BTW, DevNull, we would appreciate it if you would cease and desist equating “liberal” with “anti-American” – or, at least, cease treating that as an established fact, without more to back it up. A separate thread on the question might be appropriate. But I should hate to think you were one of this mindless lot (a characterization I can back up).
I take comfort in the belief that anyone who’d use culled-from-talk-radio terms like “leftist, USA-hating rabble,” who’d champion Reagan as the bestest President of our time, and suggest that Dubya is essentially blameless for any damage (damage? What damage? If he did anything bad, surely someone would’ve noticed!) caused by his eight-year reign because he— along with every other President in recent memory (bafflingly, somehow including the Reagan you’ve credited with singlehandedly forcing the release of hostages using the long shadow cast by his colossal testicles and delivering the coup de grâce to Communism)— is really just a marionette whose strings are yanked by shadowy actors unnamed, is tweaking us at least a little. Even if it’s not true, let me cling to my fantasy; the alternative is too horrible to contemplate.
As for discrediting your writings, you’ve left little for me to do. If your point is that Bush isn’t the only one pulling levers in his administration, I’m not sure that insight is particularly revelatory— however, if you’re suggesting that Bush has no more power over the country than a toddler twirling his Playskool steering wheel and pushing the squeaky center horn has control of a actual automobile, then I’m afraid you’ve not advanced a particularly convincing argument. “I think Cheney is running the country, prove me wrong” doesn’t really inspire much of a debate. <Squeak squeak!>
Because it is an observation of groupthink, for the most part. I do not base my understanding on the results, I use such results as a small tool of many to check myself when trying to understand complex scenarios. Every little bit helps.
The thing about such a Google search is that it is not just blogs and whatnot that come up in a search. It is official government documents, news reports, transcribed newscasts, global propaganda, poetry, philosophy, historical documents, poll results, fake poll results, black-ops, homages, school reports, drug-addled ramblings and so on.
For president GW Bush to not show up in such a simply geared Google search does say something to me because it is a traditional cliche that the president of the USA is the most powerful man in the world.
Not this time around though.
“Most powerful man in the world” First Google page results:
The Black Pope
President GW Bush
Vice president Dick Cheney
So what does one learn? That the bulk of the unwashed masses see President GW Bush as the most powerful man in the world, but not the most powerful man in America?
Yes, as contradictory as it appears. The cliche is more powerful than current sentiment.
Sentiment is more powerful than logic when it comes to groupthink.
Well, I’m convinced! Of what, I don’t know, but I’m convinced. That is evidence I simply cannot understand, much less refute. Too many for me, I fold.
I used the term once and I should have qualified the term with “who other people perceive as”. It should have looked like this:
– Why don’t they, then, go after who they perceive as his puppet-masters –
You will notice later on in that very post, I effectively shun the notion of puppet masters, at least to the extent of the fact that numerous people accuse president GW Bush of being a puppet, but spend more time going after him anyway than targeting these mythical puppet-masters.
The ones I am learned on, yes. All of them throughout history, no. If it clears up any confusion, I know full well that the office of the president has Constitutionally etched powers that come with it that must be finalized by the meat computer that fills the suit. I hold in my brain many theories, since I am not privy to the intricacies of beltway politics, that involve keeping the figurehead in line… you know, parade route assassinations, blowjob impeachments… that sort of thing. But they are just that, theories. You all help fill in blanks a bit here in my path to understanding the unwritten truth of how things are really run. Truthfully, as pigheaded as I appear, I am open to just about any thought for study… and study it I will, regardless if you see me acknowledge it either way. Not to be a prick about it, but when Clinton wagged his finger at us and told us that he did not have sex with that woman, I wondered how the hell I subscribed to what was eventually the truth. I fell for his lie. I let go of my carefully studied understanding of how beltway politics work and let me tell you that I will never, ever believe anything again 100%. I would have put money on Clinton that moment. I got burnt. Never again. If that sort of thing can happen, then anything is possible.
Alternatively, the particular phrase you happened to choose is a tautology and one that would never be uttered except in irony regarding the president. It would much more likely that the phrase would nearly always be used as little more than a rhetorical device and never applied to a person actually wielding power. Given the “votes” for Matt Drudge, Justice Kennedy, and Richie Robb, (and do you really believe that any of them are the true shadow government pulling the strings of GWB?), the phrase is claerly never used in the context of identifying actual power.
None of which, with the possible exception of the school reports, would ever have cause to remark that the “the president is the most powerful man in America.” In all the reports I have written addressing the various needs, desires, and requirements for a business to succeed (or avoid failure), I have never once remarked that the CEO or president was “the most powerful man in the corporation.”
It is simply an excessively silly approach to the discussion.
Okay, calm down, Inigo 
From Wikipedia:
– The word can also have more sinister overtones, and refer to a powerless leader who should be exercising full authority, yet is actually being controlled by a more powerful figure
The tendency of this word to drift, like many words that are in a strong process of changed meanings, into the pejorative is beginning to make it unsuitable to apply to a head of state with limited constitutional authority, such that its use may become increasingly inappropriate in referring to monarchs and presidents in parliamentary systems –
I plead drift.
