Blogcritics Comments on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Comment by Maurice on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Sat, 19 Apr 2008 09:54:52 EDT

Last night NBC news said Bush's approval rating was at 33 percent. sheesh........ Congress's approval rating is about 10 points lower. I think congress would be looked on more favorably if they had done their job; namely provide the checks and balances needed.

Comment by Jet in Columbus on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:41:32 EDT

When China and Japan restrain trading American products that give them an unfair advantage over us, and is the prime reason our trade deficits are so big. As for Columbia, the U.S. sends too much to them as it is in drug revenue.

Comment by Baronius on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:03:16 EDT

Clavos, it's not just pandering. There's been a strain of protectionism in the Democratic Party for a while now. Besides, how bad could a little protectionism be? The economy can handle another Smoot-Hawley downtick.

Comment by Clavos on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:49:51 EDT

The anti free trade viewpoint by the Dems is very worrisome. It's pandering, pure and simple, and totally wrong headed at any time, but especially now, when we should be enabling every possible policy with the potential of stimulating and strengthening the economy.

Comment by bliffle on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:40:40 EDT

McCain was a great GOP candidate in 2000, but his stature has plunged, IMO, since then, and I can't consider him seriously anymore.

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:59:38 EDT

The anti-free trade rhetoric coming from both democrats is really turning me off.. I don't have a problem with stipulations ("fair trade") but they're going overboard right now.

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:57:51 EDT

I mean John McCain is such a great candidate even I would consider voting for him.. and that's saying something. Iraq might be an itsy bitsy problem for me though..

Comment by Jet in Columbus on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:51:25 EDT

Don't write off the GOP dept of dirty trick just yet. I didn't believe it when I read the news, writing it off as paranoia... The former GOP Secretary of State was accused of trying to rig the 2008 elections before the Deomcratic winner took office??? I just got a postcard (I swear this is true) saying that my local polling place has changed from a public building near City Hall... To a Baptist church...

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:44:01 EDT

Last night NBC news said Bush's approval rating was at 33 percent. sheesh........ Ha sorry man.. just having fun. It's an amusing subject you know :D makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Comment by Jet in Columbus on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:16:08 EDT

Last night NBC news said Bush's approval rating was at 33 percent. sheesh........

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:00:48 EDT

the 2008 election is the Democratic Party's to win or lose. McCain's one of those nearly unelectable creatures-a phalse Conservative. This is something that killed Dole in '96 as a viable candidate, and unlike George, McCain's already been hit with the corrupt politician bug (Keating Five, Airbus Tanker Deal), and Republicans aren't popular right now thanks to George. (a situation like Bill's Baggage in '94-these coat-tails lead down.) While I agree this election is the Democratic Party's to win or lose, I think you underestimate John McCain as a candidate. First of all, he is a real war hero. That alone grants him credibility in the minds of millions of Americans. Moderates love him. While Obama takes more moderates than Clinton, McCain takes more moderates than either of them (probably combined). He can offer government solutions to problems and still pay lip service to reduced spending (Just like Bush did back in 00). Christians will probably vote for him because god forbid a democrat be elected (this is esp true if Clinton wins, but I think even if Obama wins the GOP will find a way to scare up their far right and christian base, they're already painting him as a socialist, unpatriotic, and unreligious). So yet again, the GOP has the opportunity to bring a wide range of groups into the tent. He has distanced himself from Bush in the past (whether this distancing has any credibility, not so sure) to the point that his distinctness from Bush is one of his defining characters in many people's minds. And lets not forget the Republican Party's natural success at winning presidential contests. Take a look at history - 5 of the last 7, 7 of the last 10, and 9 of the last 14 contests have been won by Republicans. And this despite the fact that the Democratic Party traditionally has had higher membership. The Republican Party platform inherently lends itself to successful presidential campaigns, while the Democratic Party platform lends itself to winning regional elections (it has controlled 27 of the last 37 senates (since 1933), 20 of the last 29 Senates (since 1949), 30 of the last 37 Houses, 23 of the last 30 Houses. So while the Democratic Party has higher membership and dominates both houses of Congress historically, the Republican Party has run away with the Presidency. So keep in mind the Republican Party has an inherent ability to win Presidencies. I would attribute this to the fact that the platform lends itself to scare tactics etc. which are only really effective on a national scale. Take this year for example, is John McCain gong to be able to scare the American public into believing the consequences of leaving Iraq would be greater than the status quo? John McCain is a great candidate for the Republican Party, even though the Republican Party is not in as great a position as it usually is in.

Comment by Cannonshop on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:16:44 EDT

wow, the thread has wandered. Okay, Obama's "Bitter" comment: Isn't going to change a thing with regards to his showing in PA, NC, or anywhere else in the country, the people he's likely to have offended aren't likely to vote for him anyway. y'see, he's a Democrat. Most low-income, blue-collar, gun-nut/gun-owner types don't vote for Democrats. It's that whole "Gun Control" thing that's so popular with the Democratic Party that it's become something of a stereotype of its own. the 2008 election is the Democratic Party's to win or lose. McCain's one of those nearly unelectable creatures-a phalse Conservative. This is something that killed Dole in '96 as a viable candidate, and unlike George, McCain's already been hit with the corrupt politician bug (Keating Five, Airbus Tanker Deal), and Republicans aren't popular right now thanks to George. (a situation like Bill's Baggage in '94-these coat-tails lead down.)

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:57:18 EDT

The slowing downward trend is probably due to the prevailing opinion that having hit rock bottom on the incompetence scale, President Bush can't get any worse. But he's surprised us before. He still has nine months to cook up something else really special.

