Comments Posted By Postagoras
Displaying 41 To 50 Of 55 Comments
This posting is a waste of effort. Obama is breaking promises because of what one aide said about the windfall profits tax? Or because you don't see his cabinet choices so far as "change"? Maybe you should let him be President for a couple days, and then you can re-post this, having given him a real chance to govern.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 3.12.2008 @ 22:30
OOGEDY-BOOGEDY AND BIBBIDI, BOBBIDI, BOO
The evangelicals erred by identifying too strongly with one political party, which enabled them to be cynically used during the political campaigns on one or two wedge issues. Because of this, the opposing party was able to cynically paint them as out-of-touch denizens of the lunatic fringe. The evangelicals should be out there showing how their beliefs affect their outlooks on all policies, and working with both parties as need be. "Religious" and "right" should not be automatically connected.
I disagree that "Obama won because people believed he would cut their taxes." He won because, as you say, the Republicans were known more for what they were against rather than what they were for. Plus, the Republicans' track record hurt them. The Republicans don't need new ideas... they need the will to execute the principles that are the core of the party, like smaller government and fiscal responsibility. Attractive as those principles are, Obama won because the Republicans did not deliver on them.
So it's a hard sell for conservative politicians to talk about principles. I hear your outrage, Rick, but I don't hear that being echoed in many places on the right.
The conservatives are missing an opportunity with the economic problems- the country really needs to hear a plan for dealing with the crisis from them, as a counterpoint to what the Obama administration will come up with.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 20.11.2008 @ 11:18
Yes, an "unhinged variety of dissent against Bush was practiced by a very vocal minority of liberals during the Bush presidency," including "some very prominent lefties."
And no doubt a vocal minority of conservatives will have Obama Derangement Syndrome.
And no doubt lefty knuckledraggers will call any dissent racism, as right-wing knuckledraggers called any dissent anti-patriotism.
But this kind of extreme dissent and labelling are done by vocal minorities on both sides.
Thoughtful, tough dissent, as practised by your blog and many conservative and liberal blogs, is widespread and a sign of a healthy society.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 14.11.2008 @ 09:46
Well, Rick, I don't think that you are a fucking idiot. I personally think that a fiscally conservative, small-government view is a critical part of the dialogue in our government. I applaud the desire to bring that back. But I can remember the past eight years, when Republicans in Congress and the White House acted in favor of their own power and not in the best interests of the country. I can also remember the deafening silence of all but a few conservatives during that time, and I wish that there has been a more vocal repudiation of the Bush administration. I really wish you and Russ success for the future.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 5.11.2008 @ 06:46
"no longer will right-wingers feel obliged to carry water, whether in small or large amounts, for a government that’s widely perceived as a failure"
How mealy-mouthed... "widely perceived" as a failure? If you and Russ can't bring yourselves to admit that the "wide perception" is justified, you're not carrying water, you're carrying a load of crap. Good luck rebuilding conservatism.
You know what I really hate about fucking idiots like you? You can't take "yes" for an answer. That is childish, immature and bespeaks a mind besotted with mindless, partisan hackery.
ed.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 4.11.2008 @ 12:35
'WE DIDN'T KNOW" WILL NOT BE AN ACCEPTED EXCUSE
Yawn. This is nothing but a list of worst-case expectations. Happy Halloween, an unqualified, clueless liberal is being elected President.
Since a pessimist can only be pleasantly surprised, you have just ensured yourself four pleasant years.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 31.10.2008 @ 13:51
WHO ARE YOU CALLING A MODERATE?
Here's the rub, Rick. I also agree with all of your principles with the exception of the "strict constructionist" provision for judges. You and I can start with general agreement and, when we have to decide how to govern the community, end up with different policies.
This is the essence of politics, yet electioneering nowadays pays very short shrift to the politics of governing- because it's messy, complicated, and requires an adult capability to compromise. Instead, cynical people create straw men (aka "wedge issues") to play to the basest part of the electorate.
Another tactic of the cynical types is to promote the idea that people who don't share your beliefs are at best stupid, and at worst, eeeevil. Again, it works because people like to be part of the smart, morally correct group as opposed to those morons on the other side.
It's particularly galling that a policy maker who really acts according to the idea that "people of good will can have spirited disagreements" is particularly susceptible to an attack mediated by cynical, manipulative people.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 28.10.2008 @ 09:22
OBAMA: THE NEW LEFT TRIUMPHANT
An imposed sense of “community”?
Well, no one is elected President by getting LESS electoral votes than their opponent. So you mean that this sense of community will be imposed on those who voted for McCain? It's an odd complaint, since the idea is that counting votes is a good way for folks to decide what to "impose" on all of us. You can certainly argue against the policy, but saying that it's being imposed on you by a majority of the electorate is weak.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 27.10.2008 @ 10:18
A SHORT, BUT PIQUANT NOTE, ON KNUCKLEDRAGGERS
I would laugh if I wasn't crying.
I read your blog because you represent that thoughtful, provocative, opinionated person that appeared as Locke and Demosthenes in Ender's Game but rarely appears in reality.
I fear that you are wrong about "Someday, we will rule the world." The canny, amoral con men on all sides who get elected by pandering to the worst in the voters are very successful. They promote the lowest form of thought and discourse. And they are incapable of dealing with items such as our crumbling infrastructure, or the best way to educate our kids. They are carefully two steps behind sleazy businessmen who peddle the latest snake oil knowing they will face no repercussions.
In that climate, following the rules is for chumps.
As I said, it makes me sad.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 15.10.2008 @ 10:16
IF ELECTED, OBAMA WILL BE MY PRESIDENT
Sorry, Rick. Your weak "a pox on both their houses" mention of Clinton Derangement Syndrome won't cut it.
You paint with a broad brush, labelling the entire left as two-year-olds and crybabies who never got over the 2000 election. Well, that won't wash. There certainly are people like that, but for me and most others those reservations vanished on September 11, 2001. President Bush had the opportunity to show that he really was a uniter, not a divider. He did not.
While the email writer talks about the attacks on Bush, he himself has "Bush fatigue"... (note: sarcasm alert) I guess since he is a conservative, he is not a crybaby, but a nuanced, complicated individual who doesn't deserve being labelled as a two-year-old.
President Bush has earned his low approval rating- it was not thrust upon him by leftists with Bush Derangement Syndrome.
We will not doubt see that a few percent of folks with Obama Derangement Syndrome if he gets elected. They are welcome to it, and no doubt they will get attention out of proportion to their numbers.
Call me a dreamer, but I have hope that the next President will actually be a uniter, not a divider. I believe that the American people share my hope.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 13.10.2008 @ 15:01