I submit that my brain thinks of president GW Bush as a willing figurehead.
I subscribed to that notion for four years. Myopic and pragmatic were terms thrust on my brain for the early part of his presidency, but I ditched the notion in favor of thinking of him as more of a diversionary accomplice for a much larger group.
As for being bright… Six years now and nada, as far as I can tell. Things have a way of eking out and I can’t think of anything that would compel me to ever use the word “bright”. There is something to be said of his neck thrusts when speaking. God save me if it is a conscious effect he uses at another’s direction, but by my experience it is just a quirky compensator for true passion and will. Like he is just getting it himself as he is speaking about it. I don’t usually delve into mannerisms to base my understandings of a given subject, but his speaking is off the wall and most times I cannot watch him. There is something so wrong with it and I am not buying in to it. I’ll read the transcripts (and even then I am not immune to the neck thrust because I know exactly when he is pulling the stunt).
The only new information I have ever witnessed president GW Bush receive on the fly, in real time, is the time he read a goat book for ten minutes after… or something to the effect of that. As cheesily as his enemies have used the clip, it goes way beyond being green. The man lacked passion for his own office at that moment. I didn’t see a conspirator that day and I did not see an idiot that day. I saw a figurehead that day.
Exactly. Thank you.
I do not give him bright but I definitely do not label him stupid by any means. I do dismiss anyone who subscribes to the stupid label, though.
The word did not drift (in any recent time frame) and I knew how you were using it. I just think you’re wrong. I think you jumped from your self-described naïveté under Clinton (you really believed him? Why?) to a façade of “knowing” cynicism, but I see no evidence that you actually have taken the time and effort to understand either the way the country works or the way the administration works.
You speak darkly of unidentified shadow powers and sneer at people with whom you disagree, (much like a few of your opponents in this thread), but you have not actually provided any reason to believe that your skewed world view corresponds to any factual evidence (again like a few of your opponents).
I have not used the word “liberal” on this board…ever. If you find it in your heart and have the time, please apologize to me for that mistake. I use the term “left-wing” seeing as how I was a flavor of liberal for many years. Libertarian to be exact.
Left wing politics are 90% incompatible with the Constitution of the United States of America. When left-wingers stop being so anti-Constitutional, I will stop equating them with being anti-American.
This country was founded, built, and propelled into superpower status by the bloody fight for individual rights, not collective rights. I am a strict Constitutionalist. I am a dinosaur. Not a perfect dinosaur, but I try my best. I was brought up in an-ultra leftist city during a shitty leftist time and their intense propaganda messed with my head as a young lad. I am still self-deprogramming to this day. I think I am all done then some lie the leftists burnt into my head pops up in the most embarrassing moment. Did you know I thought that the USA gave cootie-infected blankets to Native Americans? I believed this up until I was 35. That sucks. That sucks out loud. No human should have to endure such lies and base their understanding on those lies.
As long as you take comfort from it, then go for it. I wish you well.
Just you, though. I do not endorse taking comfort from beliefs.
Golly, Dev, if you found that revelation shattering…hell, if you found it particularly surprising…you might want to reconsider this whole line of inquiry, it might be a bit rough for you. People fuck around. We’re somewhere between swans and bonobos: we mate for life but with our fingers crossed. That’s why I oppose universal DNA testing, half the marriages in the country would implode, divorce lawyers would have two year waiting lists.
“Why, looky here, honey! The kids DNA most closely matches my brothers! Ain’t that something! I mean, what are the odds?..”
I thought there were limits to chutzpah. I was wrong. I learned. I grew.
On the contrary.
I am enamored in how this country works. As a rugged individual, and a free thinker, I am such a frigging snob in the way that I believe that the rabble has to be dealt with in ways that are limited by our Constitution.
As much as I secretly cheer for the style of underhanded justice that goes on, that our Constitution is designed to keep in check, I will never openly endorse it or even let it pass by without griping about the trangression.
Liddy - Guilty
North - Guilty
Libby - Guilty
But I love them. I love their sacrifice. I love their politics. I love their style. I would NEVER call for any leniency for their sentences in their crimes that they have committed against our country, the crimes they have committed against their Constitutionally sworn offices. I love them for the same reason people love Mafia movies. Human nature was not meant to be restrained by laws and the glory goes to those who can not only handle the constraints on one hand, but forge a path that is, for lack of a better term, pretty fucking cool.
This opens me up, obviously, to being a hypocrite. No matter. to this day, no government is perfect but our country is the greatest on the planet for the time being and I like being able to be who I want to be and bask in the freedom afforded to me by the founders and fighters.
A little secret about me… shhhhhhh… I detest people who play devil’s advocate but I am so into myself that I have a huge reserve of ego that can take being wrong. I can be dead wrong and admit it without suffering a bit. This makes me appear, among other things, pigheaded and kamikaze at times, but by no means as bad as most netizens. The point is, that I am not promoting my thoughts… I am TESTING them. I am trusting many of you to play along likewise. This is how debate should work, even though it is rare nowadays.
