Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Playing The "Chick" card (update)
Posted by: McQ on Friday, November 02, 2007

Anyone else notice the first reaction by some to the attack on Hillary Clinton during Tuesday's Democratic debate was to play the "chick" card. You know, "the guys are ganging up on a girl" defense?

I thought this was about presidential politics and front-runners. Can anyone remember a time when the front-runner wasn't attacked both by other aspirants in their party and by the opposing party?

Heat. Kitchen.

Sister Toljah sums it up well:
If Hillary Clinton wants to prove she’s just as tough as a man and show everyone she’s strong enough to lead this country in a post-9/11 era - an era which requires and demands strength, she needs to stop falsely blaming men in her own party for attacking her strictly because she’s a woman and start acting like the frontrunner who has has easily lead in the Democrat candidate polls over the past few months “for a reason.” If she continues to do so, it should lead to a lot of questions along the lines of how will she be able to present an image of strength for the US as the both the President as well as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces in the face of women-hating Islamofascists when she can’t even stand up against legitimate criticisms of her ideas made by men in her own party?
Bottom line - if you want to be taken seriously, stop playing the "chick" card. Attacks on the front-runner are nothing new politically and, this whining about being ganged up upon by "six men" is simply unseemly and, as far as I'm concerned, a sign of weakness. I understand the attempt and the desired result, but when Hillary put her hat in the ring, she was not exempted from the normal politics anyone who engages in Presidential politics expects (good or bad). And if you think this was bad, wait till the Republicans start in on Clinton in earnest.

Want to play in the big leagues? Then act like it. There's no crying in politics.

UPDATE: Obama's not impressed with Clinton's quick descent into gender politics:

Democrat Barack Obama, the only black candidate for president, accused rival Hillary Clinton on Friday of hiding behind her gender after she was pummelled in a debate with six male candidates.

"I am assuming and I hope that Sen. Clinton wants to be treated like everybody else," the Illinois senator said in an interview with NBC's "Today Show."

"When we had a debate back in Iowa awhile back, we spent I think the first 15 minutes of the debate hitting me on various foreign policy issues. And I didn't come out and say: 'Look, I'm being hit on because I look different from the rest of the folks on the stage'," he said.

"I assumed it was because there were real policy differences there, and I think that has to be the attitude that all of us take. We're not running for the president of the city council. We're running for the presidency of the United States."

He was speaking a day after New York Sen. Clinton — the only woman running for president — urged women voters to rally behind her against "the boys club of presidential politics."
"Boys club of presidential politics?" There will be a backlash. This is simply unacceptable.
"So it doesn't make sense for her, after having run that way for eight months, the first time that people start challenging her point of view, that suddenly she backs off and says: 'Don't pick on me'," he said.

"That is not obviously how we would expect her to operate if she were president."
It isn't? Obama obviously slept through the previous Clinton years.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I’ll say it again and again-

She is too brittle to be Pres. She does a great job of presenting this facade of strength, but she is really paranoid, weak and brittle. I worry about a meltdown under pressure from her.

She could never EVER stand up to the barrage Bush has been made to every single day of his administration. For all the supposed handwringing over how roughly she has been treated in the press or by Tim Russert or whatever, it doesn’t compare to what Bush goes through, and it won’t compare to what Hellary will go through if god forbid she wins the presidency.

How will she handle a congress like this one, nominally in Dem control but able to accomplish nothing she wants? Oh my lord, she’ll flip her freaking lid in the most public manner possible. HULK SMASH!



 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
I’ll say it again and again-

She is too brittle to be Pres. She does a great job of presenting this facade of strength, but she is really paranoid, weak and brittle. I worry about a meltdown under pressure from her.

She could never EVER stand up to the barrage Bush has been made to every single day of his administration. For all the supposed handwringing over how roughly she has been treated in the press or by Tim Russert or whatever, it doesn’t compare to what Bush goes through, and it won’t compare to what Hellary will go through if god forbid she wins the presidency.

