Friday, December 14, 2007

Political debates are STUPID

I have written about the Republican debate before and I admit this is the first time I have watched a democratic debate, I couldn't stomach it. I liked the format and while most of the world thought it was boring I actually got a lot out of it. The Fox channel put a bunch of voters in a separate room and had them use a little thingy that showed how they felt about what a candidate was saying and it showed up on a graph. It was interesting and disturbing at the same time. These voters actually changed their minds because of the debate, I find this frightening. They thought John Edwards was "inspirational". I thought one lady was going to take off her bra and give it to him. One guy actually said that he was going to vote for him because he was going to "veto" ALL that Bush has done, what a moron. Like the second he gets in office he was going to start making phone calls and bring the troops home, get everyone health care and start checking things off of a big list and perhaps give everyone 5 million dollars if elected. These people are idiots. The question was posed of what they would accomplish the first year in office. Of course they promised the moon and a love fest for the division in our country. I am wondering which one plans on crossing the aisle to appease us conservatives and of course the same promises were offered by the elephants as well. It is so lame. Obama will get into office and the hugging will begin because he can give an inspirational speech and coombaya will be bellowing from our porches. I can't stand it. Rumor has it that Bush has already called in Barack and Hillary in to his office and told them they better tone down the anti-war rhetoric because once you sit behind the big desk it is a different story. I am tired of the pile on Bush, I am the opposite of Bush, Bush sucks, Bush can't write, Bush can't read crap. Hillary got in one of her fingernails to a chalkboard cackles on a Bush slam. It is too easy to slam the President, he is unpopular, so go ahead and act like the popular kids and make fun of the kid no one likes. It's pathetic and NOT Presidential and tiresome.
John Edwards is an ambulance chaser and wants to take on corporate America and he IS corporate America and a huge reason why health care costs so much. He is a millionaire because he can sue sue sue. I don't find Barack particularly inspiring. I think he is by far the most disciplined candidate and tries to take the higher ground, but his "politics of fear" I don't find comforting when to me that sounds like appeasement. I like the tough stance that Bush has taken. I think he is the only one that has remained resolute since 9/11. I admire Barack's vision but I don't think taking our enemies to lunch is going to make them like us any better. This debate gave me a lot of insight as to why I vote the way I do. Dems really do try to appeal to a institution sucking people. This philosophy of low expectations is offensive and I would think people would resent it. I hate this part of the campaigning. I look at all the candidates as saying what needs to be said, and PEOPLE ACTUALLY BUY IT!! Republicans are just as idiotic. I don't care what their opinions are, I really don't. There are some things that can't be changed regardless of your opinion. The President may WANT to raise the salary of a teacher, but isn't that a state issue? Don't waste my time with these types of questions. I don't want to hear a mini inspirational speech of your amazing thoughts. Explain to me why "no child left behind" doesn't work. Why isn't it important to have accountability and testing? I am done with these debates and I found the dems to be non-inspirational. I am back in the Mitt Romney camp however, yes I was out for a while, but after much thought I am back.
It is so easy to blame Bush for every bad thing in our country. I suspect whoever the President is, will soon realize it ain't so grand to have the world on your shoulders.


ba and the boys said...

i have never been so confused on who to vote for ever...and i have beenvoting a LONG time! i can tell who i DON'T want to win (edwards, clinton, most of the republicans who are running...). i like you talking about how everyone is piling on bush because he is the kid to pick on in school. that i really what it looks like. bush is already in office...debate the people who are going to keep YOU out of office, not the person who already has the job. it is too late anyhow.
btw-you didn't say anything about it only being 10 days away fro christmas. it must have slipped your mind...

ba and the boys said...

i have never been so confused on who to vote for ever...and i have beenvoting a LONG time! i can tell who i DON'T want to win (edwards, clinton, most of the republicans who are running...). i like you talking about how everyone is piling on bush because he is the kid to pick on in school. that i really what it looks like. bush is already in office...debate the people who are going to keep YOU out of office, not the person who already has the job. it is too late anyhow.
btw-you didn't say anything about it only being 10 days away fro christmas. it must have slipped your mind...

Anthony Palmer said...

I don't think the Democratic presidential candidates are the only ones who are overly simplistic about their agendas. Most of your Republican candidates were talking about bombing Iran and see no moral conflict with violating international law to protect American lives. They also keep talking about cutting taxes even though they don't have anything to say about increasing revenue. Simply eliminating pork (which John McCain commonly says) is not enough.

As for Bush, people criticize him so much not because it's popular, but because he is arguably an incompetent and overly president. For example, he commonly talks about how the (Democratic) Congress wants to spend too much money and vetoes their bills, but he never had anything to say about Congress when Republicans were passing pork-laden bill after bill during the first 6 years of his term. Then there's Katrina, the false reasons for going to war with Iraq, the Scooter Libby commutation, failing to fix illegal immigration, etc.

These are not really partisan criticisms. I just think people expect more in terms of practical leadership from their president. "Resolve" is not enough. The biggest problem is that it seems like Bush is more of the President of the Red States of America or the Republican States of America, rather than the UNITED States of America. There are a LOT of people who feel that this particular government doesn't care about their concerns.

