
- Lot of truth there.boobs
- Can't argue with much of that. I'd just add that Dems simply don't know how to fight for what they believe in.luckyorphan
- Couldn't agree more...IRNlun6
- ukit0
I think people overstate how much Bush was able to get done. What were Bush's major domestic policies? There was the 2001 tax cut, the Medicare prescription drug entitlement, No Child Left Behind, Social Security privatization, Clear Skies Act (which despite its name would have greatly relaxed EPA regulations and allowed more pollution) and immigration reform.
Out of these six things, only three of them (tax cut, Medicare and No Child Left Behind) were able to get through the Congress. The Medicare bill wasn't really all that "conservative" of a policy - it spent $500 billion more on Medicare. No Child Left Behind was written partly by Ted Kennedy. On the tax cut, it was so close he had to use reconciliation.
And the two things Bush tried to do hat would have had a long-term, society changing effect, Social Security privatization and immigration reform, both failed miserably. Now granted, Bush walked around like he had a ten foot dick in his pants and generally didn't give a shit, but he that doesn't mean he was immune to the tendency of controversial laws to die in Congress.
- ukit0
This is a great article (by a historian) that sort of puts it in perspective.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magaz…
"One year in, Obama’s approval ratings have slipped, and they’re likely to get worse. He’ll probably muddle through seven more years of partisan acrimony, small-bore achievements, and bitter disappointment. But this is okay. In fact, it’s the definition of success for a modern president."
- ukit0
This is interesting. You always hear stuff about how 99.9999% (or some really high number;) of Americans are ultra religious. I always felt this seemed really far off from my own experience in terms of how people I knew personally viewed religion. I kind of explained it away by figuring that there must be a huge enough number of religious people in more conservative parts of the country that it would offset the liberal parts I lived in.
Turns out that's actually not the major issue though. Pew Research did a study specifically focusing on the differences between generations, one part of which was a number of questions about religion.
Turns out both the extent of people who believe in God, as well as how big a factor it is in people's lives is, I think it's safe to say, plummeting. Belief in God for millenials is actually only 53%. Of course Pew doesn't frame it this was because saying that would really piss people off but I don't know what other interpretation can be drawn here.
In other words, if this trend continued over the next 20-30 years, you would have a society that was majority atheist/agnostic. That's kind of shocking to think about, but it looks like that's where we're headed.
- ********0
Barack Obama tries to find a scapegoat for his own hubris
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/…Bitter and jobless after being replaced by a leading Democratic fundraiser, shunned by Obama's inner circle and the subject of the usual finger-pointing anonymous briefings, Desiree Rogers is now fighting back. Her sorry tale says much about how the Obamas have failed to change Washington and how they blame others for their own failings... With his polls numbers still sinking, however, the chances of voters blaming someone else for this hubris recede by the day.
- ********0
1 1 1 1 1
- GeorgesII0
11111
- ********0
http://www.washingtontimes.com/n…
President Barack Obama says he wants projects helping specific states yanked from the health care bill Congress is writing.Obama's proposal to eliminate state-specific items comes with polls finding heightened public opposition to backroom political deals. Republicans have been happy to fan that discontent. Many Democrats, particularly House moderates facing tight re-election battles this fall, are eager to dissociate themselves from such spending.
- ********0
- oh well...Mimio
- yeah I don't really care either..********
- ********0
Democrats aren't suicidal. They're self-executing
http://www.washingtonexaminer.co…
- ukit0
I don't see what Democrats have to lose by passing the health care bill. Are you saying Republicans will go easy on them if they don't pass it? hahahahahahaha
They might as well pass it, that way they have something to run on in the fall.
- if they pass it... they won't have a damn thing to run on in the fall :)PonyBoy
- so true PB********
- PonyBoy0
I realize it's not politics really... but it's just damned silly:
http://www.google.com/hostednews…
"DETROIT — Change is in the air for Detroit city workers.
City employees will be urged not to wear perfume, cologne or aftershave as a result of a settlement in a federal lawsuit."
REALLY?!!! you fucking SEWED over perfume? YOU SUED??
Fuck any lawyer who took that case on...
- discoduro0
The right has found they're 2008 presidential nominee.
http://link.brightcove.com/servi…- Great, another blood sucking politician...EightyDeuce
- they're=theirdiscoduro
- 2008=2012. I'm tired today.discoduro
- ********0
"George W Bush showed us that Americans want a leader. We don't even care if that leader is smart, honest, or even qualified."
http://www.qbn.com/topics/564613…Lemmings, human cattle, hegemons and shiteating cocksuckers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rig…
Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a personality and ideological variable studied in political, social, and personality psychology. It is defined by three attitudinal and behavioral clusters which correlate together:[1][2]Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submissiveness to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.
Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness directed against deviants, outgroups, and other people that are perceived to be targets according to established authorities.
Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the traditions and social norms that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities, and a belief that others in one's society should also be required to adhere to these norms[3].
Although authoritarians in North America generally support conservative political parties, this finding must be considered in a historical and cultural context. For example, during the Cold War, authoritarians in the United States were usually anti-communist, whereas in the Soviet Union, authoritarians generally supported the Communist Party and were opposed to capitalism.[10] Thus, authoritarians generally favor the established ways and oppose social and political change.
Republicans in a nutshell.
- ********0
"Look at about the 5-minute mark of this video — Janet Tavakoli debating Rick Santelli about predatory lending. You basically have a whole panel of CNBC goons pooh-poohing the idea that predatory lending took place, setting up the inevitable revisionist history that the 2008 crash was caused by individual homeowners borrowing beyond their means.
My favorite part of this comes roughly at the six-minute mark. Tavakoli has just deftly explained how a lot of the predatory practices worked — people with limited financial literacy were presented with long and complicated mortgage deals, and told they would have a fixed payment in perpetuity or a guaranteed re-finance, or were nailed by fraudulent appraisals. Then she mentioned the big one, the fact that investment banks then took all these mortgages and with eyes wide open securitized them and sold them off as worthy investments to suckers on the other end of the chain.
While she’s saying all this stuff, Santelli, who is one of the fathers of the Tea Party movement, is shaking his head furiously, video-scoffing at everything she’s saying. When he finally does get a chance to speak, this is what he says:
'Here’s my problem with this. It takes two to tango. You can’t cheat an honest man.'"
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/…
Must be the case, right SumWork. You were "set up" by your "real estate agent" and "the IRS". Yup. You were victimized. Oh well, like the leader of your Tea Party says "Can't cheat an honest man."
Must suck that you're a bum on society, eh? Takes two to tango.
- ********0
Hill's $nub of U.S. companies in purchase of crystal stemware is clear
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/nat…
Hillary Rodham Clinton's State Department is spending $5.4 million to buy fine crystal stemware for American embassies -- but it won't give the US economy much of a boost.The contract was given to a tiny Washington, DC, interior designer, which in turn subcontracted the crystal work to a Swedish firm -- snubbing such US companies as the famous manufacturer in Clinton's own back yard, Steuben Crystal of upstate Corning.
---------------
//Money well spent! What a C*NT!
- ********0
- fooler20
Hey SumWurk and/or JazX, I found the perfect job for you...
- ********0
Niiiiceeeeeeeeee work!
