Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Obama's tired

THIS really got to me. Can you imagine if Bush had said how tired he was from being president? How did Bush, an older man at the time, do so well, appear so hale and hearty, so optimistic in spite of the horrid decisions he had to make? He grayed prematurely as they all do, the physical difference in Bush before and after his administration is telling, but we never really heard him complain. Here's a bit from the article I linked above:

Not that the commander in chief really thinks he can escape his duties, even on an island. Amid golf, tennis, gym workouts and dinner, Obama has been called on to monitor the airliner attack in Detroit last Friday and what appeared to be another attack on Sunday — that incident turned out to be a false alarm. On Monday, Obama worked out in the morning and played tennis before making his first public remarks on airline security, then hit the golf course.

I don't begrudge this guy some R&R but I'm comparing this article to anything the media'd have written about Bush if he had complained. Also, remember all the attacks on him for being in Crawford 'so much'? He rarely went without entertaining visiting dignitaries or committees for meetings there, as you (and the media) know, a president's always doing the country's business no matter where he is but the media didn't care and took every opportunity to insult his 'vacations'..........

And, didn't Obama know it would be as tough as the campaign trail?
The grueling travel hasn't gone away, nor have the long days. Now they're further compounded by red-eye flights to Europe and the seemingly endless stream of social events the president is expected to attend, from concerts at the Kennedy Center to holiday parties where he and the first lady spend hours shaking hands.

That's being president. What part didn't he understand before he signed on?


sue said...

Maybe it was the part about Conservatives biting at his heels.

Leticia said...

Boo-hoo...he needs to suck it up. I feel nothing but contempt for him and he will never have my sympathy.

He should have known it was not all about spending tax payer dollars, and partying at the White House, there are some adult responsibilities involved in running a nation.

Let's hope he will resign.

Anonymous said...

I'm thinking of President Reagan who was in his seventies during his Presidency, and never publicly complained. Sure, he would doze off during meetings occasionally. The media made a big joke out of that.

But, a young guy like Obama? Oh well he has so much on his plate! Ummmm, well yes, he's the President. Of course the media takes this seriously. Poor Obama, he actually has work to do. No joking or mocking about him.

Maybe if he cut off his perennial campaign, he'd be rested enough to do his job. For instance he could inquire about what's really in those bills he want's to sign.

That way, he would have real answers to questions rather than the song and dance he usually engages in. Even then the TOTUS provides the answers.

No criticism of his waiting three days to comment on the latest terrorist attempt. No, no, he's tired, and has to decide what to say, and God knows, making decisions doesn't seem to be his strong suit! He's not quick on his feet, dontchaknow. He's tired.

I would remind the media, that they hounded George W, about the fact he took seven minutes to leave that classromm on 9-11. It didn't occur to them that security was uppermost to protect the President at a time of an attack on Washington DC.

Whining and complaining is not Presidential, and neither is bowing, scraping, and apologizing for his country. So far, this President has a few firsts, and among them is no feel for the stature of his office, nor the fact he represents the American people, not himself.

There is a simple answer to Obama's problem. He can decide against running for a second term. Problem solved!


Law and Order Teacher said...

It is really weak to complain about being tired. Nobody cares. Do your job or get out. The only ones who aren't held to doing their job are some union members. I guess the unions are giving him a real good example. After all, this really is the first hard job he's ever held.

Anonymous said...

I think he should try crying to elicit some sympathy. It worked for Hillary on the campain.


Anonymous said...

Think it's time for the POTUS to unionize? Threaten to strike?


Beth said...

Of course the media not only shows sympathy for Obama, from the linked article it says of our former president:

"Unlike former President George W. Bush, who made getting eight hours of sleep a priority" Obama works late into the night it said.

The favoritism will NEVER cease!

Anonymous said...

Indeed, things would be easier on Obama if everyone eschewed critical thinking and blindly accepted whatever Obama says. This is what is known as the 2008 general election.


sue said...

It's really just a matter of what side you are on. This is a Conservative blog, therefore everything is slanted right. A Liberal blog is slanted left. Those blogs just cancel each other out.

I have always said that one can guess what will be said before reading them.

shoprat said...

Maybe he will realize he is in over his head and resign.

If it weren't for the thought of a President Biden I would almost wish for it.

sue said...

I don't know why he would do that when the dummy before him didn't.

Elmers Brother said...

you should add this video

Ducky's here said...

I'm still trying to figure out why that Nigerian bobo tried to detonate during the descent.

If he's successful at that lower height then a good pilot can bring the plane in but if he had detonated at altitude it would have been a disaster.

More proof that its tough to recruit an "A" team and this so called training is pretty ineffective.

Oh well, this is the only response they can mount after Obama whacks a couple dozen of their top mullahs?

Ducky's here said...

Cool, shoprat wants President Biden.

More proof that conservatives don't think things through.

Z said...

Sue, have you forgotten how unconscienably cruel the media was to Bush? Picture what would have happened had he dared say HE was 'tired' after one year? My question isn't about ragging Obama so much as it is SEE THE MEDIA BIAS? That's irrefutable and nothing to do with left/right blogs.
Also, I have NEVER seen the cruelty or nastiness on ANY Conservative blog that I've seen at leftwing blogs...NEVER.
It's easy to cast off legitimate criticism by claiming "This site is Conservative"...that's a bad trap and one our leftwing gov't and media are doing now on a grand scale, having hired Communist Van Jones to head the dissing of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Imagine a White House who does THAT? there goes free speech. The "Dummy" before Obama kept us safe for 8 YEARS.

Leticia, I'm even more disappointed in Obama than I thought I'd be. I knew he had different priorities than I do but I never thought he'd have those Wed. night hiphop nights or do other things like that which make you wonder about his priorities and his dignity.

Pris, isn't it sad? Excellent point about the 7 minutes the press and the left (well, that's one and the same) harangued Bush with...still are. Heck, they STILL say Bush botched it by not preventing 9/11 because they "knew" Al Qaeda might attack airplanes...nobody's ever quite answered my question, which is "Was Bush supposed to ground all planes indefinitely till we conquered AQ, or WHAT?" Doesn't matter; the media hated Bush, he got crap night and day. And Americans heard it and voted for this awful man we have now. End of story. Maybe end of America, God forbid.

L&0 and tio....you got me smiling!

Bryan said...

I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

-1 Timothy 2:1-4

Z said...

Ducky, you think this is 'wanting Biden'?

"If it weren't for the thought of a President Biden I would almost wish for it."

Elbro..good one :-)

Ducky's here said...

"هر وقت دیدی زندگی داره روی خوش بهت نشون میده، بدون یه کاسه ای زیر نیم کاسه ی کثافتش هست"
— Louis-Ferdinand Céline

Z said...

Bryan, we're all praying...maybe a miracle WILL happen. I hope so.

Leslie said...

Can we consider Obama an example of the current generation that is being raised in America? The trophy kid generation? Where everyone gets a trophy just for participating.

Well, he already received his trophy (note the Nobel Peace Prize) for doing nothing. It is an example of the mind set of this particular generation: Wanting none of the hard work and hard choices but wanting, expecting, and taking all the rewards.

Obama began his presidency with complaining and whining. But many good points have been made here: He campaigned for the job and took the job; knowing full well what it entailed.

Still, he creates the perfect example of the socialist mind set. Wanting the rewards without having to put the work and sweat in to getting them. So I guess I'm not surprised.

Chuck said...

It has to be exhausting destroying a country as large as the US

Anonymous said...

Y'know Ducky, Obama's also turning a blind eye to the Navy Seals being prosecuted for giving the butcher who killed four American contractors and hanged their burned bodies from a bridge, a "fat lip". This is based on the barbarian's accusation alone.

Don't laud Obama for whacking anyone. He doesn't want to know who get's whacked. He doesn't take responsibility for anything.

He could stop this sham of a prosecution if he wanted to. It's an outrage. However, the left must be mollified, appeased, so, he'll let these brave Navy Seals go through this kangaroo trial, and do nothing, like he always does.

So save the kudos and cheers for Obama please. If a few mullahs got "whacked", he had nothing to do with it. In fact, he probably regrets it.

If he had any sense of what's right, these Navy Seals would be getting medals right now.


Anonymous said...

Z - Thanks. You're so right. As Mr. Pris says about 9-11. You can know what and how, but if you don't know where or when, how can you prevent anything?