How will she handle a congress like this one, nominally in Dem control but able to accomplish nothing she wants? Oh my lord, she’ll flip her freaking lid in the most public manner possible. HULK SMASH!
I don’t agree that Hillary Clinton — or Barrack Obama, John Edwards, or Joe from Burger King for that matter — could do worse than Bush as president. Bush was greviously unprepared for the job, had an immature personality, and he went nuts after 9/11. Talk about cracking under pressure! But all that said, Hillary Clinton does have very serious flaws as a candidate. She is indeed "brittle," and self-pitying as well. Not to mention, dishonest and manipulative (it runs in the family). She is also gravely mistaken if she thinks she is doing herself a favor by attempting to quash criticism of her by her Democratic opponents. The best thing that could happen to her candidacy is to get rung out in the primary, but still get the nomination. Toughen her up. Rudy — or Romney, McCain — will certainly go after her hard. As they should. She better get used to it.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
Stop playing the "chick" card AND the candidate of "hope" card and the "i’m the front runner, I don’t need to answer specifics" card....no, better yet keep on keepin’ on. Fine job Hill. As you were.
 
Written By: markm
URL: http://
I don’t agree that Hillary Clinton — or Barrack Obama, John Edwards, or Joe from Burger King for that matter — could do worse than Bush as president
.

I never made that assertion.
Bush .... had an immature personality
LOL what?
and he went nuts after 9/11. Talk about cracking under pressure
I know I shouldn’t......but please explain this one.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
...and why did Hillary play the "i’m your girl" card last week while giving a speech if she doesn’t like the "chick" card. That’s one confused woman there.
 
Written By: markm
URL: http://
"And he went nuts after 9/11. Talk about cracking under pressure."
Translation: "he attacked a soverign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11, raped the Constitution, shredded our civil liberties, yada, yada, yada. . ."

Surprised you didn’t catch that, Shark.
 
Written By: Christopher
URL: http://
Bush .... had an immature personality
LOL what?
Bush was not only intellectually unprepared for the presidency; he was unprepared emotionally and psychologically as well.
and he went nuts after 9/11. Talk about cracking under pressure
I know I shouldn’t......but please explain this one.
Remember the look on Bush’s face when the 9/11 attacks were reported to him in Florida? Remember how he just sat there, stunned? He never got over it, and that gave Cheney the opening he needed. The rest is ugly history (and present, unfortunately). Another commenter has helpfully added that Bush:
attacked a soverign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11
raped the Constitution
shredded our civil liberties
I agree.


 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
It’s always hilarious when someone doesn’t realize he’s being parodied.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://
Remember the look on Bush’s face when the 9/11 attacks were reported to him in Florida? Remember how he just sat there, stunned? He never got over it, and that gave Cheney the opening he needed.
Speaking of being psychologically unprepared. Damn you Puppetmaster Cheney! That’s some industrial-strength crazy.
 
Written By: Jordan
URL: http://
Actually, since the "men" do anything to win in an election, if "playing the chick card" works to help her win, then doing so means she’s acting like any man would: doing whatever it takes. The question then is whether or not this is an effective strategy.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
It’s always hilarious when someone doesn’t realize he’s being parodied.
Um, it’s always hilarious when one can’t recognize that "parody" has been recognized. Let me tell you fellas something: I saw the first Republican debate in New Hampshire. George Bush did not even belong on the stage with the other candidates, not all of whom (if I recall correctly) were intellectual luminaries. Bush is the most ignorant, uncurious, ill-prepared president in modern times. I assume this post’s critique of Hillary Clinton’s "make-up" is designed to ensure that we don’t make the same mistake again. It is essential that we do so.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
Scott maybe you could offer to help Hillary with her double talk seeing how your are the zen master of it.

 
Written By: coater
URL: http://
Bush is the most ignorant, uncurious, ill-prepared president in modern times.
???

Oh, that’s right, you would have preferred Gore or Kerry. Because they are curious and prepared.

LMAO
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
Bush .... had an immature personality
LOL what?
Bush was not only intellectually unprepared for the presidency; he was unprepared emotionally and psychologically as well
Oh well, since you assert it, I guess that’s the end of the discussion then. I disagree, since my guess is as good as yours.
and he went nuts after 9/11. Talk about cracking under pressure
I know I shouldn’t......but please explain this one.
Remember the look on Bush’s face when the 9/11 attacks were reported to him in Florida? Remember how he just sat there, stunned? He never got over it, and that gave Cheney the opening he needed. The rest is ugly history (and present, unfortunately).
Wow...I think you’re intellectually emotionally and psychologically unprepared to comment on this blog.

OH MY GOD! THE PRESIDENT WAS STUNNED AT NEWS OF THE 9/11 ATTACKS! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

HOW TERRIBLY, TERRIBLY INAPPROPRIATE!!

