Do you have anything to back that up? Is the state of the Union stronger now than in 1978? 1985? 1993? 1999? Or weaker? Whacha got?
No, I love how things suck.
But he gets an A+ for effort–a grade he’s rarely if ever achieved elsewhere in his life.
I’m a victim of your stupidity if nothing else. Get a fucking clue!
You have a point. There are many things now that are going to be big in the future, and people recognize that. One you hear about almost daily: Biotech. Cloning, stem cell treatments. Nanotechnology. People didn’t just blow off the computer in the late 70s. Hell, at the time I had a Sharp pocket calculator and thought it was pretty neato.
But the 70s were still a time of malaise in the country: inflation, unemployment, and realistic worries about the country during and in the wake of Watergate. Plus the Viet Nam War for a large chunk of the decade. The Iran Hostage Crisis. (And Reagan was a big part of getting us out that malaise through a certain something special in his leadership, though I don’t think all his policies were great. See, I’m not a “Liberal” spitting out “Liberal” talking points; I’m a socialist, a lefty, but not a “Liberal.”)
No, life doesn’t suck totally; my life is pretty good. That’s not the point! The point is that the political leadership in this country is an absolute abomination. Can’t you take off your “Conservative” blinders and fucking get that?
Dude, your president is making an impact on everyone on the planet, and no, it’s not “life-affirming”; it’s an up-your-ass fucking rape of world, goddamn it!
And had we not helped defeat the Germans, there might never have been a WWII. It’s the law of unintended consequences.
Also, sometimes people at the time get it right. The consensus on Viet Nam in 1970 was that it was a big fucking mess, a waste of money, and bad for both us and the people we were bombing the fuck out of. That viewpoint is only stronger today.
My worldview was that the US was committed to justice and not doing things like, I dunno, torturing people.
Who was it that said we weren’t going to do nation building. Whose worldview was that?
I understand it was rhetoric. Maybe I should start a GD or something about the savings rate. In fact, I will. I’m honestly curious about why this is a governmental problem.
I’m not Bush’s biggest fan by any means, but it seems to me that the OP is flaming Bush for the wrong thing. I mean, given that he’s either made mistakes or launched into a Machiavellian conspiracy for power (depending on who you listen to), is it reasonable now to expect him to say anything else in the biggest speech a President makes? What do you expect him to say? “The union is on the verge of collapse, thanks to my incompetence [and/or malice]. I will now turn myself in to law enforcement for crimes against humanity.” What President would say ANYTHING other than that, no matter what the circumstances?
I think the OP’s better served flaming him for the root causes and actions, but I think he’s realized that it’s all been done already. But don’t worry; I’m sure he’ll do or say something completely outrageous soon.
No major dissent? When half the electorate is unhappy, that seems pretty major to me. But maybe I’m being nitpicky.
But the rest of your post is just plain-out bullshit. There’s no civil war, hurrah for us. And the very major war that we are fighting right now? That’s not relevant to our strength as a country! Even though that war is draining our coffers, the goodwill of our international friends, and inciting anti-American hatred. Not to mention, severely wounding tens of Americans (who are going to need to be cared for somehow) and killing thousands of others.
This is the argument of a goddamn fool.
Why are Americans so arrogant to believe that all that matters is what happens within our borders?
Even if you ignore the war and the unethical stuff we’re doing in the name of war, I don’t really see how our country is doing alright. The economy is doing superific…just tell that to the hundreds of thousands of folks who just found out they’re being laid off, and all the college students who are having to pony up huge increases in their tuition costs. We’re doing a great job…just tell that to the millions of Katrina victims who are still waiting for the federal government to lend a helping hand, and all those old, sick people beating their heads against the wall, trying their hardest to figure out how to get much-needed drugs. Let’s hi-five each other…as we turn a blind eye to blatant civil liberties violations (but they better not touch mah guns!). I’m so happy about that Abramoff scandal and the fact that oil companies are making money hand over fist while we continue to pull out our pockets at the pump.
I’m so thrilled about the state of the Union that I’m not going to even tune into it. I don’t want to have nightmares.
I don’t blame Bush for all the shit. I despise the man, but I’m not irrational with my hatred. I know he can’t control the weather or feed the multitudes from a loaf of bread and a couple of fish. However, I will be very angry if he paints a rosy picture and if he tries to convince us that we’re in la-la land. He pulls that patronizing, father-knows-best shit all the time…and it doesn’t work on me. I know things could be worse (we could be Iraq), but I know the state of the Union isn’t strong, stronger, or relatively strong. It’s none of the above.