For all of Bill Clinton's personal shortcomings, at least he tried to meet his political adversaries halfway for the common good.

icanseeclearlynow said...

WOW, nikki. i am on my feet, you're getting a STANDING-O from me girlie. excellent! well said! and i couldn't agree with you more on the title and subject of this post. debates ARE stupid. that's why i don't discuss religion or politics with people. yuck! BUT you make an excellent point about the STUDIPITY of our society as a whole. people actually make voting decisions on the strength of a good speech. i smiled when you said idiots cause so many people are. and their foolishness never ceases to amaze.

later gator.


rob said...

anthony -

Boy, Bush is missing the mark representing those RED states!
He should think about ALL of us?

Where there is NO sherrif, there is no law? who is ready to enforce your moral international law?

This John Kerry garbage that there would be less trouble in the world if more countries "liked" us is just that - garbage!

most of these debates show us very little about the candidates on either side. I think a big problem with them is that at this stage (only 30 days from the primaries)they still have 6-10 people on the stage?? why?? really these primaries at this point should be down to Hill/Obama/Edwards and Giuliani/Mitt/Huck/McCain. Why should I care about an opintion from someone representing 1-3% of the populus. Let the big boys(girls) battle it out on issues like they do in the general election. I don't care what Ron Paul says. and even less what Joe Biden says (I mean are you serious, Joe?) C'mon!

Nikki, I'm waiting for a post about Huckabee blasting your prez


Nikki said...

Maria.........thanks babe!!! I am glad I finally got a standing-o from you. I know I aggrivate you sometimes and I appreciate you ready my rants sooooooo much even if you do disagree so it is fun to have some ovationing and standing while doing it!!!

I love it when you comment on my blog because I enjoy the challenge. I tried to include the reps in my post but obviously I didn't do a good job of clarifying it. I agree it is ALL of the candidates on both sides that are simplistic.
I will also agree that Bill Clinton was fairly amicable in a very republican hostile government. However of course I disagree with you on your Bush points. Incompetence has been thrown around to describe Bush from the beginning. He can't talk he can't pronounce words. This adjective of the Pres. has not been recent to define his entire presidency, it has been all along. I don't believe the pretense to war was false, that point is arguable. Call it bad intelligence, but even Bill and Hillary signed off on that one. I still believe WMD's are somewhere. The Bush doctrine of taking democracy to oppressed people will stop terrorism more is a doctrine I believe in and also a doctrine that liberals usually embrace as well.
As far as republican pork spending I would hardly call Aid for Global emergencey AIDS relief a republican agenda. His tax cut helped us through a short recession after 9/11 when the world changed for good. During his first term, Bush sought and obtained Congressional approval for three major tax cuts in 2001, 2002, and 2003. These cuts reduced taxes for almost every taxpayer, including reducing the lowest tax bracket, increasing the child tax credit, and eliminating the so-called "marriage penalty". The unemployment rate is lower than it was when Bush took office.
he also imposed a tariff that was anti-republican and against his free trade stance.
No child left behind was supported by Ted Kennedy who later claimed it to "underfunded" to be able to work. he has given more money to education than any other President. No Child left behind TARGETS federally underfunded schools.
He increased spending for the National Science Foundation, National istitutes for health. He tried to pass the medicare Act of 2003 to help seniors get control of their health care and have more choices.
I can go on and on and on. Let's just say that the reason republicans don't like him either is because the pork spending you are talking about is domestic democratic agenda. it is a double edged sword.
As far as Katrina. The local government in that situation was far more negligent!!! I say sell Louisiana back to France!! Human frailty in disaster is expected. It is arrogant to think we can surmount the unsurmountable. Like I have said before I come from a culture where we help ourselves and don't blame the government.

Anthony Palmer said...


I like it when people cite geography when showing how Republican America is. George Bush obviously won more counties than John Kerry did, but you need to think about where these counties are located. There are more people packed into New York City, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles than in all of the counties in the Great Plains and Rocky Mountain states. While Bush might have carried 90% of the physical territory of the US, he carried less than 52% of the actual popular vote. Votes are what matter, not territorial size.

I'm sorry, but I think it's a bit disingenuous to cite something as meaningless as a county map to illustrate how dominant a politician is because it ignores the fact that most of those counties Bush carried have very little people. The left half of that map is a perfect example of how this map totally distorts the truth. Very few people live in eastern Washington, eastern Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska, the Dakotas, Oklahoma, and northern Nevada. 100% of Utah's counties voted for Bush, but did Bush win 100% of the popular vote there? Also, there are more people in New York City than in all of Utah. But looking at all that red on the map would suggest that Bush beat Kerry in a landslide.

I'll be happy to debate you on Bush's popularity, but you need to display a bit more intellectual honesty in your arguments if you want to appear credible.

Anthony Palmer said...


One more point about Huckabee:

Huckabee used to be one of those "1-3%" politicians, as you put it. Had he been excluded from the debates earlier, imagine how the political dialogue would be right now. I think that as long as a candidate is credible (has campaign staff and campaign offices), that candidate should be allowed to participate.