DAMN YOU PRESIDENT BUSH FOR DISPLAYING HUMAN TRAITS AND NOT IMMEDIATELY DOING YOUR BEST MR. SPOCK IMPERSONATION!!!!!!!

News flash: the only people in America not stunned by news of the 9/11 attacks were the people who were flying the planes.

As for never getting over it, GOOD!

I’m still not over it, and I hope I NEVER get over it.

As for the rest, I’m suprised you went with the old "Cheney’s in charge" instead of the chic "Rove is the mastermind"

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Shark:

I would hope we could all agree that the next time an American president is informed that the United States is under attack, he (or she) probably shouldn’t sit in a classroom for 10 minutes reading The Pet Goat to schoolchildren. There might be something for him to do, you know, him being the President, and all.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
Bush is the most ignorant, uncurious, ill-prepared president in modern times.
Oh, that’s right, you would have preferred Gore or Kerry. Because they are curious and prepared.
I voted for Bush in 2000.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
I would hope we could all agree that the next time an American president is informed that the United States is under attack, he (or she) probably shouldn’t sit in a classroom for 10 minutes reading The Pet Goat to schoolchildren. There might be something for him to do, you know, him being the President, and all.
That’s been rehashed so many times, I’m bored of responding to it.
I voted for Bush in 2000
Despite the fact that you felt he didn’t even belong on the stage with the other Republican candidates? Despite your view of him as ignorant and uncurious? You’re only fooling yourself with that answer.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://
would hope we could all agree that the next time an American president is informed that the United States is under attack, he (or she) probably shouldn’t sit in a classroom for 10 minutes reading The Pet Goat to schoolchildren.

Really what SHOULD he have done? What did you do when you heard of it? Did you have a plan of action for dealing with AQ and the Taliban, all figured out with decision tree analysis and options?

Had he NOT acted in just such a manner in the alternative universe, the one where Spock has a goattee, we’d hear:
1) See he KNEW, he knew about the attack before hand, see how calm he is!?!?; or
2) He always planned to attack Afghanistan for the oil/natural gas/heroi and this attack merely played into his long-held plan to attack! How else to expalin his seeming calm....

Yeah , you voted for him in ’00, but couldn’t bring yourself to in ’04. Because the alternatives were ever so much more promising, eh?

I am reminded of the last "dolt" we had as POTUS, saw the destruction of the USSR, and then I am reminded of all the "geniuses" that have run this country, Bill Clinton and Jimmuh Carter...You know I’m going with the uncurious, intellectually lazy empty suit morons, from now on...you stay with them highly edjamacated Rhodesian Scholars and Nukular Engineers and the man who invented the intarWeb thingie.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
And what is up with the framing on the page?
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
I voted for Bush in 2000
Despite the fact that you felt he didn’t even belong on the stage with the other Republican candidates? Despite your view of him as ignorant and uncurious? You’re only fooling yourself with that answer.
No I guess he’s aying he’s an idiot.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
urged women voters to rally behind her against "the boys club of presidential politics."
From where I stand, even with Hillary involved it is still a boys club.

I would hope we could all agree that the next time an American president is informed that the United States is under attack, he (or she) probably shouldn’t sit in a classroom for 10 minutes reading The Pet Goat to schoolchildren. There might be something for him to do, you know, him being the President, and all.
I agree, he should’ve run out of the room, donned his superman costume and flown counterclockwise around the earth so fast that time reversed. Then he could’ve stopped the hijackers AND rescued that fugly Lois Lane from death as well.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
You guys are really in deep if you can’t admit that Bush acted foolish on 9/11.
I would hope we could all agree that the next time an American president is informed that the United States is under attack, he (or she) probably shouldn’t sit in a classroom for 10 minutes reading The Pet Goat to schoolchildren. There might be something for him to do, you know, him being the President, and all.
That’s been rehashed so many times, I’m bored of responding to it.
That’s a Clinton trick. Old news. Let’s move on. It doesn’t matter that: 1) the president committed perjury; or 2) that the president was paralyzed while the country was under attack.
Really what SHOULD he have done?
I don’t know. What do presidents normally do when they learn that their nation is under attack? Read children’s books? No, I don’t think that’s the recommended course of action.
I voted for Bush in 2000
Despite the fact that you felt he didn’t even belong on the stage with the other Republican candidates? Despite your view of him as ignorant and uncurious? You’re only fooling yourself with that answer.
No I guess he’s aying he’s an idiot.
Yes, I was an idiot for voting for Bush in 2000. I did it mainly because I was so disgusted with Clinton and the Democrats who enabled him. At least I had the sense not to do it again in 2004.
I am reminded of the last "dolt" we had as POTUS, saw the destruction of the USSR, and then I am reminded of all the "geniuses" that have run this country, Bill Clinton and Jimmuh Carter...You know I’m going with the uncurious, intellectually lazy empty suit morons, from now on...you stay with them highly edjamacated Rhodesian Scholars and Nukular Engineers and the man who invented the intarWeb thingie.
I also voted for Reagan the first time and I do not regret that vote one bit. Reagan was an excellent president. Bush is no Reagan. Why is that in a great country of 200 million we can’t find a president who is both intelligent and honorable? Is that so much to ask?
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
Really what SHOULD he have done?
I don’t know. What do presidents normally do when they learn that their nation is under attack? Read children’s books? No, I don’t think that’s the recommended course of action.

