Sanity in this country?

I’m still in shock.  I know people are saying it’s only 4 years, but that a really fucking long time to have to see and hear the arrogant and smug voice of the current thief in chief.  Maybe I’m just overreacting right now, but at least seeing this website made me a little happier about today.  Thankfully there’s still some sanity in this country.

32 thoughts on “Sanity in this country?

  1. At my age I could die in four years.  Damn I sure wanted to see this country show it hadn’t kept it’s head up it’s ass but no such!

  2. Only four years?  Look at what that moronic psychopath did in the LAST four years.  I’m truely scared for the American People.  the consequences of another term of Bush are unthinkable.  Off the top of my head…increased taxes, another draft, another 7 trillion in debt, rioting, martial law, police state, etc, etc.  Anyone who wishes to seek refuge in the Communist paradise of Canada where our most conservative of conservatives is about the same as the most liberal of liberals is welcome to couch surf at my place for a while. grin

  3. Ok, its my first post here, I’m from the UK, I’m quite drunk (‘tis my 20th birthday) and goddamn it I’m pissed off.

    How can so many of you Americans have voted for this IDIOT of a man? Really? I know almost everyone who is a regular to this site will have voted for Kerry (or spoliled/voted Nader samething as far as I know), but why have so many of your country men and women betryaed all the hopes of the rest of the world? Sure, Kerry is no saint and wouldn’t have been the best president that we (really it’s, you) could ask for, but I doubt a chimp could be worse than Bush.

    I’ve never felt so stongly about any election as I have about this one, and I can’t even vote in it.

    At least one good thing will come out of this insanity – we don’t have to worry about what the outcome of future U.S. elections will be, as I doubt there will be enough people left alive in the world to consitute a small town, nevermind a state come the next one.

    I apologise if any of this doesn’t make sense/is spelled completely wrong. I’m quite drunk, and very angry. I really should turn my computer off before I go to the pub…

  4. There is plenty of reasons to impeach him.  The problem is that there is no house or senate to keep his ass in check.

    I can’t believe a majority of the voting population is a bunch of blind, close-minded, sheep.

    Once I pay off my debt, I’m moving to Canada.  Fuck America.

  5. You all have my deepest sympathies. 🙁
    4 more years? After the past 4 years? Yikes!

    Our PM Gollum was return with an increased majority and will control the Senate as well.

  6. Disgust, rage, depression, disgust, rage, depression.

    The people in their self-righteous religious comas who voted to keep this abomination of an administration in office all have the blood of innocents on their hands now.

    You just know that now their arrogance coupled with their incompetence will give them plenty of rope to hang themselves with.

  7. My uber-Republican dad reports (when I called to rage about the election) that my sister called him yesterday.  She lives in San Francisco and was stuck in traffic on the Bay Bridge. She ranted.  She cussed. She yelled. He said that she’s so pissed off, she could barely string two words together that made any sense.  She’s threatening to pack up her 6-year old and move back to New Zealand, where she lived for 6 years.  I told him I shall go with her.  Fortunately, he loves us both and said he’d come visit.  So long.

  8. I have some comments that are not intended to be inflammatory, just observations/questions.

    I have browsed the blogs/news sites/political commentaries for the past two days and have noticed a common theme in the way that liberals explain the losses experienced this election cycle, especially the presedential election.  The primary reasons are as follows, and I would be curious to see if members of this blog agree with them, and why.

    Dems say they lost because :

    A) The right wing conservatives hate homosexuals and are homophobic, so they voted for bush.  there is so many hating bigots in the country that it pushed the election in favor of bush.

    My response : If I recall, Bush and Kerry were both publicly quoted as being anti-gay marriage.  While it was apparent to many that Bush actually meant it, while Kerry only said it to stay politically popular, nevertheless, I had no fears that Kerry would push a pro-homsexual marriage agenda if he was elected.  I just don’t see the merit in this argument.

    B) Dems lost the election because they weren’t clear enough in their message about what they’d do to change america.

    My response: I think the democrats did themselves a huge disservice by allowing extreme hatred groups like moveon.org, michael moore, etc, to be the voice of democrats – the OVERWHELMING voice no less.  I know many democrats, but hardly any of them really hold the ludicrous hatred that those types of organizations/people hold.  Movies such as farenheit 9/11, while rousing the democratic base, were so easily debunked in so many areas that it was apparent that it was simply a bush-bashing movie.  It is apparent that dems hate bush, but that hatred was so consuming and so visible that it drove off a lot of rational people.  At the same time, I think the democrats did a decent job of pushing their social, economic, and foreign policy agenda – they could have done better, but I think the bottom line is, the positives in the democratic agenda are outweighed by the negatives.  It was a simple matter of weighing democratic positives against republican positives, and a majority of americans liked the republicans.  Why is that so hard to see?  If democrats want to appeal to the american public they have got to come back toward the center.  The majority of the country tends to lean right naturally, so the republicans are not required as much to come toward the center, which makes their jobs a bit easier.

    C) dems lost the election because half the country is simply a bunch of dumbasses.

    My response : I really have to say this is probably the funniest reason.  It is one thing to disagree, and it is obvious that there are major differences in opinion between left and right.  It is another thing altogether to simply fall back on the position that if you don’t agree with me, you’re obviously a stupid hick loser.  I love how the democrats are all saying ‘republicans need to reach out to us to unify the country’, and then they proceed to tell us how stupid the average republican voter is, how they are living in the past, and are pretty much worthless.

    I think most people know that politics is about power, not about the people.  I dont have any dilusions that the republicans in power are going to do jack shit to ‘reconcile’ with democrats.  I fully expect a very conservative agenda to be pushed, I fully expect conservative judges will be nominated and forced through, and I fully expect many items that the democrats simply despise will get pushed through.  Were it the other way around (ie Kerry winning) I would expect no different from them.  I really see no hope for reconciliation.  Democrats hate bush so much that it has spilled into hatred for republicans and conservatives in general.  Republicans react to that hatred with mutual despise, and the cycle continues.

    comments?

  9. comments?

    Why not? Let me give you my overseas take on the points you raise:

    a) I do believe that there is (was, anyway) a group of swing voters who preferred Bush’s seemingly ‘moderate’ anti-gay stance to Kerry’s badly concealed hemming and hawing (I don’t know if it would have helped him to support gay rights more openly, I guess not).

    It may have been a small matter, but it may have worked. After all, with all the talk about Bushs decisive win – the gap wasn’t that big. It took a few percentage points only, and Bush got them. I think, partly due to the fact that he was seen as being more clearly opposed to something many voters still consider …icky.

    b) Sure, this may have been a huge factor. But all it shows is that the right has the better PR. Do you really believe that the right has no loonies – I think there’s a lot more of them over there in fact, at least if you consider it in the sense of: how much active damage would result if they got there way. The left has its share of fools. But I see few of them advocating ‘reeducation camps’ for Kerry supporters as the people on Free Republic do.

    The right is simply a lot better at showing up the left (is that the right phrase?) than in reverse.

    c) Many liberals say it now, I might have done so too. Partly is a bitter joke. We are entitled to some cussing, I guess. Partly its a real misunderstanding how people can be so blind to all the mistakes and intentionally bad politics of Bush. We *are* incredoulous about that.

    Ingolfson

  10. Sigh, I am tired. I know ‘misunderstanding’ is used in the wrong way here, and incred… whatever is spelled differently. But I guess you get what I mean.

  11. ARE ALL YOU PEOPLE THAT FUCKING STUPID THAT YOU WOULD WANT THE TRAITOR RUNNING THIS COUNTRY?
    John Kerry would have fucked us up worse than Bush ever thought about. As for those above that mentioned moving to Canada and elsewhere, pack your shit and go. Who needs you? Not me that’s for sure. I have supported this country and her Commander in Chief’s for over 20 years and will for the rest of my natural life. Thrust me some weren’t that great but at least they weren’t traitors. But you people have your heads so far up your asses that you can’t see the light of day much less have a thought process that actually be even near correct. Damn people open your eyes and do a little research would ya! Kerry hasn’t done anything for this country.

  12. We tend to argue that the average republican is stupid, but in reality, the average republican is simply uninformed. Upon close speculation, it becomes apparent the republican theory has a serious flaw; the trickle down effect is overstates and no longer applicable. In general, the trickle down theory works, but only to a certain degree. Give money to the rich and most of it stays in place, the rich are rich for a REASON! Secondly, if we give tax breaks to the wealthy and to large companies it generally doesn’t help because conglomerates like Nike simply use cheap, third-world labor and Americans lose money and jobs. Quite simply, the trickle down theory works to a degree but not enough for it to be used as a basis for any sound business application. That’s why we call republicans stupid, and if you don’t believe in the trickle down theory then you aren’t truly a republican.

  13. What exactly has George Bush and Dick Cheyney “Done for this country” that is good in the long term?  Please clarify for me John perhaps I am merely confused?

  14. John

    What do you want exactly? Do you just want all those whiny little democrats to just go away and everyone to stand straight and tall in jackboots and hail the president as the messiah? Our criticism of the current administration is not only justified but earned. You ask what John Kerry has done for this country? I say he has yet to prove himself before the American people, but as an alternative to Bush I would have voted for almost anyone. Our president who you rabidly support has not only further crippled our economy but has enraged the muslim world through the war in Iraq, a war which he tricked the American people into supporting using fear. Remember the phrase “when there’s a mushroom cloud over Washington, its too late”? I do. My question though is this, have you any idea of the measure’s currently being pushed through congress? Two of the most troubling are attempts to repeal the 22 amendment allowing the president to serve and unlimited amount of terms and another to allow the congress to overturn supreme court rulings. I am an avid student of history John, and I clearly remember Hitler’s Mein Kampf. His first acts were to nullify the authority of the courts and to end elections by giving himself an unlimited amount of terms as “president”. If you continue your rapid support for this inbred, incompetent ass then perhaps ChristianExodus.com right up your alley. wink

  15. Ingolfson, no apologies, please.  Your English is outstanding (I’m assuming you’re not a native speaker). 

    crazyrepublican, thanks for a thoughtful post.  There’s a very good article on Slate.com discussing the same thing:  where do the Democrats go from here?  Left, right, or stay put?  Timothy Noah doesn’t have an answer, although William Saletan, as usual, has some good points:

    What’s your strongest issue among these voters? Outsourcing. Why? Because it’s the issue on which you talk most naturally about right and wrong. It’s also the issue on which you’re most comfortable appealing to nationalism. That’s another lesson you need to learn. People are voting Republican because they think you’re weak. And, let’s face it, you are weak. You say you’ll defend this country, but then you go on about consulting other governments, cultivating goodwill, and playing well with others. You make a world full of terrorists sound like kindergarten.

    Democrats in the Roosevelt-Truman years didn’t have this problem. They called tyrants by their name, and they didn’t sound like they were faking it. A party that believes in right and wrong at home must be assertive about right and wrong abroad. You need a serious antiterrorist agenda. Otherwise, when you object to a war like Iraq, you sound like the peace party.

    I would have dumbed it down, personally, and just guessed that we need someone more macho on the Democrat side, but maybe Saletan has it right.

  16. Lord,

    Don’t misunderstand me. I am not saying that Bush has done anything either, although had Gore been elected 4 years ago, would he have had the backbone to respond in the way that the Bush administration has responded to 9-11. Would we still be sitting here waiting for the next Iraqi financed attack? Mr Bush’s response has allowed the world to see certain things for what they are. France for example, has no desire( I use desire for lack of a better term at the moment) to aid it’s allies in persuing the safety of others, Iraq is now a semi democratic society instead of a country starving and be led by a mad man whose though process rivaled Hitler’s by which I mean he wanted to rule the world not just his little square of it. Would you have wanted further attacks on innocent civilians, death tolls in the 100’s of thousands possibly? I at least see Bush and his adminstration as they are, Flawed as they may be. Do I agree with all the policies set forth by his administration? No I don’t. But at least I know that 4 years from now we will have gone through this again, hopefully with 2 canidates who have the knowledge to strive to better this country.

  17. Neo,

    No I don’t want all you whiney little democrats to go away. I want all you whiney little democrats to put some up there that has a clue. Kerry hasn’t proved himself you say. He proved him self when he requested early discharge form the Navy to “Run for Congress” and went out to protest against the same people who he promised to support and defend when he raised his right hand for his oath of office as an office in the US Navy. He proved himself when he flew to Paris and met with the Communist Viet Cong (the same people we were at war with)as an advisor to them while he was still a member of the US NAVY. Sounds like a traitor to me. He proved himself when he stood on those podiems with the traitor bitch Jane Fonda and sounded off against the very men he fought side by side with. So don’t look at me and say how can you support that incompetent ass. He may not be the best, but at least he has tried to protect this country. As for the attempt to repeal the 22 amendment and to allow congress to overturn the Supreme Court, i truthfully have not looked at it, but I will and will comment further.

  18. Gee, I love jumping on these things:

    Don’t misunderstand me. I am not saying that Bush has done anything either, although had Gore been elected 4 years ago, would he have had the
    backbone to respond in the way that the Bush administration has responded to 9-11.

    I believe he would have attacked in Afghanistan too. As for MILITARY moves, that would have been sufficient. Now if you consider this as a chance to go swagger and show off the fine US military machine…

    Then obviously Bush was a much better choice than Gore.

    Would we still be sitting here waiting for the next Iraqi financed attack?

    So you belong to the seventy-odd percent of Bush supporters who believe Saddam had a hand in 9-11?

    Poppycock. Proof please. Even Bush doesn’t tout that line anymore, and he has Saddam at beck and call nowadays.

    Mr Bush’s response has allowed the world to see certain things for what they are. France for example, has no desire( I use desire for lack of a better term at the moment) to aid it’s allies in persuing the safety of others

    So you say that paying billions of dollars and thousands of lives is a fair exchange to find out that France, like the US, plays hardball – only that they do it the diplomatic way, mostly, while you use your military?

    Iraq is now a semi democratic society

    Iraq is now a semi-anarchistic country were the journalists sent out to cover all the ‘progress’ dare not venture out of their hotels for fear of being shot or kidnapped.

    instead of a country starving and be led by a mad man whose thought process rivaled Hitler’s by which I mean he wanted to rule the world not just his little square of it.

    Now they are ruled – by fiat – by a man several thousand miles away who is of a different, at least partially hostile faith. They may not be starving anymore, but I doubt anyone there notices, what with the daily smart bombs.

    Ever heard of the 100.000 death report? Even if its magnified by 10 (I believe it ain’t, not by that much), then there’s still enough death to go round there.

    Would you have wanted further attacks on innocent civilians, death tolls in the 100’s of thousands possibly?

    Vote Kerry and die. Look, it worked.

    ‘There’s always a war on.’

    BTW: No, Geekmom, English is not my native language. In fact, I hated it in school, almost as much as French. But then I started reading English books…

  19. John,
        My problem is that the premise for going to war with Iraq was false.  First I agree that Sadaam had to go but maybe that should have been by suporting the resistance after the first Gulf War instead of an invasion financed by U.S. taxpayers (some historical irony in that).
        Osama-bin laden is a son of one of the wealthiest Saudi families and his whole operation was financed from SAUDI ARABIA.  Your own 9-11 comission has stated there is no conection between Sadaam H regime and Al-queda.
      Why exactly, when you are fighting “The war on Terror” are you in Iraq generating more extremists?  Your president “didn’t know where bin-laden was, and didn’t care” last year.  Bin-Laden is not a fool.  What do you think he’s been doing for the last few years?  I’ll give you a hint.  It all has to do with hiding better and expanding his organisation on a shoe-string budget while the U.S. spends 500 billion a year extra INVADING THE WRONG COUNRTRIES and generating more young muslim men who hate the U.S.
      France has assisted in the War on Terror just not the invasion of a soverign state uninvolved in same war.
        Why is it Sadaam was such an important target when he didn’t mastermind the attack on the U.S. but your president doesn’t care where the mastermind is.  Extremeism isn’t going to go away and invading Iraq has made more attacks more likley.
      How long will that “democratic” government last with U.S. troops to support it?  How long “really” will american troops be in Iraq and under attack?  My guess is ten years+, georges gift to the next president.

