You know, if John McCain should lose this election (he won’t, but if hypothetically he did) he could immediately begin a new career as a chess player. These moves by the McCain campaign get more and more brilliant by the minute. It is to the point where even the Republicans don’t know what is coming next. Now if we’re all that far off-balance, how teeter-tottery do the Obamabots have to be?
Suspending the campaign and the debate in order to return to Washington to hammer out this bailout deal–that’s a stroke of guts and genius that, frankly, I’m not sure another person in American could have made. The move does five distinct, and incredibly important, things:
First, and most importantly, it puts Barack Obama squarely in a corner from which he has no good escape. THERE IS NOTHING BARACK OBAMA CAN DO AT THIS POINT THAT DOES NOT IN SOME WAY UNDERMINE HIM. His options are limited. He can ignore McCain’s call for his own return to Washington, in which case he looks like an opportunist who is only interested in his own political future, not the welfare of the country. He can’t take this option without whining about McCain and the move, which will make him look even more weak. He’s already pretty much a pansy and this would just make that picture all the more vivid. The only other thing he can do is to suspend his own campaign and join McCain, in which case he’s clearly stepping to John McCain’s tune; this assuredly paints Obama as a follower and not a leader at all. Additionally, with all the recent talk about racial undertones, any agreement to join McCain in Washington would clearly throw Obama into a “yassir, Mr. McCain” light and that cannot be in any way good for The Annointed One. There is no tenable position in this for Obama, and his campaign knows it.
The second thing that’s so brilliant about this is it shoves the whole bailout issue right back in the face of Congressional Democrats who were trying to play politics with it. They made clear that they would not support any bailout unless John McCain agreed to it also. This was clearly an attempt to paint McCain as a weakling who had to step to THEIR tune, as well as giving themselves an out if things failed–”well, McCain was in favor of it too!”. By stepping up to the plate and calling their bluff, McCain has clearly dictated the terms of the issue and has said, in effect, “bring it on”. By taking this bold move, McCain is now setting the agenda, setting the conditions, and setting the timetable. If this doesn’t look Presidential, I don’t know what does. More importantly, it throws the blame for any inactivity back SQUARELY onto the do-nothing Congress, who are already roundly disliked nationwide. This will raise McCain’s political stock significantly, but it will also raise the GOP stock across the board.
Third, this alters the headlines away from the “lead” that Barack Obama and his in-the-bag press surrogates are trying to claim he’s building. I’m going to say this again, and repeat it until November 5–BARACK OBAMA IS LOSING THIS ELECTION–but the press is going to come out and say that he’s opening up a wide gap now and that McCain is finished, in the hopes that GOP spirits will be dashed and Republicans won’t come out to vote. By making this move now, at the same time this “widening lead” chorus is entering the choir loft, attention is diverted toward McCain and puts him back in the spotlight. The “widening lead” issue will be a minor story which will last for a couple of days, but will disappear as McCain and his surrogates build the case of President McCain and his Economic Strategy. It’s an amazing political move, shrewdly executed, at exactly the right time.
Fourth, this throws the Obama camp into a message mess. What exactly do they say now? How do they spin this? How does this affect Obama’s debate prep? What do they prepare for? When do they even get to debate? Once again John McCain is putting the Obama camp on the defensive, making them answer rather than ask the questions. This always throws Obama, who absolutely cannot think on his feet, and Biden, who absolutely can’t open his mouth without saying something colossally stupid, completely to the wind. It’s going to be fun to watch as they struggle for footing again.
And lastly, it’s going to give McCain the opening he’s been wanting all along. HERE’S WHAT’S GOING TO HAPPEN…the ENTIRE Obama nation is going to cry “coward” toward John McCain. They’re going to claim McCain is afraid to debate Obama (which even those dolts should know is patently absurd), and EVEN OBAMA’S OWN PEOPLE are going to be screaming for the two candidates to square off. Well, John McCain has been screaming for this himself for months, and Barack Obama has been denying him. Now, with all sides clamoring for it, John McCain will call Obama out–and this time the whiney little loser will have no choice…he’ll have to accept. Point McCain, who again gets to set the terms and have Barack Obama stepping to a tune John the Warrior is calling. Remember, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST…that is absolutely what is going to happen.
This is the shrewdest move any politician has ever tried, to my recollection. It’s gutsy, calculated, good for the country and more importantly good for McCain. There’s only one part of this that works against him, and that is that the American people will be disappointed there won’t be a “cage match” this Friday. We’ve all been looking forward to it, and at first we’re going to be a little upset–BUT THAT UPSET WON’T LAST FOR LONG because you can be certain the McCain team has a debate planned. It may even occur on Friday! The thing is, it’s going to occur on John McCain’s terms, and there’s not a damned thing Barack Obama can do about it now. BRILLIANT, absolutely brilliant.
September 24, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Everyone is amazed at John McCain’s chess moves… Calling them hail marries is stupid, he distinctly does stuff that forces uneven trades… With the Palin pick, he got the traditional GOP advantage that “the media is out to get us” that Mr. Press didn’t have, plus watched the sexism fly because the media/liberal feminism doesn’t jive with children…
Before being so amazed, remember one thing: John McCain, Navy Captain, retired, graduate of the Naval Academy and War College, trained in military tactics and strategy.
Barrack Obama, Harvard Law Graduate, trained in logical argumentation and a bit of rhetoric. The Harvard Law boys and girls are REALLY bright, at least the ones I knew, I’m sure some dolts were around, but they aren’t tacticians, John McCain is.
September 24, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Bullshit. What on earth are you talking about?
September 24, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Interesting!
mike t.
September 24, 2008 at 10:33 pm
“Now if we’re all that far off-balance, how teeter-tottery do the Obamabots have to be?”
Well, as an Obama supporter, I’m not feeling teeter-tottery. I am, on the other hand, getting quite a laugh out of this. Just like I got quite a laugh out of Sarah Palin, which everyone was excited about for about eight days, and now, well, let’s just say a lot of the shine has gone out of that star.
September 24, 2008 at 10:33 pm
To “What?”
I just spent six or eight paragraphs detailing “what on Earth I’m talking about”. A little bit more in-depth than your reply of “bullshit”, wouldn’t you say?
How about giving at least a tiny bit more forethought before posting a comment, especially if you’re going to question what I’ve said. Good plan, eh?
September 24, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Regarding Sarah Palin, a lot of the shine may have gone out of the star for Obamabots and the New York Times, but the voters who matter, and who Obama will desperately need on November 4th, Sarah Palin is still quite interesting and essentially untarnished. It should also be noted that even if her “star” burns out completely, she’s done her job–getting the conservative base on board and on the ground. That was absolutely necessary and it’s worked beyond a doubt which is why, I can confidently say, Obama won’t win Pennsylvania. If he can’t win PA, how the hell is he going to compete in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Wyoming, Virginia and even Ohio when the chips are down?
September 25, 2008 at 12:29 am
I have neve heard more inane bullshit than this analysis of McCains stupid moves.
September 25, 2008 at 12:42 am
“I have neve heard more inane bullshit than this analysis of McCains stupid moves.”
I’m certain this isn’t a truthful statement. I know, for instance, that you’ve heard Barack Obama speak, and you’ve likely heard Mr. Gaffe–er, Biden–talking as well. Everything out of their mouths is more inane than anything I’ve said here.
Also, I’m unclear why what you’ve “heard” is even germane to the subject at hand. Perhaps you mean you’ve never READ more inane…etc.
See, that’s just one more problem with the Democrats–they keep throwing perfectly good money down the rathole of the public education system, and THIS is what so many of these schools turn out. Shameful.
September 25, 2008 at 12:52 am
Ask yourself this: Do you want a president who’s going to keep the whole country off-balance and have us all wondering what’s coming next? I don’t and I can’t imagine the majority of Americans do. I think we want calm, steady leadership. I don’t think McCain’s been displaying that, not by a long shot.
September 25, 2008 at 1:13 am
I am well known for many things, one of which is that I don’t lose when I compete. Three of the things I am most noted for competing in are the games of poker, chess and baseball.
