"Actually, all recent polls show the Palin choice a net plus for McCain with independents – only 18% believe her to be unqualified while she has helped McCain to scoot out to a 11 point lead among indies."
I agree that she was a wise choice politically. But when I watch her during her interviews, I get the exact same feeling I do when watching GWB. It's like this uneasy embarrassed feeling. It's like watching a cute second grade teacher trying to do a college lecture.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 25.09.2008 @ 11:14
I must admit that I have a total hard on for this disaster.
It's like watching a movie where you hope against hope that the bully (wall street) will finally, after everything, get a severe ass kicking from our reluctant hero (the tax payer). I want the bully to suffer so much pain and humiliation that he would never even think of f'ing with the hero ever again. Kinda like Biff and George McFly in Back To The Future.
Now, I know that punching Biff in the face is going to severely mess up my hand... maybe even break some bones and hurt like hell, but I feel like I'd welcome the pain just to see these guys go down in flames.
I've read everything there is to read, from both sides of the isle, and one thing is clear. If both sides stand up together and tell these guys to go fuck themselves everyone will win in the long run. Despite the pain we'll feel.
I'm very happy to see both sides royally pissed at someone else for a change. I know there is political posturing going on, but I'm hoping they come out swinging and don't screw the tax payers.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 24.09.2008 @ 09:07
The so called safety you long for severely limits openness and intelligent discourse in the long run.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 23.09.2008 @ 13:59
There are definitive psychological differences between the left and the right. It's a matter of perception and brain chemistry, literally. These differences manifest themselves in how communication is done online. The medium itself seems better suited for well connected groups, which is why they thrive.
I read blogs from both sides. One of the main differences I've seen is the comments. On the so called left, the comments and discussions seem deeper, more involved, and far far more diverse.
Comment and discussion on the so called right seems to be either more heavily moderated, or less frequent and more targeted. I haven’t figured out which.
The funny part for me is that both sides seem at a loss to understand how the other side could possibly 'think like that'. It's often hilarious to watch. Especially when they talk about how the Main Stream Media screws them.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 23.09.2008 @ 02:12
"America did not achieve its greatest prosperity through socialist policies, but through personal freedom and free market economics. In the current economic climate, the last thing we need is more socialism."
Can you explain more about what "personal freedom" means, as you see it? Also, "free market economics" is a broad brush. What do you mean by that? Markets without regulation?Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 17.09.2008 @ 13:25
"A party that would not only be capable of winning elections but of governing this beloved country honestly and with the humble realization that the American people need more out of us than moralizing and the tired ideas of the past."
Brilliant! I will vote for this party if/when I see it. That's going to be hard to achieve with the albatross of the evangelical base around the party neck, but good luck.
Remember, Republicans, you are supposed to be the fiscally conservative party of smaller government. As of right now, you're doing it wrong.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 17.09.2008 @ 09:56
Interestingly enough, over the past 50 years the majority of the economic indicators have been better when a Democrat has held the presidency. I have no explanation for why that is, but it's true. Democrats, good for the economy. That's exactly the opposite of what I had expected.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 16.09.2008 @ 19:47
Whatever, Rick. Which part of what I said is a lie? Was it the personal opinion or was it the cold hard facts?
Postagoras is right on.
McCain saying that the fundamentals of the economy are strong is a face saving red herring. Which is, of course, why he's saying it. It sounds fantastic. But, unfortunately, it's the equivalent of him saying, people exchanging money for goods and services seems to be working out really well for our country.
I would have voted for McCain in 2000 if Rove hadn't destroyed him. He seems like a different guy this time around though.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 16.09.2008 @ 13:20
"He is, in fact, talking about the micro of all micro parts of the economy – the individual citizen’s pocketbook."
An uber Republican friend of mine is fond of saying, "when in doubt, vote your pocketbook". He does this in attempts to get me to vote Republican. I've heard this on more than one occasion from Republicans.
Hearing Obama discuss individual citizens pocketbooks in a setting where he is talking to, well, citizens, only seems to make sense from a political standpoint. Most people I know personally are not better off than they were eight years ago. That part is a no brainer as well.
On the macro level, the major economic indicators are definitely worse than they were eight years ago. The "Now" is inauguration day 2001.
Unemployment Then: 4.2%
Unemployment Now: 6.1%
Budget Then: $281B Surplus
Budget Now: $357B Deficit
Debt Then: $5.7 Trillion
Debt Now: $9.7 Trillion
Gas Avg Then: $1.46/gal
Gas Avg Now: $4.00+
(these numbers are from the US. Dept. of Commerce and the Census Bureau.)
So, if I voters are looking at Macro or Micro, and voting with only the pocketbook in mind, I think the Republicans are in trouble.
You are deliberately avoiding the point and lying to boot. McCain said nothing about whether we were better off 8 years ago. He said nothing except what I wrote above. You and Obama both are lying about what he said. McCain was making a sound, reasonable, point about the underlying strength of the economy. We are not headed for collapse - no responsible analyst I have read has said anything close to that. And yet Obama chose to try and instill fear in people in a time of crisis by misrepresenting - deliberately- what McCain was saying.
You should get a job in the Obama war room. Your lying would fit right in.
ed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 16.09.2008 @ 11:50
"The subprime mortgage mess we find ourselves in is because of the regulatory policies of the Clinton administration that Bush was unable to get Congress to change."
I'm sorry, but I don't believe one word of that. Congress gave Bush everything he wanted except Harriet Miers. You're telling me that George Bush predicted this, tried to change it, and his own Republican congress denied him? I have read absolutely nothing to that effect.
"I wonder how independent you really are with your obvious disdain for conservatives and our worldview. Maybe you have just as much disdain for liberals and that makes you independent?"
Sometimes I have a hard time articulating my feelings about conservatism. To me, conservatism means: healthy distrust of government, sound fiscal responsibility, strong belief in liberty, property rights, and staunch privacy advocates. It is limited government that serves the people as best it can.
So called conservatives have had nearly complete and total domination of the United States government for eight years. Your so called worldview isn't exactly what I've seen. Quite the opposite really.
The past eight years have taught me that my view of conservatism is about as opposite as you can get to what the Republicans have given us.
When the Republican party does not act conservative, it's members tend to say, "I'm a conservative, I don't know why they're spending so much money, etc." I can't stand that. If you're a Republican, then you're supposed to be a conservative. Act like it.
I view government regulation of business like I view building codes. Almost every rule in building code is there, literally, because someone died or lost everything when it wasn't. The codes are there to prevent loss of life and money. For the most part, the codes are not unreasonable. They make sense, and following the codes will give you a structure that you can make reasonable assumptions about and expect that it will not fail. Note, I said reasonable, not stupid.
I think that business should be regulated in the same reasonable and intelligent way. When it becomes possible to gain a sales commission on a loan you have no stake in, a loan that basically requires only a signature and a smile from the borrower to get approval - then you're screwed.
To me, it is unreasonable to blame the Democrats for this. Nor do I blame Republicans for that matter. I believe that greed is fairly non partisan. I could be wrong though.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 17.09.2008 @ 17:06