Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Through the looking glass

Let's get this straight: Despite war profiteering, lobbying scandals, bribery, and sexual misconduct involving minors* -- and let's not forget the poorly executed war, domestic spying, and prisoner abuse -- President Bush is saying that the Democrats can't be trusted to run Congress?

I'm sorry, I must have forgotten moving to backwardsland.

I really hope that the American electorate is not that stupid.



*You know it's gotta be pretty gosh darn bad when the Washington Times thinks the Speaker should resign over the scandal.


7 comments:

Emery said...

No, they are not stupid..........but you are!!!!!!!!!

Dara said...

Ah, Emery returns. And just like most Republicans, when the facts show that his party is wrong, his only resort is to call me names. Emphatically, no less.

I'd defend myself by telling Emery how not stupid I am, but what's the point? He clearly doesn't get it.

He, like a lot of people, is allowing the Republican party to treat him like a stupid, petulant child. I mean, when people start to ask questions, those in power are essentially telling us not to worry our pretty little heads about it, and just rest assured that they're making very, very important decisions to keep us safe.

Well, screw that. It's horseshit.

Bo W. said...

Hmmm - how do you know Emery is a Repblican and not just someone trying to make us look stupid, haha.

The bottom line is that the Republicans have screwed up a great chance to do some things with the power they have. Very disappointed in that. However, scandal is not the Republicans alone. Unlike the guy back in the 1980s who allegedly had sex with the underage page, at least Foley rightfully resigned. Bottom line is that both parties are full of immoral bastards, and it is easier to tag the party in power right now.

Would it be stupid to vote Republican? Well, I am much better off now than I was 4 or even 6 years ago. Taxes are still low and we have not had another terrorist attack on our home land. All the bad things (and there are a bunch) that has happened really don't effect me. My life is good - why change things.

I will say that the Reagan 80s and Clinton 90s were pretty successful times when we had two different parties having to work together, so maybe things will improve under a Democrat Congress . . . and make the Republicans there become Republicans again!!

mad said...

Umm, I hate to say this, Dara, but the the little guy got re-elected, despite massive evidence of incompetence. So I'd say the electorate was pretty dumb. I predict the Democrats will fumble the ball at the goal line. They're not all that bright either.

Dara said...

Mad: So sad, so true. But here's to hoping that the people are getting smarter, or that maybe the Democrats are learning how to play the game a little better.

Bo: I'm not saying the Republicans are the only ones with scandals -- I'm saying that, right now, it's pretty hypocritical for the president to be accusing the opposition of being untrustworthy when his party keeps betraying the trust of the people with scandals, lies, and cover-ups.

Ultimately, neither party really understands the source of their power. The people deserve truth. We need to be told what is really going on; not sent away when our questions get too challenging. Most importantly, the politicians shouldn't be calling each other names to mask the real debate -- if there even is one -- over the direction the country should be heading in.

Are we better off now than we were before? Financially, yes. But that's not really the politicians' fault, is it? It's because we're out of school. (And it's not like either of us can currently really afford to buy a nice house in NoVa.)

I, for one, don't really think that the parties are that far apart on national security issues -- or even taxes. We need schools, roads, and other things -- and the government needs to pay for them by taxing us, but needs to keep taxes as low as possible to keep us happy. Plus they need to keep inflation and the deficit down -- so that our grandkids aren't paying for these things in the future. None of this is all that controversial.

The bigger chasm is over domestic issues like gay marriage, abortion rights, and the tension between security and privacy. But these issues get short-shrift, and there's no consistency, even within the parties. I mean, somewhat surprisingly, as a liberal, I think that the government should stay the heck out of my business when it comes to those things.

Bo W. said...

Dara: Fair enough - Bush's comments on the lack of trustworthiness is like the pot calling the kettle black. I don't trust any of them, but I am not going to Wyoming and hide out in a compound! And yes, you got my somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment about being better off because we are out of college - though the economy does appear to be pretty healthy.

Someone once said that elections boil down to the economy if it's bad, but if it is good, then there is always something else. I can't imagine the slaughter in November if the economy was also bad!

We agree on privacy and security. Don't tread on me! Live free or die!

Bo W. said...

Network went down twice now and it lost my somewhat witty reply! I will say my attempted post ended with Don't Tread on Me & Live Free or Die!

Dara, the gist was I see your point and it is hypocritical of Bush (pot calling kettle black), and that you got my somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment regarding begin better off (though the economy is pretty good). Some one once said that campaigns are run on the economy if it is bad and something else if the economy is good. If the economy were bad can you imagine the slaughter in Nov's elections?

I agree on privacy and security. Insert previous 2 phrases from the first paragraph of this reply.