sagawizard ([info]sagawizard) wrote,
@ 2008-09-14 09:56:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
I just do not get it
I just do not get it. The major polls keep showing McCain ahead, albeit not by much.

Everyone agrees the country's in the toilet right now. For 6 of the last 8 years, the Republican party controlled EVERYTHING. The White House, Congress, and the Courts. No one stopped them from doing ANYTHING. Even the last two years of a Democratic congress didn't really slow them down. They got whatever they wanted:

- wars with unlimited budgets
- No Child Left Behind
- huge cuts to medicare and welfare
- a huge tax cut for the wealthy
- unregulated markets for energy and housing
- North Dakota's abortion ban that pro-choicers can't challenge because the Supreme Court will use it as an excuse to overturn Roe v. Wade, paving the way for other states to do the
same
- limitless domestic spying
- complete free reign to dispense with the constitution and human rights laws when it comes to terrorism
- anti gay marriage amendments to dozens of state constitutions

They only lost on two initiatives: privatizing social security and drilling in ANWAR, and it looks like the drilling thing is going to go in their favor soon any day now.

So in short, the Republican Party has been doing whatever it wanted with the country, unopposed, for 8 years. We are living entirely in the country of their making.

But everyone agrees the country's in the toilet right now.

Yet the polls still favor McCain.

Somehow, Obama being perceived as an "elitist" (even though McCain is just as wealthy and privileged) and out of touch with the "working man" (even though McCain owns 5 homes) is enough to make people want to sign up for 4-8 more years of what brought us this mess...?

Or is it a fear that Obama is going to raise taxes? McCain wants to not only continue our two current wars but possibly involve us in Iran and who knows, maybe Georgia, too. And he's going to pay for this WITHOUT raising taxes?

Is it the idea that McCain is a "maverick", even though he voted with Bush 90-95% of the time, and Bush is the guy who, once again, got everything he wanted and yet we're still in this mess?

I just do not get it.

Not that I'd would throw in the towel just yet. The political analysts have been so consistently wrong throughout this whole election that I don't trust either their numbers OR their ability to make inaccurate numbers into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Remember last year this time, when the media was *certain* that this would be a Hillary/Giuliani or Hillary/Romney race? Remember the huge wave behind the idea that Fred Thompson was going to be the Republican man on horseback? Remember how Hillary was going to wipe Obama off the face of the political map after Super Tuesday?

All is not lost. But it's going to be a really tough battle for Obama, and I still don't understand why.

-SW

(Post a new comment)


[info]saveferrets
2008-09-15 12:57 am UTC (link)
wars with unlimited budgets

Well, they got one war right, and one war wrong. And the war they got right, they didn't finish when they had the chance. Had they the balls to launch "Operation Bomb The Crap Out of Your House" when Al-Qaeda was driven back to the caves, it'd be a done deal. And I'm as disgusted with the Halliburton crap as you are (contracts to purify water that they do nothing but take the money), if it's true.

The inability to finish the job here is the big economic gut punch. It brought down the USSR and it's doing a number on us.

- No Child Left Behind

A Ted Kennedy initiative.

Not really a huge economic impact (short term). Could be better, but if it didn't happen, then the argument would be that nothing was done for education.

- huge cuts to medicare and welfare

No, a huge prescription drug program, which was an increase to Medicare. And if it didn't happen, the argument would be that nothing was done for seniors.

- a huge tax cut for the wealthy

I got about $10,000 back that I wouldn't have had otherwise. Am I the wealthy?

Every form of involuntary income tax is THEFT and is therefore immoral. Always. No exceptions, no matter WHAT you get in return. Consumption taxes are the fairest taxes: you pay for what you take.

The big problem is that our economy is consumption-driven, which kind of works in direct opposition to any sensible environmental policy.

That's the underlying economic problem: we drove up debt to consume, consume, consume but never address the systematic problems, and at some point, you run out of tricks in the hat. This isn't really a Republican/Democrat thing... the last 20 years have largely been an exercise in making believe things are better than they really are.

- unregulated markets for energy and housing

Regulating energy leads to shortages and fascist thermostat control laws. Housing, people bought stuff they couldn't afford. I opposed the bailout. If he did nothing, there would be nothing but ads of people whining about how they lost their home... the home they never had any business buying in the first place.

Now if you want to talk about ECONOMIC regulation when it comes to allowing companies to carry ridiculous liabilities or do things like it's 1929, yeah, those need fixing, but I don't see the Democrats doing anything about, say, cross-pollination of CEO's on each others' boards of directions giving themselves huge severance payouts for fucking up a company. Why would they? That's their donor base. :D

- North Dakota's abortion ban

Are you planning on living in the Dakotas? Hell, am *I* planning on living in the Dakotas? I say make abortion a zoning thing, like strip clubs. There, the people that want them can have them, and the NIMBYS can say they have a good little Christian town. My only opposition is to tax dollars funding unlimited abortion (or to being married and having someone abort the kid without discussing it with me - or NOT being married, having them sabotage the birth control and decide to have the kid and come for a check later - MEN should have some rational reproductive rights, too). If someone needs significant transportation because of this, fine, we'll provide the transportation.

- limitless domestic spying

On communications which cross the border, which ARE under federal jurisdiction. ANYTHING coming in or out of the country is the feds' business, even I concede that.

- complete free reign to dispense with the constitution and human rights laws when it comes to terrorism

For foreigners. They're guests, not citizens, and if they can't act like it, well, (nearly) EVERY OTHER COUNTRY in the world has the brains and balls to protect itself.

- anti gay marriage amendments

Well if we would just get marriage OUT of government and make it a private contract (or deem EVERY government marriage a "civil union," and then you can call it whatever you want in your house), instead of poking people in the eye just because you or I don't like their views, nobody would be passing those laws. Well, maybe Utah.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]sagawizard
2008-09-15 01:09 pm UTC (link)
The inability to finish the job here is the big economic gut punch. It brought down the USSR and it's doing a number on us.

So if Russia had stayed in Afghanistan another 11 years the USSR would still be around? I'm having a hard time believing that. Hemmoraghing so much money and human life for the 11 years that stayed was part of what wrecked their economy -- even President Reagan said as much.

- No Child Left Behind
A Ted Kennedy initiative.

Shyeah, yes, in the sense that Christianity was a Jewish initiative. Bush gutted and changed so much of Kennedy's plan that even he now disavows it.

- huge cuts to medicare and welfare

No, a huge prescription drug program, which was an increase to Medicare. And if it didn't happen, the argument would be that nothing was done for seniors.

Hello - defecit reduction act of 2005? And the prescription drug program edged out a lot of seniors and wound up denying them coverage. But even if one feels the program was a mistake, why vote for the party that passed it?


- limitless domestic spying
On communications which cross the border, which ARE under federal jurisdiction. ANYTHING coming in or out of the country is the feds' business, even I concede that.

A strange position for a libertarian. If Obama or Hillary was president, would you be ok with them spying on your phone calls? And who's to say it's only international calls? Since they won't let the public see the records, they can be doing anything. Unless, my libertarian friend, you simply want to trust that Big Brother will not abuse its power behind closed doors. :)

- complete free reign to dispense with the constitution and human rights laws when it comes to terrorism
For foreigners. They're guests, not citizens, and if they can't act like it, well, (nearly) EVERY OTHER COUNTRY in the world has the brains and balls to protect itself.

Argument 1: Jose Pedilla - us citizen.
Argument 2: The constitution and bill of rights apply to all PERSONS in the US, not all CITIZENS. It's why GW and company tried to do an end run by having Gitmo in Cuba, which the court says doesn't, in fact, exempt them from following the constitution. Unless you think the constitution is worthless and the rule of law should be dissolved whenever a leader finds it convenient.


My argument remains: the Republicans got 90% of what they wanted unchallenged, the country is in horrible shape, and somehow slightly more than half of Americans still want to vote for this party. Boggles. My. Mind.

-SW

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(Anonymous)
2008-09-15 10:53 pm UTC (link)
So if Russia had stayed in Afghanistan another 11 years the USSR would still be around?