"I don’t know" but he shoudda dun sump’n, huh?

So Dave exactly what would you recommend? Really, what he did was wrong can you give me a set of possible RIGHT answers? I think sticking around for 10 minutes isn’t bad, ESPECIALLY as the first reports were that a plane had CRASHED into the World Trade Center. Not that 19 Arab Islamo-Fascists had hijacked 4 aircraft with the intent of attakcing New Yor and D.C.

Should he have immediately rushed to Air Force One and called up the total ADIZ map of the US and begun conducting air defense operations? Or set course for the WTC to fight the fires and pull bodies from the wreckage?

Can’t help that you’re the one that’s in deep....suffering from BDS.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Why is that in a great country of 200 million we can’t find a president who is both intelligent and honorable? Is that so much to ask?

Because it’s ctitcs aren’t too bright apparently and think that a nation of 300 MILLION has a populace of 200 million implying that they, the critics, aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed or that they, the critics, are really only interested in scoring points, not substantive debate.

And honourable, what’s DISHONOURABLE about Bush? He been taking any "Lewinski Breaks" with the interns, placing millions of hectares of land under Federal proetection so that the Lippo Group can score in the clean coal market, accepting cash from the PRC or excusing Loral for aiding the PRC’s ICBM program, rectroactively, AFTER Loral contributes to his camapaign?

Or intelligent...better GPA than the Nuanced French-lookiing John Keery (who it is rumoured served in Vietnam) and an MBA as compared to Mr AlGore who clunked out of Divinity School, not that that has prevented him from becoming the High Priest of his own Religion.

Dave let’s be honest you’re a "Seminar Poster"..."I voted for Reagan, BUT I can’t ever vote Republican again because of George Bush...." Yeah, yeah, yeah, I’m sure your party card always said "R-" and I’m sure you are just APPALLED at what the Neo-Con Theocrats have done to YOUR Party and YOUR "Mehrika.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
"uncurious." Oh, man, I always get a kick out of that one. Yeah, I’d like to see more of Bush complete with an Encyclopedia Brown cap a big magnifying glass constantly looking for the Knife in the Observatory or perhaps Col. Mustard is really OBL and he’s been hiding out in the Kitchen...with a rope!

Wouldn’t that be cool? Perhaps if Bush then spoke with a lisp, too, just for effect. "Hey, hey, Mither Cheney, Mither Cheney, are we gonna invade Iraq, huh, huh, are we? Where’s Iraq, Mither Cheney? Huh, huh?"
 
Written By: Come on, Please
URL: http://
Dave let’s be honest you’re a "Seminar Poster"..."I voted for Reagan, BUT I can’t ever vote Republican again because of George Bush...." Yeah, yeah, yeah, I’m sure your party card always said "R-" and I’m sure you are just APPALLED at what the Neo-Con Theocrats have done to YOUR Party and YOUR "Mehrika.
I am not, nor have I ever been a Republican. I am, and have always been, an Independent. Sometimes I vote Democratic, sometimes Republican. Depends on the candidate and what I think is best for the country at the time. I am disgusted that we have now had 15 years of dishonor and incompetence in the White House. It is a blight on the country (all THREE hundred million of us). Something must change. Bury your head in the sand if you like. Pretend everything is functioning just right. But unless things change soon, this country will see its greatness slip away. And that would be a terrible shame.