In poker, I call players down when I’m convinced they’re bluffing, and I’ve been known to do some occasional bluffing myself when I am behind in a hand. Both of these skills require a steady hand, a particularly keen grasp of the situation, and balls of steel. Frankly I admire anyone who is good both at reading (and counteracting) a good bluff and at executing one.
In chess, the key to victory is keeping an opponent guessing as to what is coming. This is often accomplished via “decoy” maneuvers which set up moves called “forks” and “pins”, among others. These require a great deal of foresight, contemplation and the ability to see the board completely and thoroughly, even several moves ahead. Attempts to maneuver your opponent into positions from which you can exploit your advantage are called “gambits” and they require precision, discipline and strategic thinking.
In baseball the game often comes down to one or two key decisions when things aren’t going right. My best pitcher may be on the mound, but he’s walked a couple of batters and his “best stuff” isn’t good enough at this point. Here’s when a good manager knows the strength and weaknesses not only of the batter, but also the pitcher, and adjusts accordingly. Here’s where a good OPPOSING manager changes his strategy, too, to match the pitching change his opposite may make. This takes preparation, instinct, and the ability to adjust to changing circumstances that don’t always favor you at the time.
John McCain has used strategies from all three of these games today, and very effectively. In fact, throughout the campaign he’s employed various methodologies that are shared with these games of skill. So if you’re asking me if I want a President who has a steady hand, a particularly keen grasp of situations, balls of steel, precision, discipline, strategic thinking, preparation, instinct and the ability to adjust to a changing landscape that doesn’t always favor him–then the answer is a resounding YES.
And yes, the rest of America should want EXACTLY THAT KIND OF LEADERSHIP in the White House. The only man in this race who can deliver it is John McCain.
September 25, 2008 at 1:16 am
OA & T:
Some impressions that you’ve (transiently..) made on me:
“…I’m right, and you’re not except when you agree with me…”
- cool; always a good idea to start off with smug intimidation…reminds me of the M.O. that many of us left behind in, oh, 11th grade
“…If this doesn’t look Presidential, I don’t know what does…”
-you’re right: you don’t.
“…you can be certain the McCain team has a debate planned. It may even occur on Friday! The thing is, it’s going to occur on John McCain’s terms…”
-what’s the matter, can’t John McCain participate in a debate on even terms? Why do they have to be on his ? Do you for a minute think he’s going to be able to pull this shit in the real world and try to postpone one crisis for another, in your wet-dream-future of him in his “…new career as a chess player…” ???
“…They’re (the ENTIRE Obama nation) going to claim McCain is afraid to debate Obama…”
-and You’re absolutely posifuckingtively sure that a majority of the REST of the nation won’t as well ??????????????
“…there’s not a damned thing Barack Obama can do about it now…”
-ah, yes, actually, there is. He can show up on Friday night, suggest that John McCain is showing his contempt for the U.S. people by being the first presidential hopeful in history to blow off a debate, and ask them to decide how they felt about that come Nov. 4th (get your dates right, Mr. Know-It-All).
“…Well, you’ll just have to read the entire blog to figure all of that out, won’t you?
-not really; I actively work to prevent my valuable attention span from being hijacked by assholes like yourself, who despite being “… a fierce believer in many things…” can’t just make them so by merely saying they are…
Cheers (and good luck on November 5th…)
Another Leftist Who Could Be Your Neighbor
September 25, 2008 at 1:35 am
If you “left your smug intimidation behind in 11th grade” then, frankly, you never had it to begin with. “Smug intimidation” comes from a supreme confidence in who you are, in what you believe, and in your ability to digest information and reach correct conclusions. You’re a Liberal, so you obviously fail miserably on the latter of these; you’re at least a tacit American, so by necessity you fail on the first two as well (or you wouldn’t be a Liberal in the first place).
Let’s see…so you want John McCain to compete for the HIGHEST POSITION IN THE WORLD, but not to take advantage when he can maneuver himself into a superior position. That would be defined as WEAKNESS (not a trait I want in my President). It would remind me of someone who, for instance, would meet with world leaders without any preconditions. Know anyone who fits that description?
The “rest of the nation”, even those only passingly interested in politics, is already aware that John McCain has already demonstrated his superiority in the debate arena, most recently over his junior colleague from Illinois. You know, that fellow who yammers, stammers, ums, ahs, and takes ten minutes to get a single intelligible sentance out of his mouth–and even then he makes goofy “above my pay grade” statements that he needs a week and a half to overcome…you remember that guy, don’t you? John McCain is certainly not afraid to debate Barack Obama and in fact has been all but BEGGING his holiness for not one but TEN debates since the beginning of this campaign. Only an idiot would even consider that McCain is ducking Obama. No, this is strategy, and it’s working wonderfully.
I assure you, Mr. Obama will NOT show up alone at the debate site on Friday. I also assure you that the McCain camp is hoping that he does. Not only would this make him look like an idiot and an opportunist, it would be because his counterpart, Mr. McCain, was busy WORKING ON THE NATION’S PROBLEMS IN WASHINGTON while The One was grandstanding. That is, in fact, one part of the trap the McCain campaign is trying to set for our dear, deluded Chicagoan.
The date I specified is EXACTLY the date I intended. It would be the morning after the election, when I can gloat and say to all you Obamabots–SEE, I TOLD YOU SO. Therefore it is YOU who needs to get your date right, genius.
And lastly, GOOD RIDDANCE. You were amusing this time around; any further interaction would just be repetitious and, frankly, unchallenging. But then talking with Liberals is usually just that. You know, the “battle of wits with an unarmed person” sorta thing…
September 25, 2008 at 2:51 am
If McCain actually had something original and relevant to say about this financial crisis, then I might buy this argument, but he has been making contradictory comments for the past week-plus. He can’t seem to make up his mind about whether the economy is strong/weak, whether special interests should have influence over his campaign (Rick Davis and his Freddie Mac payments), etc. Honestly, he looks to me like he can’t juggle multiple tasks at the same time.
The thing that concerns me more about this argument about whether McCain is a “brilliant” chess strategist is that I don’t see any clear reference to policy issues. I want a president who will *lead by example* and not by trying to bully people into submission (which I don’t even think is happening). This election cycle has been consumed by arguments about strategy without discussing substantial issues. Neither McCain nor Obama is offering anything that different from the status quo, and this sort of blog posturing comes across as juvenile and more worthy of a reality show television review than a serious evaluation about the future of our country. Either that, or you are just really scared of Obama–fear of the “other” is not very warrior-like, though, no matter how much it is dressed up in football play-by-play rhetoric. In fact, it’s just sad–let’s talk about real change and real alternatives, not more of the same old Republican/Democratic non-choices that consume the masses.
September 25, 2008 at 2:59 am
Man, you’re just not too bright. “I never lose when I compete”! Or “I always lie when I talk”… sounds closer to me. Are we to believe that you’re the reigning international poker champ? The world’s best chess master? Or is it possible that you lose more than you admit?
For example: you’ll be a loser on Nov. 5th.
By the way, I know what “old age and treachery” means… and it’s not a symbol of honesty or fairness. Very appropriate for you.
September 25, 2008 at 3:15 am
Here’s the problem with your entire post…it smacks of the same kind of inane idealism that marks just about every single element of the liberal agenda. The problem with almost every single liberal idea is that it has no basis in reality.
You should face some facts. First, this IS a game. It’s a very high-stakes game and these people play it hard, to the tune of the gross national product of some countries. They have more strategists, psychologists, surrogates and spin-doctors on retainer than you have hairs on your head. They study human nature, study the American electorate, determine what will elicit the most favorable response and then utilize what they’ve learned. The one thing that’s been clear for DECADES is that people CLAIM to want to hear about issues, but they simply don’t VOTE based on that conviction. Being a great volleyball player isn’t going to do them a lick of good if the sport is curling. These guys do what they have to do to WIN…and truly discussing the issues isn’t one of those things.
