Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

 

2009-12-28 14:44:33
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6940

Read this article on Digg today, and it interested me as it's something that has occurred to me before. Do the Republicans want Obama to fail? I'm not talking about people who disagree with him, but the hardcore fanatics of the party. I appreciate some people don't agree with what he's doing, but a lot of the opinions on the economy I read here and there suggest people want the stimulus packages to fail, just because it would prove that Obama/Socialism is wrong. And this seems to be replicated for a lot of his policies.

Anyway, here's the article. Obviously it's an opinion piece from a source that I believe is somewhat militantly left-wing, although I'm sure the Americans could comment on that more than I; however it more served as something to get me thinking, and hopefully some of you.

Article

EDIT: Browser has partially crashed so I'll add the article in a second, assuming this posts.
Article added.

Last edited by ghettoperson (2009-12-28 14:45:17)

2009-12-28 14:50:48
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England
Shrug, and the Democrats pushed Bush off a cliff in his second term. He wasn't so universally hated and reviled until the Dems got their media mouthpieces pumping out story after story on his incompetence. They even stated explicitly that they wanted Bush to fail. Turn, and turn about.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-28 14:52:22
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6702|'Murka

First...Daily Kos? Couldn't find a more even-handed, less biased source? That's like using an Olbermann rant as a source, tbh.

On the OP: It's like the left hoping for Bush policies to fail and/or actively working to make them fail so they could claim they were right (no pun intended). It's politics, nothing more.

The left seemed to actively campaign on the Iraq surge failing...until it didn't. Now they've adopted the same strategy as their own in Afghanistan--except it's totally different this time.

The left actively campaigned against a number of policies from the Bush administration and/or claimed they were failures...then adopted them as their own--except claimed they were totally different this time.

And the right is doing exactly what the left did not one year ago toward policies they backed back then.

It's politics.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2009-12-28 14:56:05
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6813|...

American politics is more of a mindless sport rather than anything that anything that benefits the citizens
2009-12-28 15:02:33
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6940

FEOS wrote:

First...Daily Kos? Couldn't find a more even-handed, less biased source? That's like using an Olbermann rant as a source, tbh.
As I said in the OP, it's an opinion piece that isn't really on a particular bit of news as much as food for thought, so I figured it would suffice.
On the OP: It's like the left hoping for Bush policies to fail and/or actively working to make them fail so they could claim they were right (no pun intended). It's politics, nothing more.

The left seemed to actively campaign on the Iraq surge failing...until it didn't. Now they've adopted the same strategy as their own in Afghanistan--except it's totally different this time.

The left actively campaigned against a number of policies from the Bush administration and/or claimed they were failures...then adopted them as their own--except claimed they were totally different this time.

And the right is doing exactly what the left did not one year ago toward policies they backed back then.

It's politics.
I suppose so, but despite them constantly disagreeing what Bush did, it never struck me as they actively wanted the US to fail in order to prove themselves right, unlike with the economy at the moment. I see what you mean though, the Democrats aren't exactly a whole lot better.
2009-12-28 15:04:41
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6678

jsnipy wrote:

American politics is more of a mindless sport rather than anything that anything that benefits the citizens
QFT


Who ever isn't in office is supposed to critizise those in office. The great question is who are bigger asses, the Democrats in Congress from 04 till 08 or the Republicans in Congress from 08 till...uhhh... Right now it looks like the Repubs are in the lead.
2009-12-28 15:25:32
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

FEOS wrote:

First...Daily Kos? Couldn't find a more even-handed, less biased source? That's like using an Olbermann rant as a source, tbh.

On the OP: It's like the left hoping for Bush policies to fail and/or actively working to make them fail so they could claim they were right (no pun intended). It's politics, nothing more.

The left seemed to actively campaign on the Iraq surge failing...until it didn't. Now they've adopted the same strategy as their own in Afghanistan--except it's totally different this time.

The left actively campaigned against a number of policies from the Bush administration and/or claimed they were failures...then adopted them as their own--except claimed they were totally different this time.

And the right is doing exactly what the left did not one year ago toward policies they backed back then.

It's politics.
I really wish people would stop attacking sources and focus on the material provided and either discredit it, or agree with it.

For example attacking a pro abortion site as biased is stupid.Attack the material it presents. Of course it is going to be pro abortion.