I got a raise this year, but from where I’m sitting we don’t have anything to be proud of. The economy may be doing better, John Mace, but money isn’t everything. Everything else sucks, IMHO.
Biotech will be big. Just not today. The ethics alone are what is holding back full-scale implementation. You can take the easy shot at fundies, but that isn’t the biggest hurdle. If it was there would be dozens of countries doing exactly what you want them to be doing. Cases like the South Korean researcher extend the debate, and rightly so, IMO. True, there are countries that are further in developing the use of biotech, but it’s still in it’s infancy. The US isn’t falling behind in knowledge, we’re hampered from accelerated progress. Biotech (stem-cell research especially) will go forward in the US. And when it does, look out. It will explode in usefulness. You can bet your ass that if Jeb developes cancer, George will want every treatment available. It’s a matter of using the science ethically. Someone once said, “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.” Either that or Bush really wants people to die. That’s rhetoric, but I doubt you beleive it in your heart.
Whatever the case, this scientific development alone means you are living in the most exciting time since the control of fire. The US isn’t yet on the forefront, but our scientists are studying it and will soon, I think, be able to set a boatload of benchmarks.
They were called Reagan Democrats. Many were liberal but saw his vision as a better course. I have no problem with someone that is liberal. I just rag on the extreme faction. Much like the left ragging on the extreme right. It’s human nature and keeps us ponying up the $15 each year. See? We’re all helping the economy. And Cecil’s bar tab. 
Hey, I’ve got plenty of problems with Bush. The drug program and amnesty not the least of them. Also, I’d prefer simplification of the tax code over a tax cut. But seeing the former is impossible, I’ll take the latter. And he must be Superman. He’s able to fuck up the lives of 6 billion people at once? Jesus, even I didn’t think he was that powerful and persuasive. I can think of a few governments that are actually capable of touching off WWII and seem to actively be persuing it, but if the conservative platform is the make-or-break, I guess you have a point.
Nope, because then we wouldn’t be dealing with Europe. We’d be buying $80 Benz’ and speaking Deutsch. Hitler had no ambition for domination of the US. (Nope, not Godwin. A direct reply to the issue stated.)
Kinda like today when people still make an argument that not fighting WWI would have been better? :dubious:
Marshall?
Good to see you’re paying attention as usual.
Why is high unemployment, or sluggish growth, or inflation, or recession, or negative wage growth, or any of a host of other unpleasant economic phenomena a governmental problem?
'Cause the government is supposedly implementing economic policies that increase prosperity for its citizens. Economic problems that impede prosperity imply that the government isn’t performing this job successfully.
Sure, you could treat any of these problems as simply a widespread failure of personal responsibility. When unemployment is high, it’s because workers are doing their jobs poorly and getting fired. When growth is slow, it’s because workers aren’t working hard enough and increasing their productivity. When wages drop, it’s because workers are slacking off and getting their pay docked. When the savings rate falls below zero, it’s because consumers have suddenly turned into greedy spendthrifts who demand goodies they can’t afford. Uh-huh. Sure it is.
But, when the economy DOES begin to swing the other way, imagine the investment oppurtunities!
We agree.
We don’t agree. The technology is amazing but the benefits will be incremental. That is, unless they really come up with cures for cancer and heart disease, things that make the average person say, “A lot of my fears and/or problems just disappeared.”
He’s not persuasive; he’s a joke. But he’s supported by “dead-enders” (thank you, Rumsfeld) who will always support the guy on the right because they see him as more likely to effect their right/fundie agenda.
Bush is fucking up the world on a very large scale. He’s got the US clawing at itself politically even when he could be a uniter (the very opposite of the Reagan effect), and he’s got us into the war which is pretty much a sufficient condition for malaise. Other countries are involved, either getting shot at along with us or playing the shootee. The US malaise doesn’t help the world in any way. Yeah, Bush is responsible for a lot.
Wha’? I’m saying that if the US hadn’t helped the Allies in WWI then it is possible that one of several other outcomes might have occured in which a bitch-beaten and bitter Germany didn’t give birth to Hitler and the Reich: 1) Germany wins, 2) The war is called a draw with face saved on both sides, 3) The war of attrition continues and both sides are made too weak to fight over the long term, etc. Also, Japan was on the side of the Allies and was, conversely, made stronger by being a victor. Had the Entente won, Germany might have remained civilized and the growing power of Japan curtailed.
In any case, the point really isn’t whether it was a moral choice for the US to take the side of the Allies; the point, rather, is that you never know what’s going to happen.
The Middle East is such a fucked up mess to begin with, with such a lack of modern civilization and values, that no student of history (and Bush is no student of anything) could imagine that we could just go in there and do the “right thing” and thereafter “good things” would happen. No matter what, it’s going to be a crap shoot, and right now it’s a very expensive game of craps.
Ah, no. Bush in the 2000 campaign explicitly said that he would not do nation-building. Kind of like “no new taxes” but a far more dire promise to break.
Oh please. Do you have an clue what the US economy produces? And what coffers are being drained? The US will not collapse if a few social program are curtailed. It is a foreign war (I’m sure 50 years ago Americans would laugh in your face if you called it an actual war). We are spending money and losing minimal lives. Do you remember when we actually fought wars that killed 10’s of thousands of our troops? I don’t think the Union was in threat then either. The sky is not falling Chicken Little. None of our international friends are threatening any kind of censure or punitive measures towards the US. Do you remember the civil rights era? Do you remember the depressions of the 20’s 70’s and 80’s? This aint even close darling. Get your knickers out of a knot and look at the real world. Not what is fed to you through blogs. “Half of the people are unhappy”, eh? You do know that changes every time a poll is produced right? that doesn’t reflect the strength of the country. It reflects whch blowhards get enough facetime on TV and which morons are watching.
Because we are talking about the state of the Union, dipshit. Not the state of our International Dancecard.
I’d like to play a drinking game tomorrow night in which I take a shot of whiskey every time Bush lies out of his ass, but I am afraid I would die of alcohol poisoning within the hour. 
This is why I want the Iraqi’s to take control of their country for the first time in decades. The war itself was to oust Hussein, not make Iraq Mini-America. We were still at war with Iraq when the offensive was launched. (Yes, an offensive, not an invasion.) There was no truce signed in '91. It was a cease-fire. That’s why Iraq had to follow all the rules imposed on it. Hussein broke just about every agreement he agreed to, and continued to kill cilvilians. (Notes glaring lack of Iraqis killed by Hussein cites.)
Hussein had over a decade to comply with what he agreed to. After over a decade of bribes and kickbacks to keep the UN off his back (not to mention flat-out kicking them out of the country) it was time to enforce the terms of ending the fighting.
No, I’m not sitting here masturbating over the deaths of soldiers and civilians. War is always the last resort. Always. But there are times when it is necessary. In this case, we were still at war with Iraq when the offensive was launched. Bush didn’t just wake up one morning and stub his toe, declaring in a fit of rage that war was the correct course of action. Hussein chose to act as he did concerning the terms of keeping hellfire raining down upon him. He lost.
Considering how Hussein acted towards his own countrymen, I find it difficult to understand how you claim him to be a better leader than Bush.
Look, I understand where you’re coming from. I can appreciate the sentiment and beliefs you have. They are definately valid. But keep in mind the war is against Saddam’s regime, not the Iraqi people. Bush is not worse for the Iraqis than Hussein. And we won’t be running the country for 20+ years.
I hope that better explains my opposition to your view and trust you’ll see it as an argument, not a fight. We’re going to disagree on the fundamentals of it, that’s obvious, but maybe we’ll reach some sort of understanding. Hope springs eternal.
That was cute. Thanks for sharing. :rolleyes:
Let me throw a seeming softball to the Bush supporters: Can you name some objective ways in which the United States is better off now than it was when Bush became President?
The rules:
It has to be objective - saying America “feels better” or is “stronger” doesn’t count unless you can back it up with numbers.
It has to be non-partisan - saying America is better because the Republicans are in charge and it’s good when the Republicans are in charge because then America is better is a circular argument.
It can’t be personal - we’re happy that you’ve got a new job and are getting laid since Bush took office, but we’re looking for something a little more general.
It can’t be hypothetical - no speculating on what might have happened in alternate timelines or what will happen in the future.