But, no, we must not have aggressive interrogation. We'll just take the chance it won't happen. Give the enemy miranda rights, and get him lawyers. No interrogation, no information. Just chance and hope. A hell of a way to fight a war, isn't it?

Well now we all see how the enemy responds to weakness. It's not rocket science, it's common sense. Pre-emption is the key and in order to be successful at that, we have to play hardball.

Sue - no "dummy" is a true soldier, and Bush, for whatever faults he may have had, his instincts were right, and he was a soldier, and did whatever he could to keep us safe.

No thanks to the ACLU, the press, the left, and power hungry politicians who never put their country first.

Save your "dumb" remarks for leftist blogs, they'll love you for it.


sue said...

Z - Yes, I do remember how the media treated Bush, and I also remember that for eight years I went along with it. From the time he became a candidate for president - until the day he left office - I never liked him.

I remember reading that he had complained to Laura about how hard the job was - she replied, Well, you wanted to be president. I've always liked her attitude.

It is impossible for you to see your blog and your attitudes the way I do, just as others reacted to my dislike of Bush. I can see that now.

Sometimes it seems like Conservative payback, but that does no good.

You mentioned Glen Beck and Rush, I have no use for either of them, especially Rush. I detest him.

You'll get your chance - either in four years or eight. The way things are going, maybe four. Then you can hear me complain about whatever Republican might be in office. Please - not Palin.

sue said...

Pris - This is the only blog I read.

I have never liked George Bush, and have always felt that he should not have been president.

That's the way it is.

Law and Order Teacher said...

I respect your opinion. As for Bush there were a lot of things he did that I didn't agree with, mostly spending money like crazy. As for the war on terror, he was right on. I hope you continue to comment.

Anonymous said...

Well, whatever George W. Bush was or wasn't -- and I am not and never have been one of his fans -- has nothing whatsoever to do with Obama's job performance, his capacity to be president, or anything else that now plagues the nation.

I take the scandalous view that Obama has simply magnified the flaws inherent in Bush's policies and multiplied them exponentially.

George W. Bush was NOT a Conservative. Actions speak louder than words and most of his kowtowed to the pseudo-doctrine of Internationalism ueber alles and to out-and-out Socialism on the domestic front.

In my never humble opinion the ONLY person who told the plain, unvarnished truth in the preliminaries to the presidential campaign was RON PAUL. So there!

Sue strikes me as a very nice person, and I'm glad she visits here regularly. I'd just like to know what it IS that prompts Sue -- and so many other perfectly decent, well-meaning people -- to embrace MARXISM -- not only a colossal failure wherever it's been tried, but and agent of MASS MURDER in the hundreds of MILLIONS?

Saying that the modern Democratic Party has NOT embraced Marxism is an avoidance of an obvious REALITY.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck . . .

Saying over and over that Hillary Clinton is a beautiful, charming, captivating, charismatic, well-bred, beautifully-spoken, kind-hearted, selfless, saint-like soul is NOT going to make it true anymore than saying that a THISTLE is the identical twin of a ROSE.

I hope Sue doesn't feel singled out for "punishment?" Such was not my intent. I'm honestly curious about how she came to believe as she does?

I do understand that the Democrats have portrayed themselves as the champions of the underdog and the only fair-minded, compassionate people on earth, but their ACTIONS belie their words ALL THE TIME.

Republicans, as they are today, are NOT the answer. If R's become the new majority in 2010 without seriously REFORMING, the "victory" will be hollow meaningless and jejune.

The USA needs a true REFORMATION not just more of the same tired old shell game.

ANY Republicans is NOT necessarily better than ANY Democrat. The truth that seems obvious to me is that both parties are different in name only.

~ FreeThinke

Z said...

Sue, you're so wrong if you don't think I understand the difference of a Conservative blog and a Leftist Blog...I KNOW this is Conservative, I KNOW we champion Conservatism...but, I still say we're fairer than most leftist blogs I've read. And far more open minded. Also, I have to admit I lean further Right here because I don't want the lefties to run with and get too nasty and gleeful about whatever remark I make against certain Conservatives...having said that...I'll say that I have to admit I'm with Law & Order Teacher, I didn't like a LOT of what Bush did, but he did keep us safe and he displayed love for America, which I have yet to see in this new president. Sorry, but that's the way I see him.