Last edited by lowing (2009-12-28 15:28:42)

2009-12-28 15:32:31
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6872|SE London

lowing wrote:

FEOS wrote:

First...Daily Kos? Couldn't find a more even-handed, less biased source? That's like using an Olbermann rant as a source, tbh.

On the OP: It's like the left hoping for Bush policies to fail and/or actively working to make them fail so they could claim they were right (no pun intended). It's politics, nothing more.

The left seemed to actively campaign on the Iraq surge failing...until it didn't. Now they've adopted the same strategy as their own in Afghanistan--except it's totally different this time.

The left actively campaigned against a number of policies from the Bush administration and/or claimed they were failures...then adopted them as their own--except claimed they were totally different this time.

And the right is doing exactly what the left did not one year ago toward policies they backed back then.

It's politics.
I really wish people would stop attacking sources and focus on the material provided and either discredit it, or agree with it.

For example attacking a pro abortion site as biased is stupid.Attack the material it presents. Of course it is going to be pro abortion.
Much of the time it's not about bias. It's about credibility.

For example, major newscasters have some credibility. Random bloggers tend not to.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-12-28 15:33:17)

2009-12-28 15:34:54
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

FEOS wrote:

First...Daily Kos? Couldn't find a more even-handed, less biased source? That's like using an Olbermann rant as a source, tbh.

On the OP: It's like the left hoping for Bush policies to fail and/or actively working to make them fail so they could claim they were right (no pun intended). It's politics, nothing more.

The left seemed to actively campaign on the Iraq surge failing...until it didn't. Now they've adopted the same strategy as their own in Afghanistan--except it's totally different this time.

The left actively campaigned against a number of policies from the Bush administration and/or claimed they were failures...then adopted them as their own--except claimed they were totally different this time.

And the right is doing exactly what the left did not one year ago toward policies they backed back then.

It's politics.
I really wish people would stop attacking sources and focus on the material provided and either discredit it, or agree with it.

For example attacking a pro abortion site as biased is stupid.Attack the material it presents. Of course it is going to be pro abortion.
It's not about bias. It's about credibility.

For example, major newscasters have some credibility. Random bloggers tend not to.
I dunno about that, bloggers have no agenda, newscasters have their fame and ratings to worry about, bloggers don't.

If it is credibility that is in question, then the material should be easy to discredit, over dismissing the source. It would be much more affective.
2009-12-28 15:40:12
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6872|SE London

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

I really wish people would stop attacking sources and focus on the material provided and either discredit it, or agree with it.

For example attacking a pro abortion site as biased is stupid.Attack the material it presents. Of course it is going to be pro abortion.
It's not about bias. It's about credibility.

For example, major newscasters have some credibility. Random bloggers tend not to.
I dunno about that, bloggers have no agenda, newscasters have their fame and ratings to worry about, bloggers don't.

If it is credibility that is in question, then the material should be easy to discredit, over dismissing the source. It would be much more affective.
Your reaction to that point speaks volumes.

Bloggers are nothing. They are not a source (unless the information in them is sourced). If you think a blog is a valid source, then you're certainly conforming to your usual delusional stereotype.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-12-28 15:41:11)

2009-12-28 15:41:27
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6940

In any case, as I already pointed out, the source is basically irrelevant as we're not discussing facts here, but opinions.
2009-12-28 15:42:52
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6872|SE London

ghettoperson wrote:

In any case, as I already pointed out, the source is basically irrelevant as we're not discussing facts here, but opinions.
Which blogs are great for.

What they're crap for is actual information.
2009-12-28 15:57:08
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


It's not about bias. It's about credibility.

For example, major newscasters have some credibility. Random bloggers tend not to.
I dunno about that, bloggers have no agenda, newscasters have their fame and ratings to worry about, bloggers don't.

If it is credibility that is in question, then the material should be easy to discredit, over dismissing the source. It would be much more affective.
Your reaction to that point speaks volumes.