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:49:15 EDT

Maybe it just says that 30% of the people are irrationally optimistic. Or that..but there's definitely something wrong with them. Probably the same people who feel our economic future will be determined by the number of times the President says "God" in a speech (The Heritage Foundation). It's a positive correlation in case you were wondering.

Comment by Dave Nalle on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:41:42 EDT

Maybe it just says that 30% of the people are irrationally optimistic. Dave

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:26:57 EDT

The most likely reason for the slowdown is that he's approaching the level of his real hard core supporters who will support him regardless. Yeah that 30% of the population that doesn't understand democracy doesn't work unless you hold it accountable.

Comment by Clavos on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:04:03 EDT

The most likely reason for the slowdown is that he's approaching the level of his real hard core supporters who will support him regardless.

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:01:09 EDT

PETI: Just to clarify, that 28/31% refers to the President's job approval rating, right? Yep, it's job approval. The trend downwards for the past few years has certainly slowed.. but it's probably still trending downwards overall (judging from the RCP numbers).

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:40:28 EDT

Dan: Due to my apparently advancing senility, I just might consider voting for Senator, uh, I forgot. But, you know, like, I mean what is her name? Or, due to your apparently advancing senility, you should consider a run for the White House yourself, as you're admirably qualified. After all, Ronnie R never let the occasional senior moment slow him down! PETI: Just to clarify, that 28/31% refers to the President's job approval rating, right?

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:11:55 EDT

"I begin with the premise you don't normally (at least until this election cycle) call candidates by their full name. That's your problem right there, bub. I begin with the premise. What do you know about me or my writing that you can afford to begin with a premise at all? The folks on the board who know how to write are aware that words consist of syllables, groups of sound, and that when read aloud, these groups of sound have meter, even if they don't rhyme. In writing, I always read aloud what I write, to see if what I've written sounds good to the ear. Sometimes, the extra two syllables that the name Hussein provides sound better in the sentence. In the final analysis, that is the reason I use (or don't use) middle names at all. They are extra syllables that I can use or not use to puff up sentences to provide the meter I feel comfortable with." Despite what you would like to think, your reason is exceedingly transparent to the vast majority of objective readers. Especially when you consider the fact that Obama is the only person you do this for ever (having read lots of your other posts you tend to use only last names or sometimes first and last). Now are you honestly telling me the sentences you use Obama's name in are the only sentences you have ever written which require extra syllables? Please.

Comment by pleasexcusetheinterruption on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:08:51 EDT

Strike 'supporters'; substitute 'family'...? :-D 33% (of what, though? Bush insiders? Republicans at large?) does sound pretty high, but it's been my experience of following British and American politics that whoever the current president/prime minister is, there are always going to be a few in his or her party who get up and trumpet that he/she is the greatest leader the country has ever had. In mitigation, this sort of thing does tend to happen at party conferences and conventions, when (a) people get caught up in the moment and (b) the sucking-up opportunities are maximized. 33% is a tad higher than the actual probably. The latest Gallup has it at 28% and RCP puts the average at 31%. Statistically not very significant, but I just had to correct.

Comment by Dan Miller on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:03:00 EDT

Opps. In comment #8, I must have had a couple of senior moments. I neglected to insert the word "Clinton" following President in the first paragraph, and then in the second paragraph I omitted the word "if" following the word "wonder." Thank all of you who were too kind to comment on the errors of a typically pitiful old man. I appreciate your compassion. Due to my apparently advancing senility, I just might consider voting for Senator, uh, I forgot. But, you know, like, I mean what is her name?. . . Now what was I saying? Dan

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:26:04 EDT

Jet: ...the 33 percent of the Bush supporters who are as equally desparate to find a way to prove that Bush is the Greatest president who ever sat in office. Strike 'supporters'; substitute 'family'...? :-D 33% (of what, though? Bush insiders? Republicans at large?) does sound pretty high, but it's been my experience of following British and American politics that whoever the current president/prime minister is, there are always going to be a few in his or her party who get up and trumpet that he/she is the greatest leader the country has ever had. In mitigation, this sort of thing does tend to happen at party conferences and conventions, when (a) people get caught up in the moment and (b) the sucking-up opportunities are maximized.

Comment by Ruvy on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:16:14 EDT

I begin with the premise you don't normally (at least until this election cycle) call candidates by their full name. That's your problem right there, bub. I begin with the premise. What do you know about me or my writing that you can afford to begin with a premise at all? The folks on the board who know how to write are aware that words consist of syllables, groups of sound, and that when read aloud, these groups of sound have meter, even if they don't rhyme. In writing, I always read aloud what I write, to see if what I've written sounds good to the ear. Sometimes, the extra two syllables that the name Hussein provides sound better in the sentence. In the final analysis, that is the reason I use (or don't use) middle names at all. They are extra syllables that I can use or not use to puff up sentences to provide the meter I feel comfortable with. I do not need to hint if I think that Barack Obama is a Moslem or not. If I indeed thought so, I'd state it straight up. As it turns out, he is a fellow who has hung around one church for quite some time, and unless he (Obama) has been getting together with the daddy that abandoned him and spreading out prayer rugs in qibla, I doubt that he really cares about Islam. Having lived in Indonesia for a time, I'm sure he knows more about Islam than the average American. I could be wrong, of course. Us folks back here in Israel tend to have a penchant for brevity, and middle names just get in the way, but that's Hebrew culture, not American culture. On the news, Barack Obama is called just that in Hebrew.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Condescension or The Simple Truth?

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:15:40 EDT

You took my advise and used Turbo Tax this year didn't you? Blimey, Zedd, for his sake I hope he didn't. I wouldn't touch Turbo Tax again with a ten-foot pole after they lost my e-payment to the state a couple of years ago and I ended up with $100 of penalties that the tax board refused to waive. Bah.