I remember shedding a tear the night Obama was picked by the DNC because it touched me that so many Black kids were weeping at the selection; I got that and I got slammed here for admitting it, but it's the truth. I'm just so tired now of having a White House call Talk Show hosts names and threaten them and disparage them just for being on the other side; it's unseemly and it's never been done before.
Even with all the crap Bush got, remember he told Tom Brokaw people like the Dixie Chicks, who'd really insulted him, have the right to feel as they do and to express it. NOT OBAMA. Joe the Plumber deigned to ask an innocent question and Obama and his pals took off on him and haven't stopped insulting those who don't suck up to them since. I call that unpresidential, but maybe it's just me.

Sue, no 'payback' is going to help this country. Payback isn't what America needs...if she can never have unity again, and I don't believe she will, she needs dignity and she at least needs 'erring on her side'... remember Democrats like Tip O'Neal and Patrick Moynihan; they still loved America. They respected the constitution, they'd never have given terrorists our rights, they'd have put our safety first, they'd have thought just about everything today is WAY too far left..heck, JFK was a Republican compared to this bunch in the WH now, even Democrats admit that.

I just want Americans to remember the constitution, to get freedoms back, to put our country before race or religion. I don't think we can survive much more division.

For each side to be this ideological is dangerous and unfair to this country. BUT, how do we get around this division, this dislike? How do we get around a media which only favors so strongly one side? How do we get Americans to hear ALL the news? Why do you think FOX is SO SO far ahead in the ratings when it wasn't so much a year ago? People are FED UP and want ALL the news.

Whatever. We need to start putting our country first again.......I just don't know how we're going to do that.

Z said...

FT...I, too, am glad Sue's here, always have been, and would like to hear her answers to your questions. It's NOT a slam, it's not an attack, just plain curiosity.
Thanks for your comment. xx

Law and Order Teacher said...

I agree with your contention that Ds and Rs really are no different. Until a group champions true conservative principles of limited government in both spending and breadth, I will be lukewarm to both parties. They give life to the statement "a difference without a distinction." Well done on your comment.

Anonymous said...

Hurry up and say something inflammatory so that Sue doesn't feel singled out.


Joe said...

The job of president is the toughest job in the universe (as far as we know).

President BO's job is all the more difficult because he approaches it with sophomoric idealism, honestly believing that he knows better for us than we do.

Anonymous said...

Thank you,Z, and BRAVO! for your last post which expresses so many "essentials" so well. You hit several nails right on the head and drove them straight home.

As I've always said, you are particularly good at tagging and chronicling media bias -- and noting so many specific instances of the unhealthy, anti-democratic, bizarre de facto PARTNERSHIP between the "mainstream media" and the crypto-Marxist agenda.

All that aside, many of us do express our anger and extreme displeasure in ways that are unproductive to say the least. I should know, because I've been one of the very worst offenders in the old days at FPM and the early days here at geeeZ.

It's FUN to vent -- I love it -- but it doesn't speak very well for the conservative point of view, especially if we're sincere in trying to persuade those outside our circle (if such there be) that we have something positive, life-enhancing and economically superior to offer.

The gentle art of persuasion and bashing our opponents are mutually exclusive.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

L&O and FT:
58 of 58 Democrats (plus Lieberman and Sanders) voted for Senate health care bill. 40 of 40 Republicans opposed. Republicans may fall short of conservative ideals, but I think there is more than a dime's bit of difference between the parties. Which brings us to our next topic: the value of the dime ....oh, nevermind. We'll cover that later.


Z said...

Sue doesn't venture opinions that she can't back up like Ducky does. She doesn't spout off stupid movie titles or painters' names as if we're all supposed to know all about them and bow to the throne of elitist snobbism.

There ARE differences between the Right and Left and they warrant discussion, I think. But fair discussion.

I think the Right esteems individual rights more than the Left......anybody want to add to this? I could, and did but deleted it all as I know you all can do better than I can.

Z said...

Tio...you were typing as I was and I didn't see your comment before publishing mine....so, go ahead; you add to my list of differences, okay? :-)

FT..thanks. And bravo to YOU for this comment. I, too, want less derision and less insulting when describing the differences (one of the reasons I deleted my list as said previously is that I did start sounding insulting to the Left and I honestly don't want to...)...

I just want the constitution adhered to, I want people to feel individual worth again, not being spoon fed their every need, and I believe we need to start erring on America's side again...

now, you brains....go for it: More differences between left/right, please.

Anonymous said...

Your comment about "putting country before race and religion" reminds me of the Focus on the Family audio drama of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Initially, he didn't see how being a German could come into conflict with being a Christian. He eventually had to side with Christianity over Germany.

Knowing you as I do, I think you feel the same. Assuming this to be the case, I think "putting country before religion" is a confusing statement. I think I know what you mean, but thought I'd call you out anyway.


Elmers Brother said...

My mothers family are/were long time Democrats. I think they honestly think it's the Democratic party of yesterday. There wasn't such an extreme difference between the two as there is now.

My mother, who has always been involved in politics and volunteers to man voting precincts etc...couldn't bring herself to vote for anyone last year.

Z said...

tio....Of course you know what I mean, and I thought somebody might call me out for my comment.
What I mean is to stop fighting religions (Protestant v Methodist..Jewish v Muslim, etc.) to the detriment of our country...that make sense?

Elbro...she should have called me :-)

sue said...

L&OT - Thanks for saying you want my comments. I have little to say compared to the rest of you.

I didn't like Bush's decision to go to war, either. (But I support the troops.)

FT - I do not consider being called a 'nice' person a compliment, although I believe you meant well. What is a 'nice' person, really? I'd rather be called a 'good' person - and I am completely honest.

I appreciate your saying you want me to visit Z's blog. I'd like to think that my comments count for something.

I never thought of myself as a Marxist.

I do like Hillary.

I no longer feel singled out for 'punishment' here - ever since I was called an asshat. I got over that.

I don't really know how I came to be what I am 'politically.' Maybe it's because my parents offered no influence in that regard. Maybe it's because I want to have a mind of my own. Maybe, just maybe, deep down inside I really am a liberal. The first thing I remember is not liking JFK, and the next thing was that I totally did not like Bush. So here I am.

Z - Thanks for saying you are glad I'm here. If there is anything else you want to know just be specific.

Elmers Brother said...

of course my mother and I have gotten in some heated arguments...in restarants etc. now she lives with me....we don't argue politics much anymore.

sue said...

As for Obama, I am hoping that he will score better in the next three years. I voted for him, I like him personally, and I can just imagine that he is tired.

Z said...

Elbro...I don't see how you avoid talking politics and I admire you for it!

Sue...you've always been welcome here and I love that my other readers agree with me on that! I'd like it noted that I was not the person who called you an 'asshat'!!

What didn't you like about JFK?

And do you believe Republicans are unkind and racist, etc., as the mainstream media likes to portray?


Z said...

Sue, I can imagine he's tired, too...I'd be utterly exhausted. I just think it would be better to keep that feeling within his inner circle.

Anonymous said...

If I may borrow from Thomas Sowell on the different world views...

Democrats tend to have an unrestrained view of the good the government can do. Wouldn't it be great if an all-powerful, benevolent, omniscient government controlled health care, financial institutions, education, etc.

Republicans tend to have a restrained view. They seek trade-offs rather than "solutions". This view accepts the fact that we won't find a government that fits the description in the paragraph above. So how do we deal with it? Federalism, checks and balances, restraint of power. In short, intentionally build inefficiencies into the government.


Z said...

"In short, intentionally build inefficiencies into the government"

Nice way to sell Conservatism? I don't get it...xx

Z said...

I mean, I kind of get that no gov't can be efficient..but...?

Z said...


sue said...

To whom it may concern: Z did not call me an 'asshat.' It was some chick named Pinky.

JFK did not earn what he had in life. He was born with looks, charm, wit, intelligence, and most of all - money. His father bought the presidency for him and while president he ran some sort of sexorama.

I know some Conservatives that I suspect are racist but I would never lump all Conseratives together and say that they are racist. I really can't say that I know any that are unkind (just on some blogs) (not this one of course.)

Z - Grover Cleveland took a trip on a yacht to have surgery on a tumor on his jaw kept from the public. Then we advanced to reading in the paper that Jimmy Carter had hemorroids. Don't you think it's time that people know that our presidents actually get a bit fatigued now and then. Being tired is not unpresidential - it's human.

RightKlik said...

I'm tired. Of Obama's whining.

sue said...

RK: You're tired: of Obama

Anonymous said...

Sue, some would say it's human for some men to cheat on their wives, but it sure is unPresidential. So is whining. Being human has nothing to do with it.


Gramma 2 Many said...

I cannot help but remember how President Bush was torn apart by the press on the day of the attacks. He did not return to Washington soon enough, he ran and hid and on and on. They never let up on him. He never once received a pass. Sure is different this time, isn't it?
Leticia, we cannot hope for him to resign, that would give us Biden, and I am thinking we would be in an even deeper world of hurt. If that could be possible.

highboy said...

I'd like to see someone else on this blog do what he does: lets see you try and appease both left wing communists and right wing Republicans, spend all the taxpayer's money on pork, give away the country to China, ignore terrorist threats, all without getting tired.

Anonymous said...

Squandering trillions of taxpayer dollars and appointing morally degenerate, incompetent people to high positions of power is exhausting... as Leticia said, oh boo hoo!

I have been unemployed for about a year now, almost died in a violent car crash, lost my car, almost lost my home, have recovered from 3 fractured vertebrae and a messed up shoulder, and now I have a recall on my mammogram that was done before the holiday! I'm not going to even address the fiscal disaster I have going on from medical bills (I naturally had no medical insurance at the time of the accident!) After going through the red tape of government's idea of "health care assistance", I can tell you, Government will turn health care into a nightmare and a death trap for the common, working taxpayer!!!

I have no tears for the liberal power grabbers in Congress. None. I have worked and paid taxes since I was 16 and now during the "age of Obama... Communism"... I have lost everything. Do I want government help? NO!!! I want government to get out of my life and quit helping so I stand a chance at helping myself out of the hole. All government will do is push you deeper into the hole and throw the dirt in on top of you!

Thanks Z... end of rant!


Anonymous said...

Obama does do a pretty good Lily von Schtupp impersonation...

Mr. Spade said...

The Kenyan and his buddy, The Holder have tried to handcuff the CIA.
And threatened to put agents in jail for doing their jobs under the Bush Administration.
I expect The Nigerian won't be the last terrorist to attack us .
It's going to be a long and horrifying three years with this bunch of incompetent fools at the helm.
Barry chose Incompetano to head Homeland Security.
But, I'm sure he'll try and blame Bush.

Anonymous said...

Fair enough. I call you for how you select your words and then I choose confusing words.

By inefficient, I meant that no part within the government can do whatever he wants on a whim. If you want alcohol banned, you can get an ammendement proposed and ratified by 3/4 of the states. You can have each state or county ban alcohol. As far as time spent, this is less efficient that an executive order, or even an act of Congress. And that is by design.

I think liberals (and I don't mean this as a categorical statement of all liberals or conservatives) want a class of intellectuals to make decisions. We would be better off if the rest of us got out of the way and let these people do their thing. Conservatives see knowledge as being more widely distributed.


Ducky's here said...

Tried to handcuff the CIA? That's the pure stinky cheese.

This latest moron was in contact with the same radical in Yemen that the Ft. Hood shooter contacted. Obama authorized a drone flight and turned the guy into snot last week along with a couple dozen others.

Now just who was handcuffed?

The only issue here is why the eunuch jihadist wasn't given a full cavity search at the Amsterdam airport.

sue said...

I would love to hear what all of you would have said about W if you had been against instead of for him.

Plenty - is my guess.

Pris - Your comment just doesn't stand up. Human to cheat on your wife? It's just plain cheating. Letting sexual urges take over when strengh should rule. Men have been getting away with this from the beginning of time and they need be held accountable.

Who set the standard for what is presidential? Each president has had quirks that define him. Even 'King' George.

Z said...

Sue, who'd be against someone we mostly agreed with? We agree with him more than we do any leftwing agenda. You know very well that I and several of my commenters weren't huge fans of Bush's. Although, I'd give anything to have him back today, of course.

You don't really think Obama won because everyone adored him....I know Republicans who voted for Obama just because the msm had sold them the bill of goods that McCain was more Bush. They could hardly be more different, of course, but who took the time to look into it? The media's been winning....but it's fascinating that FOX is going so high in the numbers; those aren't all Conservatives, trust me. Trust the demographics.