Debates are another joke. The primary responsibility of any candidate in the debate process is to “stay on message”, and those messages are half-sentence talking points that they drone on and on about because, as anyone who has been in the advertising business will tell you, it’s REPETITION that sells the product. I can tell you all about the top-quality natural ingredients in my product, but you’re going to buy it because it looked good in 200 television commercials, and you’re going to keep buying it because it tastes good. That’s reality.
Who the candidates truly are can only be discerned by what they’ve done UP TO THE POINT THAT THE CAMPAIGN STARTED. You want to know what someone stands for, see how he or she has handled him/herself for the 20 years prior to all this blazing media attention and the most challenging, disturbing “game” of their lives.
Here’s a hint–the word “Maverick” isn’t something John McCain just made up on the spot. Hell, he didn’t make it up at all…others did that for him. He’s not well liked in his own party–why? Because he pisses them off when he does what he thinks is RIGHT rather than what they believe will benefit the party.
Barack Obama? He’s NEVER crossed party lines and is roundly considered the most left-wing EVER to run for President. There’s no “maverick” there. There’s no “change”.
Let’s talk honor, character, service…these are words John McCain brought to the table LONG before this campaign ever started. Barack Obama? He rose faster than a helium balloon IN THE CHICAGO POLITICAL MACHINE where corruption has been the rule for a century or more. You can’t rise AT ALL in that environment without the blessings of some very bad men. Honor? Character? Obama? Yeah, right.
You claim to want change, which usually means action. The only way action will be accomplished is when the two parties can get together for the GREATER GOOD OF THE NATION and do what is right. John McCain has proven time and time again that he is not only willing but capable of making that happen, EVEN WHEN IT GOES AGAINST HIS PARTY. Barack Obama? For one thing he hasn’t been around long enough to have made anything happen–and what he does actually show up for isn’t change, it’s POLITICS. Change means the ability to come to the middle and find common ground. Barack Obama is the single most polarizing figure on the national political scene in American History. Explain to me exactly how your idea of change and your obvious support of Obama jive with your own claim?
Get real–in your desire and your ideology. Change cannot happen under Barack Obama; things can only get much, much worse and in utter anti-American fashion (since socialism is directly counter to everything this nation has always stood for). And since so many people are behaving just like you–claiming to want change but actively embracing more of the same–it will be an uphill battle for John McCain to bring about the REAL change we might actually have some hope of. In order to do that, he has to PLAY and WIN the game. You can’t bring honor, experience, and demonstrated change to the White House if you don’t first win the seat at the big desk.
September 25, 2008 at 3:27 am
Comment 15 answers comment 13; this comment (16) answers comment 14. Got all that?
Now…if you’ll read the rest of this blog you’ll see that I’m actually EXCEEDINGLY bright. To be precise, I’m probably the smartest person you’ll encounter all day. I’m a little arrogant, too. Just thought I’d point that out.
Now, as to the chess and poker things the answer is no. To be a chess grandmaster you have to dedicate more of your life than I care to in it’s pursuit. The same can be said of almost any world-class competitor in any endeavor. Can I be beaten in chess, or poker? Sure I can.
Just not by you.
In fact, not by most “ordinary” people.
Likewise there will be some out there who can out-think me, out analyze me, be right more often than I am.
You aren’t one of them.
In fact, most “ordinary” people (and a lot of “extraordinary” ones) aren’t either.
Don’t try. This can only end in disappointment for you. Seriously, dude…just go back to reading Salon (or comic books, which are of roughly equal merit) and thinking like a typical liberal. Which is to say, not. But don’t try to match wits with me.
And don’t ever, EVER get into a game of poker with me. WOW, will THAT end badly for you.
September 25, 2008 at 3:29 am
OA&T: So., do you admit that McCain put his interest above that of the nation when he suspended the campaign. If he was putting the nation’s interest ahead of his own, why did he not suspend the campaign a few days back? What was the one thing that hit him when he decided on the move?
Does he really thinks that he will go to DC & negotiate the package? On what basis, does he believe that he will be the difference to whether the bill gets passed or not?
Why is it he cancelled on his appointment with the PM of India, David Letterman but found himself doing an interview with Katie? If he though that his presence was so important in DC, why is he talking at the Clintion Initiative tomorrow instead of going to DC?
September 25, 2008 at 3:39 am
See comment 15, above.
“Country First” is obviously more than just a slogan for John McCain. He’s proven that in ways that the rest of us can only imagine in our worst nightmares…and he’s proven it since, for 26 years. Now he has the opportunity to put “country first” by using the principles that have guided him, to guide the country. He can’t do that from the sidelines, watching while a closet Communist destroys our nation. By doing what he needs to do–gamesmanship in combination with statesmanship, in this case–to secure the White House (and perhaps more importantly, keeping it out of the hands of the single worst Presidential candidate in modern history) he is absolutely putting his country first.
September 25, 2008 at 3:43 am
Registered as neither a Green, a Democrat, or a Republican, I’ll offer you that John McCain has the stink of “lose” all over him. Self-deluding, self-indulgent blog posts about what a “brilliant chessman” McCain would be do nothing to refute what increasingly appears to be a desperate, erratic, and off-the-rails campaign (or should I say ‘suspended campaign’?).
I’m rather eager to see what issue he’s going to flip-flop his sinking candidacy on next. No doubt his next move will again be the hallmark of a master gamesman!
September 25, 2008 at 3:47 am
We’ll see who’s right. Bet against me at your peril.
September 25, 2008 at 3:52 am
Obama has announced that he will be in Oxford no matter what. Everyone knows that McCain could handle any remaining financial crisis issues by e-mail and cell phone, his physical presence in Washington late on Friday night is not required. Obama has now brought up the need for a President to multi-task. McCain looks weak on that point. Mississippi is McCain country but now they are starting to really get angry with him for standing up Ole Miss. Furthermore, everyone is just plain sick and tired of Sarah Palin being sequestered away, as if she might say something dumb. I don’t think Sarah is dumb, so what is McCain worried about?
Obama took down the Clintons. Watch out Ahmadinejad and Putin, Obama is one bad mother shut-your-mouth!
Oh, and even conservatives (like me) will prosper nicely after eight years of Obama-Biden. It’s morning again in America.
September 25, 2008 at 4:02 am
I don’t think I’ve ever read a guy more full of himself for so little reason in my life. Brilliant moves? McCain is acting like a panic-stricken bimbo determined to make everybody else as scared to death as he is. His first thought when the ‘crisis’ starts is fire the head of the SEC. I’m sure that calmed many a Wall Street denizen who was already puking in the sink when he heard it. His vp choice who they’ve obviously figured out is in no way, shape or form ready for a debate on national TV about issues that she can’t get back to us about, utters the words every politician knows are verboten in times of financial turmoil- and this has all the makings of the mother of all financial turmoil’s – “The Great Depression.” And when McCain is asked if that isn’t a bit stupid –in so many words — hems and haws and says sit looks bad but i don’t know about Depression and then ten seconds later blurts out he’s heard we’re staring into The Abyss, but no, we shouldn’t be scaring people. Well, John, you’ve just sent 25 dudes out their office window.
Another valium for Wall Street. By his own omission he knows nothing about economics, he’s been a drumbeater and steady voter for Uncle Ronnie & Uncle Phil deregulation and the Bush’s privatization of everything possible including wars, not to mention being a past member of the Keating 5 so by rights, even if he goes to Washington, he shouldn’t be let near any discussion about how to save the country from this free market meltdown to hell.