Bloggers are nothing. They are not a source (unless the information in them is sourced). If you think a blog is a valid source, then you're certainly conforming to your usual delusional stereotype.
Nope a blogger has an opinion just like you and me. Those opinions are usually sourced, if the the opinion is wrong, attack his reference material. If it is right give him credit for it.

you speak of credibility, yet you insist on attacking the perosn over his material why would that be? it couldn't be because you can not discredit his material could it?
2009-12-28 17:33:33
=JoD=Corithus
Member
+30|6849
I don't consider myself a republican, but yes.  I want Obummer to fail.  Miserably.  I want him to fail so completely and thoroughly that the only resort is his impeachment or, better yet, imprisionment, or, better yet, execution for treason.  That would make my decade.
2009-12-28 17:38:55
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7007
I want Obama and Reid Pelosi etc "policies" to fail... I truly hope they all have wonderful lives out of office though.
Love is the answer
2009-12-28 19:42:59
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6397|eXtreme to the maX
The Republicans were happy to bankrupt the country, see the economy collapse, lose international support by throwing away humand rights and get it involved in the mire of two unwinnable wars.
I don't think they give a shit about America, no. If Obama failing causes the death of America they wouldn't give a shit.
Fuck Israel
2009-12-28 19:44:25
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

The Republicans were happy to bankrupt the country, see the economy collapse, lose international support by throwing away humand rights and get it involved in the mire of two unwinnable wars.
I don't think they give a shit about America, no. If Obama failing causes the death of America they wouldn't give a shit.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-28 22:54:29
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5990

JohnG@lt wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

The Republicans were happy to bankrupt the country, see the economy collapse, lose international support by throwing away humand rights and get it involved in the mire of two unwinnable wars.
I don't think they give a shit about America, no. If Obama failing causes the death of America they wouldn't give a shit.
2009-12-28 23:26:19
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7007

Dilbert_X wrote:

The Republicans were happy to bankrupt the country, see the economy collapse, lose international support by throwing away humand rights and get it involved in the mire of two unwinnable wars.
I don't think they give a shit about America, no. If Obama failing causes the death of America they wouldn't give a shit.
lolol human rights.

You think the policy on torture has ever changed since the beginning of time? I'm pretty sure the SAS would do lots of fucked up shit for information. Every country does it. And two unwinnable wars? There is a large difference in occupation and waging a war. Today's warfare is not exactly the same as in WW2...

To lowing: The credibility of the source is everything. Yes newscasters are biased and what not, that is why you go to a MORE independent source, say Reuters and AP news.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2009-12-29 03:19:31
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6702|'Murka

ghettoperson wrote:

but despite them constantly disagreeing what Bush did, it never struck me as they actively wanted the US to fail in order to prove themselves right, unlike with the economy at the moment. I see what you mean though, the Democrats aren't exactly a whole lot better.
Semantics, tbh. I don't think the Republicans want the US to fail. They want Obama to fail. I don't think the Democrats wanted the US to fail. They wanted Bush to fail. Both parties seem to think that their solution(s) will fix whatever mess the other party gets us into...even though their solution(s) is/are essentially the same one(s) that the other party used to get us into the mess that they will supposedly rescue us from if we will only give them the chance.

I think we've got the worst crop of politicians we've seen in generations--more concerned with party power than with what they are charged with doing.

One party has complete power and they can't do shit...which is good, as the shit they want to do is ill-advised, at best. It's like a nice pretty shit sandwich that's all dressed up pretty for a magazine shot...looks nice and all--but in the end, when you take a bite of it, it's still a shit sandwich.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2009-12-29 04:29:40
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6397|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

I think we've got the worst crop of politicians we've seen in generations--more concerned with party power than with what they are charged with doing.
I don't think Obama is that bad, the rest of them yes.
Fuck Israel
2009-12-29 04:33:52
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6702|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

I think we've got the worst crop of politicians we've seen in generations--more concerned with party power than with what they are charged with doing.
I don't think Obama is that bad, the rest of them yes.
Obama is lumped in with the rest of them, just as Bush was lumped in with the rest of his Administration. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

He and his cronies/czars are bringing Chicago-style politics to DC...and it's failing miserably. Even worse than DC-style politics.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2009-12-29 04:34:38
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6397|eXtreme to the maX
Bush was total shit though, Obama not quite so much.
Fuck Israel
2009-12-29 06:12:31
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6907|do not disturb

Dilbert_X wrote:

Bush was total shit though, Obama not quite so much.
Obama is following in the same failed footsteps as Bush in my opinion, but he is also making a name for himself in his own way. I wouldn't prefer either, but I'd say Obama is worse. He'll prove that as time goes by.
2009-12-29 08:20:30
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Bush was total shit though, Obama not quite so much.
Obama is worse because he's charismatic. He's a salesman selling garbage that Bush would've never gotten away with because the guy was a dufus. Obama will sell people a shit sandwich and most of them will walk away smiling.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

 

Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard