Is It Time to Impeach Bush for Incompetence?

[BrainGlutton]

@elucidator

Difference being, a clear conscience. For is it not written that “whatsoever shall go around, verily, therefore shall it come around”.

Aye, but 'tis a False Scripture forsooth.

[elucidator]

@John Mace

If you want to debate whether the Republican party and/or Bush’s administration broke some rules in the last election, you won’t be debating against me. But that’s not what I’m talking about here. I’m talking about whether the election in 2004 was “stolen” or not…

So…they cheated, but not that much? Would have if they could have, but couldn’t, so innocent? Hey, if it works for you.

…If the majority of the Dems in the Senate say they think the election was stolen, I’ll man the barracades with you. In fact, I’ll take the first shift!

Well, I dunno. Maybe in the Libertarian Auxilliary.

[Least_Original_User_Name_Ever]

@John Mace

So, we’re talking about “cutesiness” now… Show me precisely how many votes have been definitively determined in a court of law to have been defrauded. Otherwise, all you’ve got is a bunch of empty accusation.

Whine all you want, the fact is Kerry lost. The first thing the Democrats have to do in order to win next time is to recognize that fact.

Did you fall asleep during the concession speech.

[Carol_Stream]

@BrainGlutton

You were flat wrong in assuming “fighting ignorance” = “striving for balance of opinion.”

Are you saying that there’s a knowledgeable “correct” way to vote, and an ignorant “wrong” way?

Because that’s the feeling I’m getting from your posts.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Carol Stream

Are you saying that there’s a knowledgeable “correct” way to vote, and an ignorant “wrong” way?

I’d say that’s absolutely correct.

[Garfield226]

@Carol Stream

Are you saying that there’s a knowledgeable “correct” way to vote, and an ignorant “wrong” way?

Sure there is. Just ask anyone in Florida who used a butterfly ballot.

[BrainGlutton]

@Carol Stream

Are you saying that there’s a knowledgeable “correct” way to vote, and an ignorant “wrong” way?

No, I’m saying “fighting ignorance” != “fairness and balance.”

Giving creatonists equal time with, well, scientists in biology classes would be balanced, but it would also be stupid.

[BrainGlutton]

@Carol Stream

Are you saying that there’s a knowledgeable “correct” way to vote, and an ignorant “wrong” way?

As for voting as such, it’s rarely that simple. Some voters are heavily influenced by cultural factors and values; values cannot be easily classified as “knowledgeable” or “ignorant.” OTOH, the Pubs have been very successful these last few cycles in persuading a lot of poor and working-class Americans to vote on their cultural-conservative values even though that means they’re voting against their own economic interests, and that is exploiting ignorance.

I’ve argued before that if the Dems really want to win, they need to downplay cultural liberalism and focus on economic populism. Gay marriage will be legal eventually, but working people need good-paying jobs with benefits now.

[Evil_Captor]

@BrainGlutton

I’ve argued before that if the Dems really want to win, they need to downplay cultural liberalism and focus on economic populism. Gay marriage will be legal eventually, but working people need good-paying jobs with benefits now.

Exactly. There has to be some education before gay marriage is anythign but an albatross around Dems’ necks. Going with economic populism is an excellent plan. I’d say the middle class is distressed enough by now that the Dems can actually score points with them by putting the Pubs properly in the corner as “the party of the rich of us.”

The only problem I see is this: given that the American lower class has swallowed the Pubbie line whole on “gay marriage is more important than your kids’ chances of getting a good job” what basis do we have for assuming that any rational line by the Dems will work?

Still, gay marriage = loser issue for Dems is so fricking obvious.

[Cardinal]

@BrainGlutton

OTOH, the Pubs have been very successful these last few cycles in persuading a lot of poor and working-class Americans to vote on their cultural-conservative values even though that means they’re voting against their own economic interests, and that is exploiting ignorance.

Ok, seriously, that comes off a bit “You know those dumb lower classes. They’re SO dumb that they vote wrong. If only they were smart enough to vote like I tell them.”

[elucidator]

BG is a latte-drinking, Vovlo driving, Birkenstock wearing nattering nabob of negativism? Who knew?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Cardinal

Ok, seriously, that comes off a bit “You know those dumb lower classes. They’re SO dumb that they vote wrong. If only they were smart enough to vote like I tell them.”

Well there is some truth to that. The majority of them are not particularly well-informed and they can be manipulated into voting against their own economic interests (or even their own civil rights) by distracting them with non-issues that appeal to their cultural and religious bigotries. T

And they ARE pretty stupid, there’s no denying it. Look at the surveys which routinely show how many of them think that Iraq had WMD or was involved in 9/11. Look how many of them believe in stuff like angels and creationism. They’re ignorant, superstitious rabble and the GOP knows just how to appeal to them.

[Cardinal]

@Diogenes the Cynic

And they ARE pretty stupid, there’s no denying it. Look at the surveys which routinely show how many of them think that Iraq had WMD or was involved in 9/11. Look how many of them believe in stuff like angels and creationism. They’re ignorant, superstitious rabble and the GOP knows just how to appeal to them.

Bolding mine.

You know you’ve officially crossed the line, right?

[BrainGlutton]

@Cardinal

Ok, seriously, that comes off a bit “You know those dumb lower classes. They’re SO dumb that they vote wrong. If only they were smart enough to vote like I tell them.”

If I thought voting Pub were the smart thing to do, I’d be doing that. What else can you reasonably expect me to think but that it’s “wrong”?

No, I’m wishing the Dems were smart enough to craft a message that appeals to Bubba without sacrificing their historic commitment to serving Bubba’s actual interests.

I’m taking the name “Bubba,” BTW, from Foxes in the Henhouse: How the Republicans Stole the South and the Heartland and What the Democrats Must Do to Run 'em Out, a new book by Steve Jarding and Dave “Mudcat” Sanders – who use the word in a good way, drawing a cultural distinction between “Bubbas” and “rednecks.”

Democratic elitists have stereotyped Bubbas to the point many think all Bubbas are rednecks, but this is far from the truth. Bubba is easily distinguishable from a redneck. In fact, there are few commonities between the two. Bubbas and rednecks have been equally hard hit on the economic front, each despise government intrusion into their day-to-day culture and lives, and overwhelming numbers of both pull for Dale Earnhardt Jr. Once Bubba trusts a Democrat enough to listen, the economic argument is easy to win. As far as “government intrusion” is concerned, while Democrats have allowed the Republicans to falsely paint us as “government intruders,” the Terry Shiavo incident suggested with certainty just the opposite. Bubba needs to be reminded of the Schiavo spectacle and the Democrats need to be the ones doing the reminding. As for the issue of Dale Jr., we don’t have an answer, because like Bubba and the rednecks, we love racing, too.

But the differences between Bubba and the redneck are many. In the world of campaigning, the most important is that Bubba is registered to vote. On the other hand, rednecks can’t or won’t vote. They can’t vote for any number of reasons – domestic violence, auto theft, every kind of auto part theft, breaking and entering, entering and breaking, shooting deer at night, selling bear parts in the Far East, 200 bad checks all less than ten dollars each, meth sales, and of course, another several thousand or so alcohol-related crimes. And then most rednecks who can vote, don’t, they’re simply too ignorant to care.

Whether he goes to church or not, Bubba has an ingrained belief in the power of the Almighty. Churchgoing Bubbas (and there are many) keep God in their hearts, not one their sleeves, while churchgoing rednecks wear rhinestone crosses, ask you constantly if you know Jesus, and, of course, bumper-sticker their vehicles with displays of spiritual self-righteousness. . . . Bubba’s faith manifests itself in strong family values and bonds.

Although Bubba takes one week of his two-week vacation to hunt deer, he always spends a week with his family in the summer. Rednecks hunt both weeks. . . . When his kid is having trouble in school, Bubba says, “You better cut out this nonsense or I’m gonna fix it and you ain’t gonna like it.” A redneck’s kid falls behind, and he says, “Quit. You’ve already wasted too much damned time. Get yourself a job.”

Although the word “environmentalist” conjures up thoughts of “tree huggers,” Bubba feels strongly about resource conservation, air and water quality, and won’t litter. While Bubba throws his own beer cans in the back of his pickup, a redneck throws his out the window. . . .

Although he may disagree with another’s beliefs, Bubba is tolerant of other people’s opinions, while a redneck only tolerates another redneck. . . . In the South, when Bubba sees a Confederate flag, he thinks of “Southern Pride and Valor,” while a redneck thinks of “White Pride.”