And how this paints Obama into a corner helpless I’m missing totally. Obama has picked up 8 or 9 points this week and all he’s had to do is stand and watch McCain bounce around the room like Daffy Duck on a meth binge, babbling and postponing and suspending his campaign — probably going to want to postpone the election, if he isn’t in a straitjacket by then. And then we have to read about what a fabulous chess player, poker player and baseball manager you are. A steady hand and keen mind, you never lose. Well hooray for you, I’m sure you’re a sight to behold and if it’s true, it’s a damn shame you aren’t running for president because absolutely none of that applies to John McCain. His campaign stupidly sent out the internal talking points about suspending the campaign which makes him look even goofier, more cynical and more afraid to debate or let Palin debate. Yeah he was raring to debate until the financial policies he’s welded too are about to put our economy on a level with Zimbabwe. But if you think he wants to get in the same room with Obama on national TV for an hour of questions about deregulation and millions lost and how much more than 700 billion is it going to cost us working morons to bail out bankers and junk traders, with a provision drafted into it that makes the bailout – ta-da! — Unregulated and subject to no supervision or rules, you’re crazy. Not to mention there’s not one dime in this piece of crap going to anybody but Wall Street. Revolutions have been started over less than this.
If he debates, what’s he going to say? The economy is fundamentally sound while his nose spurts out an inch each time? Or the economy is fundamentally sound; it’s just a little more fundamentally sound for some than for others? Like 99 percent of those of you watching my nose grow even as I speak. Yes, I did vote for these hair brained economic bills every time but I’ve seen the light and I am the real agent of change in this election while the crowd roars with laughter?
I’ve re-read your column to see what I might be missing, but I don’t think I’m the one missing anything. It’s an interesting angle, but when George Will starts dissing the Republican for being a ditz and all but says he’ll take his chances with Obama, the Republican is toast and your talk of brilliant moves looks pretty much like the ultimate whistling past the graveyard.
September 25, 2008 at 4:14 am
$100.00. You have my email address.
September 25, 2008 at 4:23 am
Ok, I’ve read a few more of your replies and have a better feel for what you’re doing – and it’s not bad. I like that arrogant, Muhammad Ali thing you got going and the against the grain analysis. Hey on the slim chance you’re right, you look like a genius, right?
But you obviously aren’t from around Chicago so let me fill you in real quick. There’s still plenty of corruption in the state – somewhat of an understatement when you get down to state level politics in Springfield — but there is no corrupt evil machine in Chicago any more. Harold Washington cut off its head – patronage – and while it’s still exists, it doesn’t do much for anybody. Daley Jr doesn’t need it. There is virtually no Republican Party left in Illinois anymore and there never was much of one in Chicago until Washington ran for mayor the first time. So there’s no need for a machine. Two, Barack is a Hyde Park liberal, the University of Chicago, Senator Paul Douglas? And if there were still a corrupt evil machine, its’ lone enemy would be Hyde Park liberals. Always one in City Council to piss Daley senior off but Barack wouldn’t know how to go about getting the old machine to back him for anything. And a real machine politician from their golden era of the 40s to the 70s wouldn’t waste his time on the presidency. They couldn’t steal nearly as much as they could staying in Chicago as an alderman or ward committeeman.
Just a little Chicago political update there. No charge.
September 25, 2008 at 4:54 am
He’s for offshore drilling, after being against it for 26 years.
He was against torture, now he’s for it.
Against warrant-less wiretapping now he’s for it.
Against tax cuts, then for tax cuts, then against tax cuts and now is for raising FICA taxes.
Against privatizing social security and now he’s for it.
For protecting abortion rights now he’s against it.
Against storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain now he’s for it.
Against engaging in diplomacy with Hamas now he’s for it.
Against diplomacy in Syria now he’s for it.
Against going after Al Qaeda in Pakistan now he’s for it.
Against talking to Iran and now he’s for it.
Against talking to North Korea and now he’s for it.
For Liberman-Warner to curb Global Warming now he’s against it.
Both for and against attacking Obamas’ former Pastor.
Against inflating your tires and getting a tune up, now he’s for it.
For disclosure of campaign donations, now he’s against it.
For the Iraq war because it would be quick and easy now against anyone who said Iraq would be quick and easy.
Thought we were on the right course in Iraq in 2004 now says he’s always been against Rumsfeld’s strategy in Iraq.
FOR gay marriage now he’s against it.
For affirmative action until he was against it.
Against a timetable for withdrawal until he was for it.
For the troops until he voted repeatedly against their body armor, helmets, vest inserts, R&R at home after a one year deployment and Senator Webb’s GI bill.
This is just the last entry on a rather large list of flip-flops from what I would judge to be possibly the worst presidential candidate in history: John McCain… Have a read of the rest of the list at http://www.bi30.org/wordpress/flipflopper.htm
If he hasn’t made a difference in 26 years, what makes you think he’ll make a difference now? Plus, with the amount of flip-flopping he’s been doing I seriously doubt he even has a clue what’s going on. Someone find him a nice retirement village to live in because sure as hell that’s where he belongs right now.
Not to mention the fact that suspending his campaign is the single dumbest thing I have ever heard. He’s no economic expert and he’s far from being the “maverick” that he makes himself out to be. To think that he himself will craft this bailout bill out of thin air and push it through parliament thanks wholly to the fact he suspended his campaign is ludicrous. He has been absent for 109 of his last 110 senate votes and suddenly it’s super important to attend? Maybe he should have been a bit more consistent in his approach.
Perhaps he should leave it up to the people who have some idea about what’s going on in the financial market rather than inflame things further by using this crisis for political gain. The bailout is just delaying the inevitable and inefficiently allocating resources. Most economists with a clue are proponents of scrapping the bailout and allowing the banks to fail.
Airline companies worked fine while they were in bankruptcy why can’t investment banks be the same?
Anyway, you are clearly deluded about McCain and you should do some more research. Flip-flopping on issues isn’t necessarily a bad thing, since becoming more informed on an issue can change where you stand, but you should at least be willing to research the issue and come to a consistent conclusion.
P.S. People who claim to be “exceedingly” bright are not as bright as they think they are. If you were half as bright as you make out, you’d probably be running for President. Thankfully you are not.
September 25, 2008 at 8:12 am
Hey Narcissus,
The only thing McCain has proved is that he’s good at taking a beating. He did so in Vietnam, and he’s doing it again here at the end of his life. These are important bookends in his personal trajectory. He capitulated back then, and he’ll do so again. Like every other arrogant gambler- he’s ultimately proven himself to be a loser.
September 25, 2008 at 10:23 am
I SO want to answer all of the overnight comments, and I might in a few hours (once I’ve returned from doing my REAL work), but there are two specific points I’ll take the time to make now. The first one is directed at the guy who claims to be a conservative who is supporting Obama. You are no more a conservative than I am a liberal. I don’t care WHAT you claim to be (and you’re fooling nobody), but even if by some chance you DID consider yourself a conservative at one time, the moment you drink from the Obama fountain you not only turn your back on conservatism, you stab it repeatedly until it is dead, then you sign your name in blood above it’s corpse. The moment you even CONSIDER a vote for Barack Obama you become a liberal of the worst kind. Talk about the regression of thought.
The next point is do “merge divide” who wants to make a joke of John McCain’s torture in Vietnam, and his “capitulation”. I have never, personally, had to endure anything even remotely close to what John McCain did. My step-father, the man who raised me, did. Let me promise you three things–first, that you’ve never met a tougher son-of-a-bitch than my stepfather. Second, he would have beaten you to a bloody pulp for saying anything quite as callous and stupid as you just did (and you would deserve it), and third, you would “capitulate” in ten seconds. The fact that John McCain “broke” is not some kind of scar against him. Nobody, including my step-father, can undergo torture for long without “capitulating”. Of course they don’t make it look all that hard in the movies, but you can thank whatever God you pray to that you have never had to go through it. You’re an idiot for even bringing it up.
