Bush/Cheney divide?

It shows that the most vocal Bush supporters are dumb. It doesn’t say anything about the people who just chilled. It doesn’t influence my opinion of all the dumb liberals I saw parading around New York saying dumbass shit and ignoring any conflicting ideas to what they were saying. I’m not saying that Bush supporters are smart, only that Kerry supporters are equally dumb. Anyone that sticks to the party line is stupid. IMO.


One MIGHT think that sooner or later, reality would set in. I guess not though. I wonder who is dumber, if the reports, documention, evidence, and facts all point to the one thing and yet people refuse to reconsider. One has to wonder which side’s stories turned out to be closer to the truth.
[Hypersil]This is not happening. We are not sinking. Glub glub[?Hypersil]

Dumb? I’m not sure that’s quite the right word. IMHO, Mr Eric Blair came up with something a bit more accurate in 1949:

(From A Newspeak Dictionary, an appendix to my dog-eared copy of 1984.)

Yes, I’m aware that on the surface “protective stupidity” sounds much the same as “dumb.” But I look at the former as more of a defense mechanism than a genetic trait.

Pssst … rumor has it W is drinking again.

Explains the blackouts, eh?

Pass it on!

To return (slightly) back to the OP, the rumor I’ve heard is that there’s this thing called a wagon and somebody has slipped off of it.

I repeat, just a 2nd hand rumor, but if true, I think it would be very unfortunate for everyone.

And no, I didn’t hear it from Spiff! :smack:

Given the “glowing success” that is Bush, maybe extreme drinking might be an improvement.

That’s a single item in, of all things, the National Enquirer. If it’s invented, which you should suspect, it wouldn’t be the first time. Some years ago, they lost a huge libel judgment to Carol Burnett for making up a story about *her * being drunk.

Even so, it might be an improvement.

By the way, anybody see this news story?

I could imagine that such things would be a lil’ bit stressful.

Actually, that’s not where I heard it either.

But, you have made me fell properly chastised for spreading rumors. :frowning:

On the other hand, they did break the Bill and Monica story IIRC.

I must re-read Orwell soon. That so explains so many fruitless political arguments I’ve been in …

Well, what exactly do you propose we do about about it? The “accountability moment” for GWB was a year ago. There were plenty of folks back then pointing out that GWB was incompetent and weak – it wasn’t that hard to suss out. But people were so wrapped up in the myth of the Great Wartime Leader that they voted for him against all the evidence to the contrary. Now the wheels are coming off the wagon and we’re stuck with him for three more years.

Personally I think our only distant hope is a Democratic sweep in 2006 leading to immediately impeachment proceedings. And the only way that’s remotely possible is to tar the Congressional Republicans with every Bush screw-up under the sun. I want them to pay the political price for covering his sorry ass.

You call it partisan whingeing. I call it taking the first step toward fixing this mess.

The problem with partisan whingeing is this. There are lots of Republicans coming around to seeing that Bush is an idiot. If the Democrats turn this into a Republican witch hunt it will backfire, and you’ll find a new Republican solidarity possibly.

I’d hate to see that.

Regardless I feel both parties failed us, and the only thing TO DO, is think long-term as to how we are going to fix all this. People thinking on the short term is what got us into this predicament in the first place. Most people can’t see past the next election. I’m more interested in shifting the culture overall than taking sides.


I never claimed being dumb was genetic. I think most of the time it’s willful ignorance, or a crimestop.


Shifting it where?

All this talk about non-partisanship and not taking sides is bullshit. Any attempt to shift the culture, in any direction, is going to involve taking sides. Maybe not specifically with the Republicans or the Democrats, but with a particular set of values and politics, or a particular worldview. There’s no way that everyone is going to agree on how things should be done, so partisanship for certain ideas and ideals is inevitable.

The claim to non-partisanship or moderation is too often, i think, and attempt to either sit on the status quo (after all, if we don’t fight about things, they’ll probably stay pretty much exactly the way they are), or it’s an attempt to claim that a particular political position or worldview is somehow neutral and objective, and that any contrary positions are simply partisan.

The problem isn’t just Bush. It’s the Republican Congressional leadership that’s been covering for him as well. They’re covering for him even now, stonewalling on Iraq intelligence, stonewalling on Libby, stonewalling on torture.

Yes, there is some blame to be assigned to both sides. But not equally. And as long as the Republican leadership continues to pretend that we don’t have a major problem in the White House, more and more blame will shift onto their plate.

Right now the Republicans in Congress are sitting on their hands. The Democrats are not. So if you want to see some changes, maybe you should start pulling for the side who’s actually trying to change things … hmmmm?

If you want to shift the culture, you’ve GOT TO TAKE A SIDE. Sure, maybe the Democrats don’t sync up exactly with every one of your political positions. But if you’re really that worried about what’s going on in the White House, why not help the side that’s fighting that fight?

Just last week Harry Reid went to the wall to shame the Republican leadership in Congress into moving forward with the investigation of how the White House misused intelligence in the run up to the war. That’s a serious concrete step toward forcing the nation to honestly take stock of the situation we’re in. Is it partisan whinging to cheer him on?

That’s why Bush’s approval rating amongst republicans is still hanging at ~76%, right?

After all the “Are you with me or against me” rhetoric, it’s strange now that shit may hit the fan (I hope), the people who initially TRIED to polarize everything under the sun suddenly want to be conciliatory. It smells like blood in the water (but I am an optimist).

It isn’t partisan at all. If the case to be made is that the USA was lied to and manipulated into war for personal glory, personal profit or pure poltical expediency, then it is not partisan whining, it is good old patriotism to impeach, indict, and convict the traitors who did it. - Usint “traitor” in the most general sense, not in the legalistic sense - I clarify, to avoid semantic derailments.