Bottom line is that every thought I write down here is mine. I am not testing random thoughts, I am testing my own. Check closer at my sneers. The main thrust of my debates involve scenarios where no factual evidence is available… not that it stops certain people from writing signs and making puppets and marching in protests.
Speak for yourself, E.
Unlike the lower order of animals you have relegated yourself to in comparison, I have control of my destiny and it should be of no surprise that I chose this board to tickle and expand/test a belief of mine. The rules are fair here and the intelligence is through the roof… present company included… for the most part.
Lay off the self-deprecating comparison to violent birds and sexualcentric primates and get back to the human side of debate… you know, the practical and real. I was rather enjoying the back and forth until that point.
If I wanted to score self-serving political points, I would start in the pit.
Gotta admit, Tony Soprano was a cool guy. Sure he lied, cheated, stole, and murdered, but I still can’t believe he was ignominiously faded to black to a Journey song, for chrissakes. Whattayagonnado? I also recall seeing on A&E that even Richard “Night Stalker” Ramirez had a gaggle of admiring groupies, so you’re certainly not all alone if criminal behavior moistens your panties.
Speaking of sad overlords, they say that in some distant galaxy there exists an alien race whose entire social order and rule of law is based upon the results of Google searches. They’re also said to be mean as hell with an insatiable taste for “long pork,” but I think we’re safe as long as easiest planet colonization keeps turning up hits for planets other than Earth.
If this is true, how come it is the right wingers who are so dissatisfied with the Constitution, they are always trying to change it:
[list=*]
[li] anti-gay marriage amendment [/li][li]anti-flag burning amendment[/li][li]anti-abortion amendment[/li][li]school prayer & pledge of allegiance amendment[/li][li]ensure confirmation of presidential appointees amendment[/li][li]tax increase limitation amendment[/li][li]restrict U.S. birthright citizenship amendment[/li][li]English as the official language amendment[/li][/list]
As a liberal I like our Constitution the way it is; how about you, Dev?
Semantics call.
A leader of the free world only wields power that is popular… not legal.
A leader of America, as we have been speaking of in explicit terms, is an elected official who wields powers etched out in the Constitution of our country… whether that leaders chooses to delegate or act.
Popular is the operative word here. Yes. It is EXACTLY what I was getting at throughout the thread… as haphazardly as my thoughts have been solidified into posts.
I’ll rest my laurels, for the time being, on my posit that a Google search CAN be an effective research tool for groupthink and understanding of how things really work in not only this country, but apparently the world.
Yeah, but if you Google “To Serve Man”…
(Read the whole post before commenting. I do not want to retype anything.)
Because in my humble opinion, right-wing politics are 89% incompatible with the Constitution of the United States of America. I am simply on the side of the most righteous. (half joking)
But seriously. Those right-wing stances, and they are pretty much fully right-wing stances, yes, are stunts that are fluffery to cater to the voter base. They are not firmly held beliefs that would radically change our nation in the scope of things. I would spit on them if they did not actually help build legal precedent before something really nasty comes along. I give the same courtesy to half the argle-bargle the ACLU makes hay with. Well… a little less than half… and my vocal opposition to the half I detest is correspondingly louder than what I detest from my side… but I digress.
I am not here to argue why I chose a right-wing existence for the time being, and truth be know I could counter each of those right-wing movements to an equal left-wing atrocity. I can burn a flag but not engage in “hate speech”? I can abort a human fetus but not club a dumbass squirrel on my own property? Muslims get footbaths in colleges but the Ten Commandments are not allowed in court?
Yours are very valid debates, but not here. Not this thread. I never claimed that right-wingers are overly concerned with the Constitution of the USA… only that left-wingers are less concerned in the scope of my tastes and sensibilities overall when it comes to the founding fathers’ intents (Second Amendment…cough…cough). YMMV. I am a right-winger, but if it helps, just picture me as the elf who wanted to be a dentist. Elves are supposed to make toys, but once in a while one wants to be dentist. I am a lot cooler to the concerns of the left than you may imagine but I chose my side due to the sheer collectivity-humping that reeks from the left.
You’re allowed to engage in hate speech. Should the government try to shut your hate speech down, you could turn to the ACLU for help. They’ll defend you just as strongly as they defend flag-burners. Of course if you start railing against minorities people have the right to object and argue with you, or walk away in disgust. But it’s your right to do so, under the first amendment.
I certainly hope you’re allowed to kill pests on your property. Why wouldn’t you be? I got a cat to deal with my mouse problem, and she’s killed dozens of them. I think if you club a squirrel to death for the sheer joy of it, most people would be pretty disgusted at your rank sadism.
As for Muslims getting footbaths, I have no idea what that means. Everyone should bathe their feet, and the rest of their body too. The Ten Commandments should not be allowed in court for a variety of fairly obvious first-amendment reasons.