Re Presidents and admitting to fatigue in public, or fooling around with interns; EVERY president's done dumb stuff but I don't want to KNOW ABOUT IT. I honestly don't. We had dignity in years gone by. Some women might really argue with me that JFK's shenanigans should have been publicized (they all knew about it in the press) but what good would that do? I'm not even sure I agree that Clinton's Lewinsky thing should have come out. Honestly, I don't, looking back on it now.

Dignity involves keeping American dirty laundry to ourselves...too much news, anything to sell ad time is killing us. I honestly believe that.

beamish said...

The Republican Party hasn't nominated an actual conservative to run for President since 1984.

In the 2000 Republican primaries I voted for McCain over Bush, knowing neither were conservative, but both more so than the Democrats had to offer. For what I think of Bush, I believe McCain is "more conservative" than he, and I don't think McCain is really that conservative at all, less so now than 10, even 20 years ago. McCain pretty much stepped further to the left during the 8 years of Bush. I wouldn't have voted for him at all in 2008 had Sarah Palin not been on the ticket offering the chance a conservative would be President in 2012 or sooner if McCain died in office.

Politically, I'm a "fusionist" - I hold the common ground between libertarian and conservative ideology, the "sweet spot" that created two Reagan landslide elections. I can live with a true conservative government to the point it becomes agenda-driven and divisive and social conservatism begins to conflict with libertarianism. (I often joke that hardcore drug abuse problems in America could be solved if we legalized drugs and made rehab clinics illegal - the stupid would take themselves out of the gene pool, leaving only those mature enough to be responsible for themselves. What better anti-drug message is there than a junkie dying in a gutter from his dumb choices?)

My core political belief is opposed to the expansion of government power over individual liberty. With Republicans at least, "reducing the size of government" means less meddling in the affairs and lives of the private sector. There's a libertarian component there. With Democrats, "reducing the size of government" means eliminating Army divisions and scuttling Navy ships, which is quite frightening in its implications to this libertarian as to what a Democrat believes the government actually is. It comes down to "we're not going to regulate and tax you into becoming a ward of the state" vs. "we're gonna have less bombs to drop on your house when you refuse to submit to our agenda."

I'll remain independent, but I'll take Republican over Democrat every time. The left-wing has a violent totalitarian streak going back to Robespierre that I can not abide.

Republicans NEED to be the party of the right-wing. They NEED to get back to the "fusionism" of the Reagan years.

Or, we'll continue to slide towards Obama's retro-Nazism.

Z said...

Beamish, I agree with you ....

and love your suggestion about drugs in this country :-)

Do you think Term Limits would help against the way both parties' politicians are so agenda-driven and so "America LAST, after my job's secure"-driven?

sue said...

Sue - 'I would love to hear what all of you would have said about W if you had been against instead of for him '

Z - I'm not sure you got what I meant. If he were the same person but not a Republican president. Just curious how you would have viewed him. (If you don't get it just drop it. It's not worth worrying about at this point!)

beamish said...


My solution is a bit more nuanced than term limits.

For one, I'd repeal the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, and return to the days that individual state legislatures chose US Senators, instead of a popular vote. Senators are supposed to represent states, more specifically, they're supposed to represent state governments. They're not supposed to represent political parties, which is basically their group dynamic now.

To change the makeup of the US Senate, you'd simply have to work, at the local level, to change your state's legislature, and they'll elect someone to the US Senate that represents the state, or the local state legislature will be dumped and a different Senator named.

The second thing I'd change is the way Presidential Electoral College votes are counted. No more "winner takes all." Senators would vote in the Electoral College for the candidate with the most popular votes in their states. Congressmen would vote for the candidate with the most popular votes in their districts. (This system would be more democratic, and would have avoided the tragedy of electing Democrat presidents altogether from Andrew Jackson onward)

And the third thing I would do, after restoring state government's voice in the federal government and counting the votes for President in a way that reflects the nation's true intentions, is to repeal the 12th Amendment and giving the Vice-Presidency to the candidate that came in 2nd place in the Presidential election. Imagine if only people qualified to be President ran for the job, and the two most desired candidates got the job or the VP job?

In short, I'd undo the damage the Democratic Party has done to the US Constitution via amendment, and return it to its original language.