 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
I don’t know" but he shoudda dun sump’n, huh?
Joe:

I generally find you an intelligent correspondent and a straight shooter. But are you honestly suggesting that the president of the United States should sit still for 10 minutes reading children’s books while the country is under attack? Please. The only way that makes any sense is if Bush truly was irrelevant to how the White House responded to 9/11. Maybe, just maybe, Cheney and The Guys told Junior to just stay there reading to the kids while The Guys took care of business. But you have assured me that that scenerio is ridiculous. That Bush is and has always been in charge. The Decider, if you will. Therefore, I must assume Bush could have done something useful, you know, being the president and all. Since he wasn’t, I assume someone else was running the show. I’ll give you one guess who it was.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
Dave you’re BDS is showing badly. All anyone knew was that a plane had flown into one of the Trade Centers...was "America under attack?’ Hind sight combined with BDS ...makes for a bad combo.

And tell me Dave, you keep saying he should have done something...you just seem to remarkably unclear about what...exactly WHAT...you must have some ideas. Let’s see we grounded all the planes quickly...we attacked Afghanistan and ousted the Taliban...so exactly what was the POTUS supposed to do in those 10 minutes that was going to dramatically improve or change anything? You make no suggestions, just keep saying, "shouldda...Shudda" I think Dave Shaughnessy should have done something in those ten minutes, too what it is I don’t know but I KNOW there was something....

Bottom-line: your complaint is silly based solely on your unreasonable dislike of George Bush...all in hindsight.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
If we had cameras rolling when FDR was informed about Pearl, or Truman about Korea, do you think they’d have not look stunned and perhaps took a bit of time, say 10 minutes, to reflect on what happened? How about the OK bombing? Do we have immediate tape of Clinton? What did he do within the first 600 seconds after he heard the news?

Finishing reading the book to the kids seems like the right thing to do, to me, in a symbolic way. (Assuming you can read a kid’s book and sort through other thoughts at the same time. It wasn’t as if there were nuclear missiles heading for us and he needed to press the red button pronto or Russian tanks on the Jersey turnpike.)
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
Check. FDR wouldn’t have looked stunned. He knew about the sneak attack beforehand.

:)
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
From the 9/11 Commission Report (page 38):
The President was seated in a classroom when, at 9:05, Andrew Card whispered to him: "A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack." The President told us his instinct wa sto project calm. not to have the country see an excitedreaction at a moment of crisis. The press was standing behind the children; he saw their phones and pagers start to ring. The President fely he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening.
He sat there projecting strength, knowing that two hijacked planes had crashed into the World Trade towers, reading children’s books while America was under attack. And. remember, this is Bush’s own explanation for his conduct. Projecting strength. Uh-huh. If that were Bill Clinton — or any Democrat for that matter — you all would be ready to lynch him for dereliction of duty. But since Bush is a Republican, well . . .
unreasonable dislike of George Bush
Wrong. My dislike of George Bush is as reasoned and principled as my dislike of Bill Clinton. For me, the information precedes the opinion, which explains why I voted for both Bush and Clinton is their first terms but not their second. It is partisans — Republlicans like you, Democrats like the Clintonistas — who suffer from thought distortion. Both Bush and Clinton have done greivous harm to this country. Both have ridden waves of partisanship to their ends — in Clinton’s case it was personal political aggrandizement, in Bush’s, implementing a theory of imperial presidency. However, they have both used the same techniques to achieve their goals. Karl Rove merely studied the Clinton playbook and employed those tricks in substantive policy areas. You can decide which is worse: Clinton’s veniality, or Bush’s authoritarianism. But let me say this: The world is complicated enough, and clear-eyed analysis accordingly difficult, but such reasoned anlysis is nearly impossible when one filters reality through the distorting lens of political partisanship. And when the party leader — the sitting president — exploits that partisanship and stokes the partisan fires, no partisan can resist the call. It was true when Bill Clinton was being impeached and it is equally true now that Bush has blundered us into Iraq, adding to his list of debacles and disasters.

 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
"He sat there projecting strength, knowing that two hijacked planes had crashed into the World Trade towers,..."

Totally unacceptable. He should have immediately announced he needed a potty break, run to the nearest phone booth, changed into his superhero costume, and flown off to rescue all the folks in the towers, the other hijacked airplanes, and then interrogated (in a legal, torture-free manner) the hijackers, and tracked down and captured OBL and his evil henchmen.
And we all lived happily ever after.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Oh, woe! I forgot that SuperGeorge should have consulted with our friends and allies before taking any action.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Tim you forgot, he can fly faster than light, so AFTER all that her could have gone back in time and prevented the two aircraft from hitting the WTC at all. Only partisan hacks like you defend Bush....

