New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Where is the political rage?

Cicero

Mayor
It occurs to me that the rightwingers have yet to go at one another's throat. I recall back in 2008 when for a time it seemed that if they could have done so, many Hillary Clinton supporters and Barack Obama supporters would have done real damage to one another.

Of course that was much farther along in the contest. So perhaps it's just too early yet for such passions to rise on the Right regarding their gaggle of candidates.

But then again, I don't recall right of center posters getting particularly heated in 2008 when McCain and the others were going through their trained seals acts on stage, fighting it out to be the last GOP candidate standing. Perhaps it's just not something that happens on the Right. I dunno.

At the moment the corporate background of Mitt Romney is coming under scrutiny and the reality that he seemed to have been pretty much a corporate raider, someone in an investment consortium that bought out struggling companies, laid off about half of the employees, forced the remaining employees to do the work of both their work and that of the missing men and women and then as soon as the newly lean and mean corporate machine began turning out a real profit, put it up for sale, and then took the money and started the whole cycle over again somewhere else.

Here's a few dirty little secrets though, George Herbert Bush also used to do the same thing before he finally became president. He was notorious for doing just that as a matter of fact and nobody seemed bothered by that sort of thing back in the 1990s. Lyndon Baines Johnson was a war profiteer back in the Vietnam War era, though of course that was never proved.

Generally speaking we do not put saints into the Oval Office. The nearest we came to doing so during the last century was perhaps Jimmy Carter and, frankly, he sucked dishwater as a president. The Left tried it again in 2008 and their Political Messiah has been a total dud.

So perhaps Right of Center voters are simply practical enough, realists enough, to instinctively understand that saints make for bad presidents [even false saints like Obama].

But then again perhaps it's still early times yet, and perhaps our Right of Center posters will yet get heated over this GOP contest for the Party's nomination. If so then that should get interesting by and by.
 

degsme

Council Member
Carter actually did OK as POTUS ... until the Joint Chiefs basically
ed it up and let him down in Eagle Claw
 

Cicero

Mayor
Riiiiiight. The president is supposed to be a leader among other things and Carter couldn't lead hungry ants to a sugar bowl. He was a well-meaning fool. His only positive accomplishment was the Camp David Accords. But then again, at least that's one more positive accomplishment than Barack Obama has achieved. That's something anyway.
 

degsme

Council Member
Riiiiiight. The president is supposed to be a leader among other things and Carter couldn't lead hungry ants to a sugar bowl.
He lead just fine. His JCoS lied to him about how much they could and could not pull off. And the JCoS failed in their jobs because the morale and readiness was so low in no small part because of their inter-service rivalries. Yes a leader must lead - but when he's surrounded by bozos foisted on him from his predecessor (remember JCoS serve a term not concurrent with the POTUS) - there is only so much you can do in 2 or so years to fix the problem.

Carter was dinged by the WA establishment - largely George Will - because he didn't like the socializing game. But he was no less a "leader" than Nixon was or Ford. He just had the bad luck of Eagle Claw failing.

If you look at the polling numbers back then, Carter leads Reagan going into Eagle Claw... and when Eagle Claw fails, within a month Reagan pulls ahead of Carter and never looks back
 

degsme

Council Member
Riiiiiight. The president is supposed to be a leader among other things and Carter couldn't lead hungry ants to a sugar bowl. He was a well-meaning fool. His only positive accomplishment was the Camp David Accords. But then again, at least that's one more positive accomplishment than Barack Obama has achieved. That's something anyway.
Right Obama did not achieve

Getting Bin Laden
Getting Q'daffi (something even Reagan Bungled)
Reversing an 820,000job/mo peaks job loss slide
turn a 9%/annum GDP loss into a 2.5% GDP growth (which BTW is ABOVE what GWB AVERAGED for almost a decade)
having the insight to prevent a meltdown in the Acc'ts Receivable lending that would have caused unemployment to jump an additional 5%-10%
Did not execute on the Iraq withdrawal succesfully
Defusing a potential race riot in Southie
succeed in becoming the first Dem POTUS to be able to make significant cuts to DoD spending

Nah, none of those are accomplishments
 

Cicero

Mayor
There's no point in trying to convince me since I know that Obama is a rotten president. The question is that if Obama and his operatives continue to shriek for the next ten months or so that people eating Alpo due to his policies and incompetent [or corrupt] decisions are really eating the same lobster that he and Michelle [My Belle] eat during their frequent and lavish vacations, will the Alpo chompers . . . believe in fairy tales one more time come voting day?

I wouldn't, but then again, you can always hope that people like the taste of Alpo.
 

Jen

Senator
Democrats like their leaders to sit down, shut up, vote "present", lead from behind ...........or play the saxophone. If they do much more than that, they are considered to be "hawkish".


Riiiiiight. The president is supposed to be a leader among other things and Carter couldn't lead hungry ants to a sugar bowl. He was a well-meaning fool. His only positive accomplishment was the Camp David Accords. But then again, at least that's one more positive accomplishment than Barack Obama has achieved. That's something anyway.
 
Top