Reply
Wed 5 Mar, 2008 09:10 am
Okay, call me cynical. I see the three remaining candidates and I say to myself, "so what?" Are any of these three really capable of changing anything or is this a higher stakes version of American Idol?
I see McCain and Clinton as virtually the same entity despite the different party affiliations. Both are essentially centrists whose colleagues have delivered the country into the mess it's in now. What the hell would either of them do that they haven't already?
Obama strikes me as having significantly more character and integrity than both Clinton and McCain combined; but so did Jimmy Carter and he ended up being a loser of staggering proportions. Could Obama possibly stand a chance against a hostile Congress? Wouldn't an Obama administration just invite another conservative revolt in 2010 and then 2012?
Really, is there even a point to this circus?
Part of this can be blamed on tv, mainstream media, and modern culture. People grow up nowadays paying more attention to celebrities than they do politics, so many people now view politicians as potential celebrities. Bottom line, blame the voters, particularly Democrats where their candidates are most definitely more celebrity status than politician. This was obvious in the debates, and there was a definite difference between the two parties debates.
Democrats view Republicans as old fuddy duddy, out of date, business, traditional people stuck in politics of the past. They prefer the celebrities like Clinton and Obama that chant change, and talk in vague and idealistic terms rather than in specific policy terms. Alot of people don't really want to examine closely the merits of specific policies. If someone promises change and acts like they love everybody and will do something to give more money to cure all the world's ills, they will vote for that so they can forget politics and go have fun, and they feel good about themselves and the world. Never mind whether the policies actually will work.
I fear for the country because the recipe for disaster can be found in the above scenario. It has happened in history before.
okie wrote:I fear for the country because the recipe for disaster can be found in the above scenario. It has happened in history before.
Yeah, that's what creeps me out. Carter got everybody all warm and fuzzy after Watergate/Vietnam, telling us that love and goodwill would carry the day. Yeah, whatever. I think we would have been better off just leaving the White House vacant.
The same could well be said about Reagan too, I suppose, but he was able to actually move the country in a specific direction.
I dont really think that any of the candidates actually represent "change", at least not in the way many people seem to want.
Hillary and McCain have both been part of the establishment for so long they dont know any other way to be, and Obama, while claiming to represent "change", will have to deal with the established people in DC.
His ideas might be good ones, but the people in DC that really have the power will fight him tooth and nail on almost everything.
He will have to have people in his admin that know how to play the game, and they wont want to change the rules,especially if it means they lose their power.
Well put. That about sums up my feelings to a "T".
Quote:
I fear for the country because the recipe for disaster can be found in the above scenario. It has happened in history before.
I am curious... what happening in history are you referring to?
ebrown_p wrote:Quote:
I fear for the country because the recipe for disaster can be found in the above scenario. It has happened in history before.
I am curious... what happening in history are you referring to?
Don't you recall that disaster of Clinton when the US was not at war and we had a decent economy and a balanced budget. How would we deal with another disaster like that?
okie wrote:Part of this can be blamed on tv, mainstream media, and modern culture. People grow up nowadays paying more attention to celebrities than they do politics, so many people now view politicians as potential celebrities. Bottom line, blame the voters, particularly Democrats where their candidates are most definitely more celebrity status than politician. This was obvious in the debates, and there was a definite difference between the two parties debates.
Democrats view Republicans as old fuddy duddy, out of date, business, traditional people stuck in politics of the past. They prefer the celebrities like Clinton and Obama that chant change, and talk in vague and idealistic terms rather than in specific policy terms. Alot of people don't really want to examine closely the merits of specific policies. If someone promises change and acts like they love everybody and will do something to give more money to cure all the world's ills, they will vote for that so they can forget politics and go have fun, and they feel good about themselves and the world. Never mind whether the policies actually will work.
I fear for the country because the recipe for disaster can be found in the above scenario. It has happened in history before.
St. John Ervine once said, "Every manÂ… should periodically be compelled to listen to opinions which are infuriating to him. To hear nothing but what is pleasing to one is to make a pillow of the mind."
ebrown_p wrote:Quote:
I fear for the country because the recipe for disaster can be found in the above scenario. It has happened in history before.
I am curious... what happening in history are you referring to?
Just a few quotes. Not suggesting another Hitler here at this point, but I am suggesting that the current political scene is becoming riper for very dysfunctional or subversive personalities to find some success in politics now.
All great movements are popular movements. They are the volcanic eruptions of human passions and emotions, stirred into activity by the ruthless Goddess of Distress or by the torch of the spoken word cast into the midst of the people.
Adolf Hitler
All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.
Adolf Hitler
I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.
Adolf Hitler
The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force.
Adolf Hitler
Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.
Adolf Hitler
After reading those quotes by Hitler, its a good thing you are willing to give up freedoms to fight "terrorism" okie. Because you know terrorists are dangerous people that should scare the hell out of you and make you realize that "paradise" is a country where your government can spy on you in spite of the constitution.
Have you been spyed on, Parados? You must be shaking in your boots, if you have any. I'm not particularly concerned. I am more concerned about terrorists, perhaps you aren't, proving what I just posted. Leftists are 180 degrees out of phase. That is the whole point.
parados wrote:After reading those quotes by Hitler, its a good thing you are willing to give up freedoms to fight "terrorism" okie. Because you know terrorists are dangerous people that should scare the hell out of you and make you realize that "paradise" is a country where your government can spy on you in spite of the constitution.
And you should be old enough to realize that "paradise" is an unattainable myth.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace