The worst part about it is that if you’re correct, you’re going to suffer much the same punishment as the rest of us. Your gloating will sound shallow as our strategic resources are burned, our international credit declines, and our electoral decision isolates ourselves on the world stage to the point where we could wish we were driven by the leadership of Fidel Castro or Kim Jong Ill.
Someday you may wish for the foul breath of the masses to cascade our overlords. That day, you’ll be in a First Amendment Zone a quarter of a mile from the stage.
I sense a sort of cynicism in your statement, but seriously, it would be better directed at replacing these people with responsible stewards who wish for the betterment of our society.
While yes, I said there are idiots here, I’m referring to those people whose sense of partisanship outweighs their ability to discuss issues.
Like, for instance (apparently), yourself.
With you last three posts in this thread you have
First, assumed that not wishing to argue with people who won’t listen means we don’t want to ‘mix it up’. It’s not a contest. There will not (should not) be a winner or loser.
Second, declared that I was not worth wasting time on. Also indicating that a discussion is not what you are interested in having.
Third, resorted to a throwaway line again indicating that you have no wish to participate in a discussion.
It’s not like this is something new. I’ve said for years that 90% of Great Debates isn’t worth participating in simply because it becomes a shouting match and not a debate. I am interested in the cheerful exchange of ideas. I am not interested in bickering with someone whose mind is closed. What would the point be?
Eh, for the record I’m not anti-Republican and I actually agree with J. Chance that partisan politics is silly. I respect several politicians based on their qualifications and actions, not what party they happen to be in. I just think Bush and Co. are arrogant and incompetent which is quite possibly the worst two characteristics a leadership can have.
Gee, you write this as if it has already happened. Almost as if you are foaming at the mouth with Bush love. Do you have a mouthful of Bush love, Bricker?
My sense is that people with feces for brains will continue to make predictions about the successes and vindications of George W. Bush based on nothing more than a complete inability to refrain from being imbeciles. It seems only yesterday that we had the Thanksgiving Day crow eating Bush vindication. The surety of David Kay’s smile has faded faster than the Groundhog seeing his shadow. I hope you enjoy your celebratory dance while you can.
The real reason this thread is a bad idea is this: if Bush wins, I’m going to be angry, saddened, etc., etc., but what I’m going to be upset about is the feeling that the economic and political fortunes of the United States are going to be even more thoroughly screwed than they already are, that the environment is even more fucked than it already it is, and that freedom will be that much closer to being a memory in the U.S.
The notion that your gloating is going to be more than a drop in that ocean is truly misplaced. Gloat all you like, in my opinion you’ll be gloating over the further dissolution of American democracy. Enjoy. Really.
I think there is a strong chance Bushco will be deposed if the votes are counted, but I know they won’t be counted (in a legal manner) in a couple of states, and I fear for a lot of other states.
So why throw gasoline on their fire now? As if throwing down the gauntlet now, nine months before the election, is going to change anyone’s mind.
As Harold Wilson said, “a week is a long time in politics.” Nine months is a lifetime. Just about anything can happen between now and then–the economy could boom or bust, the war in Iraq could settle down or blow up, Bush or Kerry could make the gaffe of the century (and I think either is capable of it). It’s way too early for this election to be called.
Again, what’s the upside here? Dragging yourself down to the lowest common denominator of your opponents?
Bricker, your OP kind of reminded me of my college days. Freshman year. When you get these gung-ho conservatives who get all excited about their candidate, but when questioned a little, you realize that the only reason they are for their candidate or party is because their parents trained them to be that way since birth. They had not really studied the issues at all, or had allowed them to be challenged, they merely had been spoon-fed the rhetoric and had adopted the dogma. I don’t believe I am 100% in agreement with any candidate, although [http://www.presidentmatch.com]this](http://www.presidentmatch.com>[url) presidential match says I am 100% with Kerry. I am not saying you are absolutely like this, but many with your rah-rah attitude are.
Give it a try, let us know what it says.
I think I’ll check MPISM’s and see if it has (or not) been posted.
Geez…talk about counting your chickens before the eggs are hatched.
Or perhaps this was just to bolster your own courage?
I take it Bricker that you are one of those privaledged few that really saw some of Bushco’s tax relief. If so, I’m glad for you. But there are many millions who didn’t and come November they will have their say.
I have no idea who will win in November, but I thought I chime in with a little food for thought. I’m 38 and I’ve never voted for a Democrat in my life. Last election I voted Libertarian as a protest because I didn’t like either of them. This time I will be voting for whoever the Democrats put up.
I’m not sure how typical I am, but Bush has pissed off a lot of conservatives. He could be in more trouble than he knows.
Good grief. I’m over 40. I’ve been actively following politics since well before I could vote. I am well aware of the positions I hold, and those of the major candidates. I am most certainly not “programmed” from birth.
Despite my indicating a desire to see the death penalty removed from the land, the link you provided gave me a 100% match with President Bush. I’m not sure I understand that, since Bush favors the death penalty, and during his tenure as governor of Texas presided over quite a few executions.
The program gave me a 38% match to Edwards in the number 2 position, 33% for Kerry in #3 and 28% for Dean in #4.
Bricker, I never got around to accepting your wager when you posted it. If you’re interested, I’d like to posit the wager as I remember it – a bottle of single malt scotch, based on whether President Bush is re-elected or not.
This way, even if I lose the wager, at least I can tell myself that someone’s enjoying a fine whisky and the world isn’t all that bad.