Since I’m on the subject, here’s a short story of my stepfather. He earned the highest honor available to a serviceman this side of the Medal of Honor (I believe this was the Distinguished Service Cross, but I’m not certain so I don’t want to say); a handful of purple hearts and another handful of other medals–NONE OF WHICH I’VE EVER SEEN. SERVICE is what was important to the man, not pieces of metal and ribbon. He was a quiet man, unassuming, and I watched him back a man twice his size and half his age up against a wall by his throat once (that man, incidentally, “capitulated”). My stepfather was in his mid-60s at the time. He never talked about the war unless he had too much to drink, and even then he spoke only sparingly. About the only time you ever even got a sense of what he had endured was when you carelessly (or callously) uttered an expression like “I’m starving”, when he would explain in a way that made your blood run cold that “you have no idea what it means to be starving”. When he would remove his shirt and you would see the scars, or when he would turn his arm a certain way that you’d never known anyone’s arm could even turn…that’s when you would learn about his service and what he endured in defense of his country. He was a paratrooper in World War II who was regularly dropped behind the Nazi lines and it is the actions of men–MEN–like he and John McCain that give you the freedom to say such moronic things in your mundane, haven’t-done-anything-close-to-what-they-did lives. My stepfather would punch you in the mouth if you said something like that in front of him, and you’d deserve it.
Come to think of it, I’d do the same in his memory. I’d be interested to see how quickly YOU “capitulate”.
The others on here amuse me, for the most part. You disgust me.
September 25, 2008 at 12:41 pm
“… and it is the actions of men–MEN–like he and John McCain that give you the freedom to say such moronic things in your mundane, haven’t-done-anything-close-to-what-they-did lives.”
Funny, it’s also people like John McCain that advocate torture in the first place. One would think that his own experience would lead him to think differently. But hey, it’s not so bad, right? Suspend Habeas Corpus, reauthorize the PATRIOT act, open secret prisons and terrorize the public at large with the fear of being detained indefinitely without being charged. Fuck the constitution. I mean, who really cares?
It’s people like John McCain that through their inaction on these issues make them JUST as bad as the people who tortured him. Possibly worse. Talk about hypocrisy. Fuck John McCain.
Obama ’08. Sucks to be a McCain supporter, he’s a shill and you’re all being swindled fabulously. But, some people are realizing that it’s not so much about supporting Obama’s policies it’s about disliking McCain and his lies and rhetoric enough to come to the conclusion that the ONLY logical choice is to vote Obama.
Don’t worry, John McCain probably won’t remember losing this election anyway. He sure as hell won’t remember some hack writing sweet nothings about his brilliant tactics either.
September 25, 2008 at 1:25 pm
I won’t bother with your post. It says one of two things:
1)You’re wrong about your intelligence.
2)You’re writting things you know are wrong.
Either is a good reason not to waste my time with that stupidity. Of course, in your view, there’d be option three- that you’re intelligent and you believe this tripe.
Good luck with that.
What is worth my time is a question…
How does your step-father, a man who went through hell for this country, feel about McCain politicizing his POW status? I ask this honestly- While I know a few war heros, none of them were tortured. Are you and your step-dad ok with McCain using his POW status as a political tool?
September 25, 2008 at 2:12 pm
My stepfather was a WWII hero. I can’t say exactly how he would feel if he thought John McCain was “exploiting” his service and the things that happened to him, but I don’t think that’s a realistic assessment. I think it is correct to say that McCain is using his unique situation to provide insight into his character, his makeup, and to demonstrate the lengths to which he’s already been willing to go for his country. When running for congress and the senate, McCain didn’t want this talked about but now, given the gravity of the situation and the office for which he’s running I don’t think he has much choice. This is compounded by the fact that he’s running against a man of questionable character and associations who brings NONE of this type of experience or dedication to the table. I can’t speak for my stepfather but I’d like to believe that he’d take the totality of the situation into account and understand the necessity for what McCain is doing. I know very well who he’d be voting for, and it sure wouldn’t be the little man from Chicago. My stepfather, by the way, was a lifelong Democrat.
September 25, 2008 at 2:15 pm
I should mention, by the way, that my stepfather has been dead for a decade now. I’m glad he doesn’t have to see what’s going on in this country he fought so proud and bravely for. I am certain, CERTAIN, he’d be ashamed. There are people trying to elect a Socialist as our President…people who call themselves Americans. It turns my stomach and I know it would turn his even more.
September 25, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Is it socialism to have the government fund fire fighters? Why don’t the fire insurance companies do that? Is it socialism to have the government build and maintain roads and highways? Why not have the auto and trucking companies do that? Is it socialism to secure air travel? Why not have the airlines do that?
We can argue about what services the government should or should not provide. But you’re a nutcase to call it socialism just because a service is provided by the government. We can take care of the least of us without being a socialist country. Christ himself told us to do that.
I am for small government, especially a small federal government. I am for state’s rights in most cases. I am a hardcore fiscal convervative. I think Obama supports these views, although apparently you can’t see that.
September 25, 2008 at 4:58 pm
It is socialism to suggest that those who create the wealth and opportunity in this country are somehow not “doing their fair share”; it is socialism to steal money from those who earn to give it to those who do not. I could go on, but I won’t waste time dictating what can clearly be uncovered with ten seconds homework. There is NOTHING–absolutely NOTHING–that even RESEMBLES fiscally conservative policies in Barack Obama’s world. It would be one thing if he were promising that in his campaign, which he would obviously be doing just to secure votes. He’s not even promising that…he’s promising taxes on business and those who represent the engine of the economy so he can give handouts to “95% of the American people” which, given that only 60% even pay a dime in taxes, means he’s passing MY money over to someone who has done NOTHING to earn it. And that’s just his campaign rhetoric–to know who Barack Obama is and what he TRULY stands for, you have to take a look at his HISTORY. What has he said, what has he done, what has he been for and against.
A true “hardcore fiscal conservative” would run as fast as he could away from Barack Obama. You either aren’t what you represent yourself to be, or you haven’t bothered to do the requisite homework before making such a statement. That, or you’ve chosen not to actually use that space between your ears.
For ANY conservative (particularly small-government, fiscal responsibility types)–for any state’s rights advocate, or military, or catholic, or businessman (large or small), or person with a grasp of history, or person raising children in America–there is only ONE candidate in this election for whom you can cast your vote, and it sure ain’t Barack Obama. Failing to heed that that is failing the very things you claim to be or to support.
September 25, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Obama is promising tax cuts to 95% of working families. If you don’t work or you don’t pay taxes you are not included. I like the idea that hard working people get to keep more of what they earn. The engines of the economy, the people running businesses and earning more than a quarter million a year, (me included) cannot help but keep doing what we do. We’re a bit compulsive that way, and I’m ready to give up my Bush tax cut tomorrow. Bush is the biggest spender in the history of the USA. And McCain has supported all of those new programs, so he gets no vote from me.
September 25, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Define working families? I can think of a dozen off the top of my head who work but not only don’t pay anything in taxes, they actually get money from the government every year IN ADDITION to their income tax refund (the misnamed “Earned Income Tax Credit”). These people are working, yes, and this is a step up from the welfare class devised and perpetuated by the Liberal left…but they are not paying taxes. Many of these, besides being paid in cash dollars from the government, are also on the government dole for health insurance, prescription drugs and food stamps. I know this because these are my very own family members we’re talking about. Is it right that someone who is creating opportunity should be required to distribute even MORE of his income to these folks who are doing, at most, just what they need to get by? Obama’s tax “cuts” would go to my sister, who positively has not done a thing in her life–not just this year, but in her entire life–to earn them. In the meantime his tax INCREASES on the small business owners who CREATE JOBS AND ECONOMIC PROSPERITY/OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHERS will stifle growth. It’s idiotic, and it’s patently unfair. No real American could support that kind of thinking. That is flat-out my honest opinion. You either believe in personal responsibility and REASONABLE civic duty, or you don’t. Stealing from the rich to give to the poor is not noble or honorable…it’s Communist, and it’s wrong.
September 25, 2008 at 5:36 pm
OA&T:
Judging by the feedback to this blog, I’d say you struck a nerve.
September 25, 2008 at 6:39 pm
This is not a zero-sum game. The citizens that have earned themselves comfort and security benefit when those less motivated or capable are housed and fed. In other words, everybody benefits when we all look out for each other. I would rather be a tiny bit less rich and live in a compassionate and healthy community.
You’re in the minority with your angry old man views. And you should show an itty-bit more respect for your own sister. In my humble opinion.
September 25, 2008 at 7:53 pm
You know I would love to agree with you. I honestly would. I’d also love if everyone took only what they needed from society, and contributed to the best of their abilities. I would be the first person to sign on for a program like that…
…if there was any chance in Hell that human nature would allow the concept to work. Unfortunately I’m a realist, not an idealist. I know human beings will never, ever, ever be this way. Which is why Communism will never work. No form of it, not now, not ever. That leaves us either wishing it were different and lamenting that it is not, or it leaves us accepting that, regrettably, Darwin was right and we had better come to terms with it. I reached the latter conclusion already and I’m working to make sure I and my family are not the gazelles at the back of the pack.
If you want to bring a REALISTIC idealism to this, you could argue (rightly, perhaps) that as reasoning human beings, we should strive to rise above our own weaknesses and our inherent nature. This is equivalent in some respects to challenging the wisdom of God (if you believe in such things) and I’m not sure it’s the right course. For the sake of argument though, let’s say that our creator gave us the higher functions so that we might overcome our natural limitations. I’d be fine with a REASONABLE attempt to do this, but it’s got to be tempered with an intelligent examination of what works and what doesn’t and THIS is where the liberal agenda, in my estimation, fails miserably. History has consistently proven that attempts to adopt communist principles (no matter what they’re called at the time) ALWAYS fail miserably. We should also be able to extrapolate from history that the American model of free enterprise, liberty and opportunity are the most likely path to enriching society and bringing even our weak “along for the ride”. This is why America’s poor are rich by the standards of so many other countries. BUT I’LL TAKE IT EVEN ONE STEP FURTHER STILL…America still has a lot of work to do. There is improvement that can be made. I’m going to write a more in-depth post soon that discusses that very proposition. In effect it’s going to say that we can adopt some “socialized” principles BUT THAT THEY MUST BE BASED UPON HOW THE RECIPIENTS OF THE PROGRAMS CONTRIBUTE TO THE SOCIETY, not on how much the government can steal from those who have already contributed (and continue to do so every day). This is the only type of socialized program I could ever buy into.
The long and short of it is this…America remains the best attempt at civilization that’s been made in human history to date, and we have the overwhelming abundance and growth to prove that out. “Reverting” to concepts that have proven fatal in other societies (such as the socialist programs that have made Europe such a weak and unsustainable region) would be foolhardy at best. If we wish to “tinker” with our approach to try to improve upon what is already great, I’m all for that (who wouldn’t be?)…but to make the types of wholesale changes to the system that the Saul Alinsky’s of the world would admire is most definitely NOT the right approach. Alinsky wanted to sow discord FROM THE INSIDE among the “lower” classes, in order to co-opt them into “the revolution”. America’s original promise, though, is to bring everyone along into prosperity, by bringing everyone together toward the common purpose–the pursuit of liberty and happiness. Alinsky’s discord and liberty’s promise simply don’t mesh.
September 25, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Comment 36–I’d say you’re right. I guess that’s a good thing if it makes people think, right?
September 26, 2008 at 2:37 am
Uh, duh. What gives McCain the right to call off the debate? The debate is an opportunity for voters to see both candidates facing off. Who needs McCain’s heroics? And his veep pick is out there making a fool of herself. If she was smart, she would have turned down the opportunity, with so little experience only a narcissist could go out there like Palin. But that’s what happens to narcissists–everyone starts to see the truth. Why look, the empress isn’t wearing any clothes!
Man are we a bunch of dumb asses in this country or what?
September 26, 2008 at 9:22 am
Given that nearly half the country is currently saying they’d vote for Barack Obama (talk about an emperor without clothes!), I would have to agree with you–we are a bunch of dumb asses in this country, yes.
As for the “right” to call off the debate (which McCain didn’t do–he postponed the debate to do some real work), there is no requirement that the candidates EVER debate. He could cancel all of them if he wanted…just like Barack Obama has denied the TEN other debates McCain has repeatedly asked him to have. Everyone who is so up-in-arms about McCain’s decision should have been pressing OBAMA to debate months ago. What gives HIM the right to avoid debating with McCain?
September 26, 2008 at 1:05 pm
I have to agree with you. John McCain is a brilliant tactician and a very crafty and capable opponent. He’s made bold moves throughout his career, whether it’s deregulation, campaign finance reform, or his bold proposals on immigration, the guy is a tough maverick.
Watching Barack Obama gracefully turn McCain’s strikes back against him reminds me of an old Tai Chi master I once saw. Remember, Obama rose to leadership in one of the toughest political arenas in the world, Chicago. He bested one of the most skillful poltical machines in American history, the Clintons. Now he is schooling the wiley old Navy captain.
That is the guy I want going up against China, Russia, Iran, and Isalmic fundamentalists. That is the guy I want slashing obsolete programs out of a bloated federal budget. That is the guy I want kicking ass on corporate swindlers. McCain would be a good president. Obama is historic.
September 26, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Oh, Obama would be historic alright. The history book would go something like “Barack Obama ushered in the end of the United States of America as we know it”. Buy into the “slashing obsolete programs” rhetoric if you want to, but the guy’s history, and the Democrats history more specifically, say otherwise. Most of those obsolete programs are remnants of other failed attempts at socialism, and a HUGE chunk of the “bloated federal budget” is DIRECTLY TIED to the social programs we’re already tied to–failing programs that the Democrats can’t touch or they’d lose all of their constituency en masse. History just doesn’t support your assertion that the EXCEEDINGLY LIBERAL Barack Obama will accomplish any of the things you’ve mistakenly attributed to his candidacy.
September 26, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Dallas, #42:
I must say, your comments regarding Obama’s reaction to the current situation with McCain are the first I’ve heard that made me stop a moment and give some consideration to the possibility that perhaps Obama’s responses/reactions have some merit for dealing on the world stage.
But then I remembered Obama’s comments from yesterday regarding the banking debacle, which were something on the order of “I am appalled that things have gotten to this point, and I think we should press forward with developing a solution.” Well, DUH-H-H! What about that comment is actually considered or constructive? To my way of thinking, it is merely an observation of the situation, and one which I was perfectly able to deduce on my own. And where was Obama, a United States Senator, during the past nearly four years, such that he is only just now appalled by the process which became this situation?
Regarding Obama’s comments that a President ought to be able to do more than one thing at a time, that is an accurate statement. But I have done something Obama has not; I have actually been in executive management positions. I know, and Obama apparently does not, that sometimes it is absolutely necessary to divide your attention between competing issues, and sometimes that is the worst thing you can do given the issues at hand. This financial crisis may actually be one of those times that divided attention is hazardous, and frankly I think Obama’s comment that we should not insert presidential politics into the situation may simply be self-serving. It certainly allows him to avoid actually taking a stand and putting himself on the line.
My experience with people who are consistently prone to state the obvious and who avoid taking a stand on the tough questions has been that those people are not dependable when the chips are down. In fact, they usually find a way to absent themselves from the process of solving the problem. Which, come to think of it, kind of looks like what Obama has been doing in regard to the current crisis, namely that he was just going to stay in Florida, continue to campaign and show up for the debate as previously planned.
As you asert, it would seem that Obama knows how to be political, but I have yet to see politics solve a problem.
September 26, 2008 at 4:24 pm
You have stated something that I think John McCain would be well served to point out and keep hammering home. Barack Obama is a wonderful contemplater; this is one of the reasons it takes him so long to answer a simple question. While there is merit in the ability to take information in and consider it, there comes a point where one must DECIDE and then ACT. This, by the way, is the name of my upcoming book.
What separates John McCain from Barack Obama is that he is not afraid to reach that point. Obama waits until the wind has stopped blowing…reactionary but not until AFTER someone else has made a decision upon which he can build (correctly or incorrectly, as the case may be). McCain, on the other hand, will dive into a problem WHILE IT’S STILL A PROBLEM. This is why he sometimes seems to make zig-zag mistakes and say things from which he may have to retreat later. Sometimes it’s called “flip flopping”–not something I particularly have a problem with, so long as the final destination is the right one. McCain is a get-your-hands-dirty kind of problem solver, unafraid to mix it up to get the job done. Obama waits until the map is pretty much laid out before actually doing anything. Sometimes this is appropriate, but oftentimes it winds up making a “blister” of him; he shows up after all the hard work has been done.
Information-gathering is nice. Contemplation is, too. But a leader has to eventually make a decision and ACT, good or bad. This is something Obama has shown virtually zero ability to do.
September 26, 2008 at 4:40 pm
OA&T:
LOL! I like the “blister” comparison. Never heard it used that way before, but I will be sure to remember it! Quite astute and appropriate.
September 26, 2008 at 4:46 pm
dude get over yourself fuck. there are plenty of places that offer a much greater quality of life than america and they are all pretty socialist places to be. Guess what- they WORK so fuck your couch.
September 26, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Ordinarily I would just take Comment 47 down and be done with it since it’s obviously posted by a 12 year old. However, in this case I need to correct this misguided child…again.
There is NO PLACE ON EARTH that offers a SUSTAINABLE “greater quality of life” than America. Anyone can spend themselves into oblivion and give themselves really nice things, for a short while. Any government can do the same, and promise even more. The problem with that is that promises always hinge on tax dollars. Germany, for instance, has made promises to its aging population about the healthcare and retirement benefits that it’s socialist-leaning government will be giving them as they get older.
The only problem with Germany’s plan is that they have more people getting older and retiring than they have young people entering the workforce and paying taxes. They have more and more business being lost to less-costly competition overseas, which in turn generates less opportunity and tax dollars to support their wild promises. You might think of this plan as “Obama Lite”. It’s unsustainable and, on it’s current path, there will be no Germany as we know it in 30 or so years.
There remains NO PLACE ON EARTH where people have the opportunity for long-term success and freedom than right here in the United States. Now since you’re a child and you’ve been indoctrinated into the Saul Alinsky Socialist framework, I won’t hold you responsible for the foolish things you say. If you were an ADULT I’d tell you to take your sorry ass over to one of those countries you think is so great and leave America to those who understand what it’s all about and appreciate the liberties and opportunities it presents to you (and anyone else willing to make good on it). For now the best I can hope for is that you, too, will eventually grow up. When that happens you’ll come to understand why, at the moment, you know not of what you speak. Like anyone with a brain, though, you’ll figure it out once you’ve taken on a little bit of experience and wisdom.
September 27, 2008 at 1:15 am
haha… thank you for once again pointing out that you are indeed an idiot. may I point your attention to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index which is a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education and standards of living. Guess what? America doesn’t even rank on it. They are far down the list at number 12. So get your facts straight before you call me a child.
And, I don’t know what you mean by sustainable, but, the current state of affairs in America is certainly not sustainable. Largest national debt of any country…. call that sustainable?
“Anyone can spend themselves into oblivion and give themselves really nice things, for a short while.”
that just describes the current state of affairs in America RIGHT NOW! spending themselves into oblivion, gradually losing their relevance in the global economy.
Oh yeah, btw, McCain flip-flopped on the debate sucker!!! Looks like he’s not so brilliant after all. Also, his definition of “helping” with the bailout bill was: “stay very silent and make some broad blanket summary at the end” haha he’s a washed up old geezer who has NO idea.
September 27, 2008 at 1:57 am
I need not call you a child again; you’ve already proven that beyond doubt. Regarding the statistics you’ve offered, they prove nothing beyond what I’ve already stated–that any nation can spend themselves into a fine position, but unless they can keep the promises they make to their citizens in the process (“sustained prosperity”) what they achieve in the short-term is meaningless.
The United States has built, from the ground up, the most effective and longest-lasting example of overall prosperity in the history of mankind. It’s success has been duplicated in many nations, many of which I’m sure sit atop the list you’ve just provided (which I won’t bother with because it is not germane to the issue at hand). I’m certain not all of those governments have embraced socialism; I’m equally certain that a deeper examination of the fact would reveal that for those that HAVE taken on socialistic principles, there is a severe price waiting to be paid in the next twenty to fifty years. Economic models suggest that some of the most well-known nations in the world (France and Germany among them) will CEASE TO EXIST by 2050 if they do not substantially alter their social welfare programs because there will be no way to pay for those promises in the coming decades.
You’ll be happy to note that I actually agree with you that America is spending at a ridiculous rate at the moment. I’ll also lay some of the blame for that on the Republicans who had an opportunity to reverse that course but chose instead to give in to the temptations of greed and corruption. MORE BIG-SPENDING, ECONOMY-KILLING SOCIAL PROGRAMS WILL NOT MAKE THAT BETTER; IN FACT THEY WILL MAKE IT MUCH WORSE. These types of programs stifle business, the engine of economic progress. No business, no jobs. No jobs, no money. It’s a pretty simple formula.
As to Senator McCain’s participation in Washington, he didn’t go in to grandstand (as Mr. Obama clearly did); rather he went in to assess the situation and do what he could to make sure that house Republicans had the opportunity to be heard on the issue. He did what had to be done lest Harry Reid hang a bad bill around his–and America’s–neck. As a result the American taxpayers will get a MUCH better result for their hard-earned dollars. I realize this is probably meaningless to you because high school kids don’t pay much if anything in taxes. To the adults in this nation, though, that’s an important consideration.
Lastly, regarding the McCain “flip flop” on the debate, you’ll note that some people suspected all along that the debate would go on as planned, pretty much right from the beginning. I’m happy to say I was one of them, from the start:
“There’s only one part of this that works against him, and that is that the American people will be disappointed there won’t be a “cage match” this Friday. We’ve all been looking forward to it, and at first we’re going to be a little upset–BUT THAT UPSET WON’T LAST FOR LONG because you can be certain the McCain team has a debate planned. It may even occur on Friday!”
This is gamesmanship combined with statesmanship. You’ll learn about statesmanship when you take your first Civics class (or possibly in History–it’s unclear from your babbling just how far along you are in school). Gamesmanship, though, is something that comes with experience. One of my favorite statements of gamesmanship goes something like this:
“Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill every time.”
You’d do well to remember that, both on November 4th (so you won’t be too upset when McCain wins) and throughout your life. That way, you won’t take spankings like the one I just gave you quite as often.
You’re done posting here, by the way. You pose no challenge and I’ve grown weary of you. More importantly, I won’t be watching this space beyond the next few hours so there really isn’t much point in continuing your disjointed rambling, is there?
I hold no ill will toward you, by the way–it isn’t your fault you’ve been brainwashed. Learn to think for yourself, get a little life experience, and you’ll be fine. Oh, and don’t take on fights you can’t win–that’s always good advice. Here’s some more…when you start to shave, always remember to shave WITH the grain of your skin, not against it. Remember that semen contains protein and that leaves stains, so when you masturbate try not to clean up with a sock or a dry towel–your mother will know right away what you’ve been up to. Parallel parking is not NEAR as hard as it will seem to be when you first start driving–just keep practicing. And lastly, wikipedia is pretty much the last place anyone with a brain looks for ANY information of importance…wiki references are pretty much for internet noobs who are too lazy to do the REAL work of fact-finding. Keep those things in mind…they’ll all help you get through high school.
Good luck.
Have a nice life.
September 27, 2008 at 3:08 am
Nice move to try and undermine me as a person… when you know you’ve lost what else can you do but try. I’ll just ignore that and at least correct you as to how far along I really am. I’m currently doing a thesis in electrical engineering and computer science so please refrain from allowing your ignorance to shine. You clearly know nothing about economics and by having an arts degree you believe you know better than anyone else.
You’re not a total idiot though. Oh yeah, P.S. Wikipedia is as good as anywhere else on the internet. Plus I hardly think you have subscriptions to any journals.
As to your claim that:
“MORE BIG-SPENDING, ECONOMY-KILLING SOCIAL PROGRAMS WILL NOT MAKE THAT BETTER; IN FACT THEY WILL MAKE IT MUCH WORSE.”