Dave "partisan" may not mean what you think it means. Apparently anyone not in agreement with Dave is "partisan"...YOU are apparently pure and non-ideological, and no doubt rational, dispassionate and more or less correct. Being such only partisan could disagree with you. Mayhpa you just belong to a party that disagrees with my party, mayhap we are BOTH partisan, the only difference is, you get the good name and I get the bad name.

It’s akin to "Special Interest Group" and "Public Interest Groups" or Lobbyists versus "community Activists"...the only difference is the name. So too "partisan" you’re partisan only you don’t like to admit it.

Lastly partisanship need not be blind, but sadly yours is...I DO criticize POTUS Bush, YOU you can find no good in him, and apparently have to retroactively fault him, it was THOSE 10 minutes on 9/11 that have led to the current "disaster." Yours is the blind, irrational partisanship. Having broken with Bush over Iraq, now NOTHING Bush has done can be good.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Apparently anyone not in agreement with Dave is "partisan"...YOU are apparently pure and non-ideological, and no doubt rational, dispassionate and more or less correct. Being such only partisan could disagree with you. Mayhpa you just belong to a party that disagrees with my party, mayhap we are BOTH partisan, the only difference is, you get the good name and I get the bad name.
No, if you read my previous comment, you’d see that I explicitly stated that the world is a very complicated place, regardless of partisanship. That means, for those a bit slow, that even without partisan distortion, finding solutions to problems is difficult. Ipso fact, there are bound to be good-faith disagreements over how best to proceed regardless of partisanship. The problem with fealty to the political dupoly (either side) is that it prevents people from getting to the point of good-faith disagreement, which disagreements can usually be worked out somehow. Not so for partisan disagreements: they can not be worked out because they are designed that way. Partisanship’s aim is to create a neverending state of two-party strife, as if the nation had been turned into a sporting event in which everyone must choose a team. Then "our" guys are good; "their" guys are treachorous. Our ideas are sound, theirs are foolish. It would be one thing, of course, if each individual Democrat or Repubican honestly reflected about each idea, candidate, and issue before choosing a side. But that’s not what partisanship means: It means picking a side in advance and sticking with it, not matter what position is subsequently espoused, or the conduct of the politicians who espouse them. Hence, party loyalty. Obviously, almost no one is 100% partisan, but I find partisanship to be increasing its grip, rather than relaxing it, and at an especially troublesome time.
Lastly partisanship need not be blind, but sadly yours is...I DO criticize POTUS Bush, YOU you can find no good in him, and apparently have to retroactively fault him, it was THOSE 10 minutes on 9/11 that have led to the current "disaster." Yours is the blind, irrational partisanship. Having broken with Bush over Iraq, now NOTHING Bush has done can be good.
I fully supported the Afghanistan War. I generally support Bush on immigration. North Korea seems to be working out well. But there is some truth to what you say: When a president misleads his country into a disasterous war, then prolongs it indefinitely, thereby constantly ratcheting up the risk to the U.S., playing brinksmanship in the face of an instability he created, well, you’re right: I don’t think much of that president. And when that same president who invaded the wrong country for the wrong reasons has simultaneously allowed the very people who attacked us on 9/11 (while said president sat reading The Pet Goat) to reconstitute in Pakistan, then, yup, I think even less of that president. Fool me once and all that.

Incidentally, Pakistan is declaring martial law. Do you think Bush might be reading The Cat in the Hat?
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
John Kerry, July 8 when Larry King asked where he was on 9/11, according to CNN’s own transcript:

>>"I was in the Capitol. We’d just had a meeting - we’d just come into a leadership meeting in Tom Daschle’s office, looking out at the Capitol. And as I came in, Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid were standing there, and we watched the second plane come in to the building. And we shortly thereafter sat down at the table and then we just realized nobody could think, and then boom, right behind us, we saw the cloud of explosion at the Pentagon."
 
Written By: frendlydude2k
URL: http://
"we just realized nobody could think,"

LOL. A brief moment of lucidity and self-awareness before they sink back into their left-wing stupor.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Kind of reminds me of "Flowers for Algernon".
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider