This entry was posted on Sunday, March 27th, 2011 at 2:39 pm and is filed under Quick Hits.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
I haven't been able to watch this all the way through (this one and "Recount") because it makes me so angry. We all know about the 2000 election, of course, but "Hacking Democracy" makes a very good case for the hypothesis that the 2004 election might have been as well. (Unless, of course, you were talking about how Bush the Elder got elected, in which case I have no idea either.)
"This man" may be either of the Bushes. There is a worse and more menacing question: How did Obama become president? He isn't a Democrat, he is dysfunctional, he is a terrible politician and he is not smart at all (despite legions that claim that he is bright based on god knows what evidence).
The first Bush was benign; Obama brought us Wisconsin.
Ah yes: "It would not be pruDENT at this JUNCT-ure for Sad-DAM HussEIN to mess with the United STATES of Uh-merIca. There will be a million points of la-i-ght, comin(g) togethe(r) ov'r Bag–dAd" (insert requisite hand gestures, hope I got his intonation right).
1) former head of CIA may have helped
2) human animal's desire for stability why else would Gore have been elected? Shrubling is personality plus compared to Gore, and only won by theft.
@Middle: ¿Que? It's a case of 30yrs of Reaganist ideology, which brought you the recession, meets (the only thing directly attributable to Obama which is) there can't be no uppity brown people in the White House — I guess to some of his detractors it's called the *White* House for a reason — that's bringing us these Wisconsin moments.
You’re so right, Middle Seaman, if only we had voted for those shining beacons – McCain and Palin. It boggles the mind: how did that damn Obama get elected?
Obama certainly seems to operate under the mistaken belief that small, incremental “progress” via political compromise is universally the best the course of action, but it’s quite another thing to call him stupid. It is, after all, possible to be mistaken about something without being an idiot. I do wish, though, that Obama would heed the rallying calls of 1968: “Be realistic. Demand the impossible” – it works so well for conservatives.
Also, I’m curious how Obama “brought us Wisconsin”? And who is “this man” that “may be either of the Bushes”? What?
How Bush 'Pere' Got Elected: Michael Dukakis, a.k.a. "Stand Him Next to Gore and Kerry and They'll Look Like Fucking Wild-men." Ah, I'll always cherish that presidential election, the first in which I voted. Dukakis in the tank, Willie Horton, Constitutional Amendments against Flag Burning–so young I was, and already my country was bludgeoning me across the face with the stupidity of national politics. God bless America.
Bush hired Lee Atwater as campaign manager, who really brought the slash and burn style of negative advertising into presidential campaigning. Not that their hadn't been negative campaigning before, but Atwater really elevated it to another level against Dukakis. Combine that with Dukakis's lack of charisma, and it wasn't pretty.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm thinking Middle seaman is criticizing the primaries and not the general election. I thank many people can agree (especially after her sterling performance as SoS) that H.R.Clinton would have been a much better president than Barry O.
H.R. Clinton's crowning moment as SoS was successfully pushing for a third war because apparently fighting two at a time is so passé. Yeah, based on her time as SoS I'm heartbroken she isn't in the White House.
displaced Capitalist – you were the one who cited Clinton’s tenure as SoS as proof of her liberalism. I merely pointed out her most significant move as SoS so far was leading the charge for yet another war (I know, I know, just sending some missiles – a few more dead brown people can’t really be called a war, just yet)– something she also did as a senator by being the Democrats leading Hawk. Her second most significant move as SoS was defeating Biden in an in-house debate on Afghanistan – he wanting to draw-down and her wanting to increase troop levels. I didn’t take a pro-Obama stand; I simply made the observation that her actions as SoS may labeled many ways, but “progressive” isn’t one of them.
Nice of you to move the goal posts though. I'll take your abandonment of your statement "especially after her sterling performance as SoS" as proof you no longer stand behind it.
you were the one who cited Clinton’s tenure as SoS as proof of her liberalism.
You'd better get your eyes checked there champ. I never used the word "liberalism" in my post at 12:27 nor any synonym of that word.
I was trying to defend the mindless attacks on Middle Seaman's post by pointing out that someone else could have been a better president than Obama and that someone else didn't have to be McCain/Palin. You're reading too much into what I said.
Also, who said I abandoned my statement? Where did that happen? Am I missing something or are you just plain insane?