No. The wars have both been bungled. I don't like war any more than you do, but I say, if you're going to fight a war, don't play nice. Play to win. Kill and destroy everything in your path until you achieve your enemy's complete and total unconditional surrender. That's war. Nobody's going to like you either way, so you might as well actually win. There's no brownie points for being the "nice" invaders - war is unpleasant either way. Any other way of fighting Islamic extremism will LOSE. Period. Harry Truman already showed us how you deal with a suicidal enemy.

Shyeah, yes, in the sense that Christianity was a Jewish initiative. Bush gutted and changed so much of Kennedy's plan that even he now disavows it.

Funny, since he VOTED for it.

even if one feels the program was a mistake, why vote for the party that passed it?

Well I can vote for the party that passed it, or the party that wanted to pass an even bigger, even more expensive version of it. Actually, I'm not voting for either, but I know which one I fear.

If Obama or Hillary was president, would you be ok with them spying on your phone calls?

I stand by the concept, transmissions over the border, which are constitutionally the feds' jurisdiction. And the chimp listening in and finding out I'm sick this week, while hardly ideal, is still a lot less offensive than Bill Clinton and Janet Reno sending in their jack-booted stormtroopers to multiple private residences and killing innocent civilians.

Argument 2: The constitution and bill of rights apply to all PERSONS in the US, not all CITIZENS. It's why GW and company tried to do an end run by having Gitmo in Cuba, which the court says doesn't, in fact, exempt them from following the constitution. Unless you think the constitution is worthless and the rule of law should be dissolved whenever a leader finds it convenient.

The constitution isn't a suicide pact. If they're committing terrorism or conspiring to do so, they've effectively renounced their citizenship. As far as persons, that would mean the guys who attacked the USS Cole would get extra protection just for showing up here, and that just can't be right.


My argument remains: the Republicans got 90% of what they wanted unchallenged, the country is in horrible shape, and somehow slightly more than half of Americans still want to vote for this party. Boggles. My. Mind.

Well let's see, despite the offenses of the Republicans (I'd name a completely different list of offenses, such as runaway deficit spending, no-bid contracts, the crack at illegal-alien amnesty, Terri Schiavo, Harriet Myers...), voting for Democrats gets you:

- A government controlled thermostat
- A government controlled speedometer
- government control of what you eat
- massive tax increases (if Clinton lied about the middle-class tax cut, what do you think Obama will REALLY do, especially with a Congress full of functional communists?)
- government control of the education of your children (they won't teach them math, but they'll teach a 5 year old to put a condom on a banana)
- government control of the media
- government control of everything you say and think and do, the ULTIMATE nanny-state.
- racial quotas ensuring that straight white guys who aren't in the good ol' boys club will be screwed for life
- even bigger spending increases
- surrender of U.S. sovereignty to foreign entities
- giveaways of nuclear technology to crazy regimes (North Korea - Clinton and Albright accelerated that problem nicely)
- lopsided treaties that feel good but don't address the big problems (Kyoto... yeah WE get screwed, but China and India pollute all they want...)

. . . . .

FUCK THAT!! I'll take my chances with the robber-baron assholes. It requires a lot of sacrifice and gymnastics, but at least I keep SOME of my freedoms. With the Democrats, it is the DEATH of all freedom. Forever.

I'm under no delusions about the Republicans, but the alternative is even worse. Which, honestly, is really freaking saying something, because the Democrats have had to try PRETTY DAMN HARD to be worse, and yet, they've succeeded overwhelmingly at it!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
it also helps if i sign in.
[info]saveferrets
2008-09-15 10:53 pm UTC (link)
...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]academicblue
2008-09-15 02:54 am UTC (link)
People are..... not bright. And also, I think, racist (in some cases).

McCain is not just "also" rich and privileged--- he's SO MUCH RICHER than Obama. Obama still had frickin' law school debt until his books sold well.

I think what matters most is state-by-state polls, due to electoral college math. I was encouraged to read that Obama has a major lead in Iowa, of all places--- that could be a good sign for the midwest. But I'm pretty damn cynical and pretty damn worried about the election.

at least it will all be over soon.

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…