I blame the campaign finance laws.
Special interests, lobbyists, and the like were a foil for the great
unwashed masses. Sometimes the monied interests won, sometimes the mob won.
It was a balancing act.
When the special interests won, the mob would get all exercised and vote out
the crooks. When the mob won, those financially affected would pour money
into the next election.
It evened out.
Now, with the special interest mostly emasculated, the rabble wins more
The ideals and principles of American democracy, to coin a phrase, is not a
suicide pact. Here's an example from another realm.
Orthodox Judaism holds that there are 613 Commandments - plus thousands more
regulations based upon these commandments. These rules were handed down
directly from God and God is not fond, to say the least, of anyone violating
them. Still, breaking these rules and commandments is not only permitted but
required and meritorious when a life would be at risk if the rules were
Would you say a Jewish surgeon called to save a life on the Sabbath was
showing a "disdain" for his religious teachings? Would you complain that a
Jewish soldier firing back at an enemy was not adhering to his "principles?"
If a leaders "falsehoods" are considered evidence of evil, what about God
lying to Abraham?
If you assert that "polarization" is a bad thing, how do you explain the
truth: "If you've got two Jews, you automatically have three opinions"?
* For the purist, there ARE three exceptions.
Yes, thank you. I'm glad you picked up on that. :)
[ Clearly, there is a need for a sniley type icon to indicate sarcasm
(where a "snile" is a facial expression about midway between a sneer and
a smile). ]
There is a difference between a screwup and a conscious intent to mislead
people. I recognize that either is a possible explanation in the
circumstances we're discussing. But, after 6 years *no one* has produced
a shred of evidence that Bush/Cheney et al knowingly mislead us. Quite
to the contrary, their detractors have regularly demonstrated themselves
to be outright liars: Pelosio lied about the CIA, Gepettobama lied about
curtailing earmarks, Frank lied about the health of the Fannie/Freddie
system, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Does this make W's administration
fabulous? No, of course not. But it's hard for me to take criticism
of W very seriously when it is primarily leveled by demonstrable liars
in their own right.
Like I said, get some real proof of your contentions and you'll be awarded
a medal for being a Hero Of The Soviet Sheeples Revolution In AmeriKKKa...
Tim Daneliuk email@example.com
On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:48:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
No, I don't think so.
I believe Tim is saying that, in all the blather about it, no one has
presented conclusive evidence that Bush lied about anything. There is
a very big difference between a deliberate, conscious intent to
mislead and acting on bad intelligence.
Have you never presented a statement you believed to be fact that was
later shown to be wrong? If that's the case you are quite a unique
individual. But, does that mean you lied?
Of course, if the speaker is already despised, for whatever reason,
any incorrect statements will be interpreted as lies, whether or not
they really are.
And ... with considerable irony ... it is Bush's most severe critics
in the political arena that have turned out to be the demonstrable
FWIW, I think what went on there was way more complex than the Bush Haters
and the Bush Supporters grant. I think there was a combination of
forces and actions at work:
- Saddam's intransigence even though he was a demonstrable butcher
and was openly supporting Palestinian suicide terrorists.
- The world's intel community coming to approximate agreement,
possibly skipping a few steps of proof, because pretty much everyone
knew the guy was a monster and needed to be stopped.
- There is some credible evidence (not proof) that Russian Spetsnaz
special forces moved "sensitive materiale'" into the Syrian Bekka
valley from Iraq.
- Bush/Cheney's unwillingness to divulge sensitive operational intel
to the world media to prove their case and instead trusting that their
fellow legislative citizens like Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Durbin, et all
(who almost universally voted to go to war) would do the right thing
*during the war*. The administration was wrong. The sheer hubris,
arrogance, selfishness, and treachery of the political Left was
breathtaking and almost record setting. (The only time I've seen worse
in my lifetime at least was Johnson and McNamara lying through their
teeth about a win in Viet Nam using their policies while American GIs
died for nothing.) Even Nixon looks like a stone cold saint by
comparison to today's Left scumbags.
As crummy as the Right has been, the Left continues to accelerate
to be much orders of magnitude worse.
Tim Daneliuk firstname.lastname@example.org
BushCheney's reasoning was syllogistic:
All tyrants have WMD's
Saddam is a tyrant
Saddam has WMD's
how many flaws can you find in the syllogism?
What if you decided to give the 'others' the wherewithal to kill each
You guys want to 'off' each other? Here's some toys!
Nothing like fomenting a destructive rivalry with the end result being
a smaller, tired all-shot-hell opponent?
I'm sure HeyBub would approve.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.