  20. BTW: No, Geekmom, English is not my native language. In fact, I hated it in school, almost as much as French. But then I started reading English books…

    Ah, another one who developed unbelievably fluent English as a result of reading … That’ll get you every time, you know. wink

  21. Ah, another one who developed unbelievably fluent English as a result of reading

    Thanks for the nice words. I’m trying to do the same with my French, but I seem to lack the time I had during my teens.

    With about 15 French books under my belt its still – well, to quote John Kerry: ‘C’est affreux.’

  22. John,

    You label John Kerry a traitor because he protested against a war in which he fought but didn’t support? Wow, fucking wow. I do not support the war in Iraq, given the chance I would have supported the insurgency in 1991, and yet I joined the Navy in the hopes that I might be assigned to one of the several SEAL teams operating in country because I firmly believe that the Iraqi people are entitled to the same democratic process and liberties which we take for granted. I suppose that I will be labeled a traitor for not supporting Bush, but I do not care. As for labeling Kerry a traitor, you do a great disservice to the men and women in uniform by labeling a veteran with a distinguished service record a traitor. My family has a long military history; my grandfather is a veteran of the Korean war, I’ve two great uncles who served in WWII one was killed in combat just outside of Rome another fought in the Solomon Islands campaign with the USMC and recieved two purple hearts and the silver star, my mother is a former marine corps telecommunications specialist, my uncle was a member of the 82 airborne division and is a veteran of the war in the Persian Gulf, my oldest brother is a combat controller with the USAF stationed in Iraq, my second oldest brother is a mechanic for the USMC stationed in Fallujah and as I said before I intend to join the SEALS program. John Kerry served his country and he deserves a certain measure of respect. Bush did not. He joined the air national guard and subsequently betrayed his service oath by going AWOL. He is a disgrace in the eyes of my family and in the eyes of many veterans.

    As for our vested interest in the Middle East, an invasion of Afghanistan was a necessity both for humanitarian concerns and in the interest of national security. Our invasion of Iraq, however, was not justified in that Iraq neither had WMD’s nor financially supported Al-Qaeda. In point of fact, Osama Bin Laden made public his disgust for Saddam Hussein in a tape aired by Al-Jazeera in the fall of 1998. The issue of human rights abuses in Iraq should have been addressed by the United Nations. A proper show of force by the United Nations in Iraq would have likely brought about an end to major human rights abuses within the region, at least for a time. The United States, however, felt it necessary to trounce the Iraqi military in a pitchd battle humiliating the Iraq Army as it did in 1991 and the Iraqi people with its use of totalitarian mechanisms of control. These include random military sweeps and mass arrests. The United States further upset the Iraqi people with its promise of civil liberties and its idiosyncratic use of torture and humiliation at the Abu Ghraib prison facility. Surmise to say, the United States has hitherto renegged on its promise of a free Iraq and has made a fool of itself on the world stage. All this, of course, is the product of our current administration. As this is the case, my argument has been and remains that the American people are entitled to an alternative. It is a sad reality that we will have to wait four more years for one to arise.

  23. My previous posts were written in haste and anger. For that I apologize, I spent four years in debate learning to keep a civil discussion from becoming a pointless argument but it would seem I failed and so I posted a revised edition of some of my previous arguments above.

  24. Wow Neo.  I thought that was pretty articulate and compelling!

    Surprises the hell out of me, coming from someone from a military background, but I guess that says something about my tendency to paint with a broad brush.

    Wow.

  25. Four years of Lincoln-Douglas debate can do many things. One, it provides one with the knowledge that an eloquent presentation of any argument is worth review. Two, it allows an individual to create a moral vaccuum in order to view any matter without prejudice. Finally, it allows one to advance an argument based soley on its individual merits.

    As for a military background, I failed to read some of John’s posts and had no idea he is a 22 year Navy veteran. For that, I applaud him. I have the utmost respect for our nation’s veterans, and although we may disagree in principle, I know we both wish for nothing more than the honor and the privilege of serving our country.

  26. John:

    “Would we still be sitting here waiting for the next Iraqi financed attack?”

    You have proven yourself to be an uninformed parrot/pawn of the Rovian Revolution. And thus not worthy of any attention on this blog. How about Saudi financed attack? That would be infinitely more accurate.

    Go sell crazy somewhere else we are full up here!

  27. “Would we still be sitting here waiting for the next Iraqi financed attack?”

    Way to provide the evidence that the Bush-supporters are uninformed, or rather misinformed.

    “You have proven yourself to be an uninformed parrot/pawn of the Rovian Revolution. And thus not worthy of any attention on this blog. How about Saudi financed attack? That would be infinitely more accurate.

    Go sell crazy somewhere else we are full up here!”

    Well said Eggman.

  28. I feel compelled to respond to all with a little information not known to the general public but first I must respond to Neo.
    Neo, Your family has obviously distinguished themselves as honorable servants of our great nation in their various services. Your ambition to join them in service of your country is at the utmost admirable. Good luck shipmate. You and yours have my most honorable respect. Myself, a veteran and still serving in a civilian capacity, have seen the might of the US on more than 1 occasion, Libya, Iran, Red Sea, Gulf War and with 9-11 was deeply involved in the security of our nations east coast ports. Unfortunately, due to certain reasons, I cannot go into details. That said, I can say there are numerous bits of information that the general public hasn’t seen or heard with respect to 9-11, Al Quada, etc. Yes, Bin Laden is Saudi. Yes his money came from Saudi oil, but there are and were other interests involved that are still unknown to the general public and probably never be released.
    As for me being an “uninformed parrot/pawn of the Rovian Revolution”, I do not sit around following the democratic based media and the biased information they put out. Although they may give out tid bits, they do not provide the “full story”. Research is required of which I happily conduct when time permits.
    If you read all of my posts you will see and I will repeat for you again, I do not question Kerry’s service record, nor do I question Bush’s. Neither of their records are spotless. Both have issues with their service in the military. Nor do I agree with Neo that protesting a unjust war should label you a traitor. Kerry did many other things, which are common knowledge and can be found if you look for it, in addition to his protesting of the war. I personally know quit a few Vietnam veterans, have heard their stories and agree most times with them. Many will tell you that Kerry did not represent their best interests at home and hurt them more than helped them.
    Do I agree with the Iraq War. Can’t really say yes or no. Some issues, which compelled us to attack, were valid. Some have proven not. BUT, I myself, due to my position as a veteran, stand behind the decisions of My president and Congress, who I might remind all of you voted to give the President permission to proceed with this war. Democrats and Republicans alike voted to do this. I do not have the numbers in front of me but if memory serves me, it was not a close vote in either the House or the Senate.

  29. I must say, after Bush’s press confrerence today, as a young person & a teacher, I’m optimistic about fixing SS & our schools

  30. John- You say you “feel compelled to respond to all with a little information not known to the general public”.  Fine- we’re all ears.  Do you have information that vindicates Bush’s decision to invade Iraq? Not only do we “fucking stupid people with our heads up our asses” (I guess you mean liberals by this) want to know, but the 9/11 Commission, the Republicans, and even Bush would love to have had a better justification for the war than they’ve offered us so far.

    But what is this information?  “…there are and were other interests involved that are still unknown to the general public and probably never be released.”  So, you’re saying that Saddam’s support for Al Quaeda, or his WMD’s, or something else really evil about Iraq, is a Military Secret?  Right.  This is exactly the sort of thing the Administration really has to keep under wraps.

    Standing behind the decisions of the President and Congress is fine, if the decisions are good ones.  If they are demonstrably bad, or disastrous as in this case, then such patriotism is not necessarily a good position.  One might even argue (although one would probably have to be a “liberal” to do so) that a lot of misery we humans have inflicted on ourselves could have been avoided if more people had followed their conscience and not their leaders.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.