I landed a full-time job with a retirement plan, stock options in the 3rd largest company in the world, and solid job security doing software troubleshooting.
All in what most of you would consider a shitty place to live with no job prospects.
I’ll have to go Tony Robbins and say “If I can, you can.”
You may not have the option of working an unskilled job making $50k a year with a gravy benny plan, but there are options.
I know that if you’re willing to move to North Dakota you can get trained to weld and work for Bobcat making $17.60 an hour. And they pay you $13.65 for the training period. I realize that’s an insult wage to many bitching about the economy, so that negates the pay.
If you can make that in rural ND, I’d say there’s ample opportunity in other areas of the country.
Shut the fuck up about not being able to find a job that offers you the comforts you demand. Sometimes you have to follow the money. The jobs don’t come to you. Government isn’t there to provide a job. Government is there to stay out of the way allowing companies to hire people while making sure the roads are suitable for people to get to work. To pay the taxes.
Goverment serves us the basics, not to make sure we have a big screen.
Care to show us how we’re worse off than 10 or 20 years ago? Did Clinton commadeer the greatest economy in history only to see it lost in 6 years? Is the American economy really that fragile?
I think not. Simplify your life, you’ll see a huge surplus in income. Or pay for all the goodies, the debt will reflect how bad the economy is concerning savings. You’re writing the check.
I’ve never argued that the war wasn’t “permissible,” merely that it was
So your arguments mean precisely jack shit.
No, indeed I think he was planning it or at least desired to do it before he was even elected president.
Who’s ever made that claim?!
Um, whom are we fighting now, pray tell–Saddam’s regime?
We’ve precipiated a civil war that looks like it’s only going to get worse. In reality, Iraq was an artificial nation from the beginning. Like Yugoslavia, it was probably doomed to break up once no longer controlled by a dictator. Saddam was rotten, civil war is and will be rotten. At the end of the day our plan sucked, and that’s our fault, not Saddam’s.
If we aren’t, then there won’t be an Iraq.
Sorry, no, I don’t get your position. I don’t see how the war was in any way waged in a wise or even self-serving fashion (Bush-serving, perhaps). It was an other-fuck and a self-fuck.
Duffer, you duffed Little Nemo’s rather simple question.
Er…so because you’re personally doing well, there’s no problem? That seems…well…illogical.
Speaking personally, I’m a dancer in Dallas, Texas, and there’s alot of (male-dominated) big business here, all of whom love paying to see titties right up close and in their face, so I’m doing well…and my hubby actually got a job last year entirely because of the Iraq War.
He’s working for AIG processing the workman’s comps claims of all the oil workers/rebuilders/private contractors over there, he’s making the best pay he’s ever made, a killer benefits package, 2 weeks vacation, etc. (And you really don’t want to hear the stories he comes home with. Really.)
So we’re both doing ok…and he’s got his job entirely because we got ourselves into this damn fool war. But I sure don’t think the two of us should be a benchmark for how well our economy is doing.
The two of us are doing alright, but a large number of our friends have been having a very hard time the last year or two. And these aren’t dummies, these are electrical engineers, IT guys, guys who previously were making 2-3 times what my hubby is. There’s been layoffs, closures, etc etc. Dallas has been in a rough place in the job market the last year or so, and if you think differently, you’re fooling yourself.
Hell, one of our friends who used to make 100k+ bennies a year as an IT guy at a very large company here is currently working as a bar bouncer because there just hasn’t been anything for someone of his skillset, and no one else has been willing to hire him simply because he was so overqualified for the jobs he applied for after he got laid off.
We just got lucky, is all. He got hired due to one of his friends getting a job at AIG and getting him in, and I have genetics on my side. But we shouldn’t be and aren’t holding ourselves up as the benchmark of America’s economy.
The jobs I mentioned (in a very small area) weren’t being offered 7 years ago. Maybe it was a carryover of Clinton’s policies? Or maybe an anomoly of the Republicans holding a majority in Congress at the time? Maybe it was people doing a job without finding shit to bitch about?
The post wasn’t “simple”. To you, it may seem that way. There is a component in economics that you need to understand.
Looking at last week’s numbers doesn’t say a lot. The internet boom showed the US was on the brink of unending economic domination. How’s that working out?
I guess we just won’t agree on it.
Excuse me while I search for the document Saddam signed ending the war. It’s probably the page after the one showing he was calling for your head.