As far as gay rights are concerned, Bubba may not totally understand it, but as long as nobody bothers Bubba, Bubba’s spirit of individual liberties says, “It’s their mouth, they can haul coal in it if they want to.” In fact, Democrats could help neutralize the Republican-built wedge issue of gay marriage if they would simply declare it a “states’ rights issue.” Bubba would forget it. . . .

As far as getting Bubba back into the “big tent,” it’s simple, but it’s not easy. Convincing the liberal intellectual wing of the part who spout “tolerance” to actually have some towards Bubba is a formidable task. However, as losses mount, who knows? The truth is Bubba has been voting for Republicans. But rural America’s institutional memoryu is still clearly imprinted with Democratic New Deal politics. Get through the culture with true tolerance, give Bubba a cause. and he will pull the “D” lever. In many areas of rural America it has become culturally and socially unacceptable to be a Democrat so it may be a while before he tells anybody . . . but he will pull the “D” lever. Stick your nose up at Bubba, give him no causes, and he’ll vote for the Republican for cultural and social reasons alone.

@elucidator

BG is a latte-drinking, Vovlo driving, Birkenstock wearing nattering nabob of negativism? Who knew?

FTR, I take my coffee black, drive a Toyota Camry, and lost track of my only pair of Birkenstocks years ago.

[BrainGlutton]

@Cardinal

Bolding mine.

You know you’ve officially crossed the line, right?

:dubious: What line would that be?

[Cardinal]

@BrainGlutton

If I thought voting Pub were the smart thing to do, I’d be doing that. What else can you reasonably expect me to think but that it’s “wrong”?

No, I’m wishing the Dems were smart enough to craft a message that appeals to Bubba without sacrificing their historic commitment to serving Bubba’s actual interests.

It’s one thing to say that Dems need to craft a message that resonates with a group. It’s another to imply, as it seemed to me you did, and others here have before, that people vote Rep because they’re dumb.

What line would that be?

That would be the line that is so hypocritically crossed around here so often. If someone says they don’t like the idea of gay marriage, they’ll be roasted over an open fire, but apparently it’s ok to greatly imply that only stupid people are religious. I’m officially sick of it, and this is one of the reasons I hardly ever go into GD or the Pit. I can’t stand the crass statements and one-sided arguing that goes on (regardless of the side).

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@BrainGlutton

:dubious: What line would that be?

I guess it must be offensive to say that believing in angels is stupid.

Well let me clarify just a little. I was talking about people who believe that angels are walking around on the earth and interacting with people. The ones who think they’ve talked to angels or taken pictures of them, etc. I wasn’t talking about a basic belief that “angels exist” but the phenomenon of people seeing angels as explanations for actual observed events. I guess (to me) it’s like the difference between people believing in souls and believing they’ve seen ghosts.

Sorry for any offense. If you believe angels exist in heaven then I still think that’s silly but it doesn’t mean you’re stupid. It’s those who believe people can talk to them or take pictures of them or that an angel found their wallet who I think lack intelligence.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

That would be the line that is so hypocritically crossed around here so often. If someone says they don’t like the idea of gay marriage, they’ll be roasted over an open fire, but apparently it’s ok to greatly imply that only stupid people are religious.

I didn’t say that only stupid people are religious. I said that only stupid people believe they can talk to angels.

[elucidator]

Besides which, so what? Those of us who cherish democracy don’t do so because it is the best or most efficient form of government, we do it because it is the most just! Since, in all likelihood, we are going to be governed by idiots no smarter than ourselves, whose only identifying characteristic is a ravening ambition and a drive to climb the “greasy pole”, then at least we are not governed by idiots selected only by noble birth or inherited wealth/power. And at least we get to chuck out the current array of drooling morons and bring in a fresh set.

Do I scorn representative democracy? You bet. Do I think it the noblest experiment in human history? You bet. Is that an unbridgeable conflict, doomed to bitter disappointment? Yeah, sure, but I can always drink.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Cardinal

That would be the line that is so hypocritically crossed around here so often. If someone says they don’t like the idea of gay marriage, they’ll be roasted over an open fire, but apparently it’s ok to greatly imply that only stupid people are religious.

No one is trying to make religious beliefs illegal, so that’s not a valid comparison.