You increase taxes to cover the costs of social programs. This doesn’t result in a net outflow of money since it is being injected right back into the economy as a whole. The only time that money is removed from the economy is when you have a budget surplus – you tax more than you spend. So, no, they won’t necessarily make it worse. They may even make it better. You see, you’ll lose some disposable income with higher taxes, but at least you know those tax dollars will go to employ American men and women rather than say, importing some expensive luxury items from overseas.
It is very true that Germany and France face a huge crisis as the “baby boomers” reach retirement ages. It’s the exact same crisis Japan is currently in and they are still surviving OK. It becomes difficult, but not impossible to manage.
Here in Australia, there are plans in place to avoid similar problems – we have mandatory superannuation. 11% of our pay is automatically deposited in a superannuation fund over the course of our working lives. This can add up to a huge sum of money by the time you reach retirement. The problem is, many current retirees have insufficient superannuation to cover their day-to-day spending needs. This compulsory superannuation has been in place for years now, so anyone leaving the workforce in 30 or 40 years will be well equipped to cope without government pensions. The government need only address this ‘lag’ period over which people aren’t retiring with enough superannuation and the crisis is over. It will be difficult, but not impossible to manage. I imagine similar things are in place in Germany and France.
Apologies about some knee-jerk reactions and offensive language because it hardly conveys the views of an intelligent person. I just don’t see why on earth you’d vote for John McCain and it’s frustrating that someone reasonably educated like yourself can’t see that Obama really is the best your country has to offer right now. He may not be perfect, but he’ll take the country in a new direction which is where it needs to go right now. It almost seems that America is slipping into facism.
You seem like an OK person, and it’s nice to be able to debate the issues. Cheers.
September 27, 2008 at 3:47 am
See, now if you had started out that way I wouldn’t have had to go all condescending on your arse. THOSE points are well considered. They’re wrong, but they’re well considered.
The reality that is not quite so clear in the foreign press is that what a candidate says on the campaign trail and what a candidate actually stands for (and would do) are often far apart. In Barack Obama’s case, he has a demonstrated history of ideology that directly contradicts almost everything the founders of this country believed in…this in itself is disturbing, but his associations with people and organizations that are clearly anti-American (and, like it or not, socialism and the other Marxist offshoots are positively anti-American) lead myself and others to seriously doubt his judgement and credibility.
John McCain does not have a blemish-free record, but he’s often admitted when he’s wrong. Lost on many, particularly I suspect on those outside of America, is that John McCain has ALWAYS followed a path he believes to be correct for this nation, even when that path runs counter to the party to which he belongs. McCain has a demonstrable record of reaching accord among dissimilar collegues; he is widely respected among both parties (so much so that he was seriously considered as the running mate for Democrat John Kerry in 2004, despite that McCain is a Republican); and unlike Obama, McCain’s honor and patriotism have never been questioned–at least not until the campaign began in earnest, when NOTHING is sacred and, for that matter, nothing can be believed from either candidate or their supporters. Our election process sucks, but it is what it is and a part of intelligent decisionmaking during this process is considering the man (or woman) BEFORE the election began. McCain passes that test nicely, while Obama barely has any credentials to run on and those he does have are distasteful to many of us.
When the rhetoric and vitriol are removed from the equation, this becomes a simple thing for me. I have long admired John McCain. I’m right-center-right fiscally and economically, but more left-center-right on social issues. I believe, for instance, that there should be no prohibition on gay marriage, that the drug war is idiotic, and that the Patriot Act is just about the worst example of anti-Patriotic legislation ever devised. I ALSO believe that people in this country are given every possible opportunity to succeed if they truly want to do so, and that a handout is not a leg up. I believe that all welfare programs should be pared down to near-nothingness, that class warfare is unproductive (and often counterproductive), that free markets are the only means to growth and prosperity, and that liberty means not just opportunity but responsibility. Too many of the Barack Obamas in this world leave that last part out of the picture, and I can’t abide that.
I obviously slice-and-dice when I’m in attack mode; I’m pretty good at it and it’s kinda fun so I don’t hold back much. Naturally I lay it on pretty thick, as I did with you regarding your age. That said, I nevertheless believe without doubt that your world view will change as you age. At your age I was a bit more conservative than you are, but FAR more liberal than I am now. Your evolution will occur as you begin to realize that dreams never quite work out the way you think they will, that people are never quite as good as you think they are, and that black and white really are pretty much black and white. When you find yourself having to choose among them, rather than holding on (as all young people do) to the notion of varying shades of gray, you’ll find your thinking will grow more conservative as well. That isn’t me talking down to you (not this time, anyway)…that’s just my experience coupled with everything I’ve learned from everyone who has made it past age 40. Hold onto your dreams, by all means, and temper your inclination toward despair with your ideology for as long as you can…you’ll be the better man for it in the end. But keep in mind that there is quite a chasm between the world we wish we lived in and the one we actually occupy–and the sooner you mentally make the leap toward the realities of the world the sooner you’ll be able to do your part to bring your “wish world” closer to fruition.
Incidentally I don’t have a degree in the Arts. I’m a businessman, and writer, and bum, and any of a dozen other appropriate titles. No degree, though. I couldn’t bear the idea of sitting through another four, six or eight years being lectured by people who were half as smart as I was (no matter their education level). Some days I regret that decison…and then I hear people like Barack Obama speak and I’m reminded all over again why I did EXACTLY what I needed to do given my intellect and disdain for those who could not match it. Sounds terribly arrogant, doesn’t it…? I’m going to have to work on that.
Someday.
September 27, 2008 at 4:50 am
Heh, I guess I have misjudged you. Suffice to say that much of what you said just then resonates with me. You’d probably be a fervent supporter of Ron Paul given the chance. I’m definitely for a market free of government intervention and I certainly have a social conscience.
The one thing I can say against free market economics is that without government regulation such as requiring seat belts in cars, there is no incentive for producers to adhere to it if it means the product will be more expensive. As such, you’d probably see the quality and safety of many products diminish, while the cost of the product would probably fall. So there needs to be an inherent amount of government regulation that doesn’t change in most industries. Especially safety regulations. We don’t live in quite so much of a Darwinian world these days.
At the end of the day, the President can only do so much as the senate allows him, so just being elected doesn’t guarantee results. It’s probably better that with a Democratic run senate a Republican president be elected since it encourages bipartisanship and only the bills that are moderate enough and about issues important enough will be passed. But at the moment, your country needs decisive leadership. That will be best imparted by having a Democratic President. If only to bring the troops home and save your nation an enormous bill in the form of military spending. Then it will be time to be introspective and fix the great nation that was once America. Restoring basic liberties and rebuilding after this financial crisis should also be high on the agenda.
Oh yeah, national healthcare isn’t so bad – I know it’s served me well when I have needed to use it. I have never been in a situation where I have been denied treatment because I don’t have money or health insurance. It’s also probably a boon to the economy – a healthy workforce is a productive workforce
To lose my idealist notion of the world would be to lose part of what makes me human: compassion for others. I understand and acknowledge that I am more fortunate than a lot of people by virtue of being born in a prosperous, developed nation. It is therefore my duty to occasionally (not always) put others before myself and any selfish desires I might have and help out as best as possible. At some point in life the pursuit of money and power becomes moot. Note that most of the mega rich figure this out and become philanthropists. So the ultimate goal is not to acquire stinking big piles of cash, but to leave the world a better place for having been there. As a corollary, I can have morality without god telling me to be good
.
So, what kind of books do you write? Is it difficult to get published? Coming from a reasonably curious person.
September 29, 2008 at 11:40 pm
You dared me to bet against you at your peril, yet I’ve seen no acceptance of my $100.00 wager that McCain will not win.
Looking at the polls, it would appear that McCain’s gambit COST him 4% (which now have gone to Obama). It was 46% vs 46% when I wagered $100.00 that “suspending the campaign” was a stupid move on the part of McCain.
Shall I understand that you do not back your words and refuse the wager?
Don’t worry, I won’t blame you for refusing the wager. It was even money when I took your dare. Things aren’t looking so good for Sidney now.