Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:54:44 -0800
Wasn't it Michael Moore that called Bill Clinton a Republican president in one of his recent books?
I'd also heard/read somewhere that Clinton sent more money to the military than Bush 41 did.
And doesn't it seem now like that economic boom in the 90s was a false one -- given the Enron/Tyco/Adelphia/Health South/others scandals that followed.
My stock portfolio in 2000 didn't look nearly as good as it did in 1999 -- and Clinton was still president. :)
Of course, the guy that really controls our economy's performance isn't the president (though the president can really screw up our budget by giving our surplus to rich people -- who so obviously deserve it because they're already rich people), it's the Fed Reserve Chairman. :)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 01:53:24 -0800
Well, now we're getting some juices flowing. :-) Actually, I think BGA was mostly tongue-in-cheek in his rant, but it managed to get a bit of a rant from BRM as well. Not exactly what I was going for with our continuing political dialogue, but I'll run with it. "YHK" comments to BRM's are below. I see now the evidence that yours and my comments below embodies the polarized opinions in American politics. I'll try my best to be civil but honest; I can't promise not to be sarcastic or a wise-ass, though. ;-)
> --- Brian Menard wrote:
> Sounds like you took your Bob Dole pill this morning, and I do NOT mean the one for which he does t.v. commercials.
> First, in the interest of full disclosure, my mother was a Goldwater Girl. Okay, in truth she did oppo at RNC headquarters on Capitol Hill (that's DC, not Seattle!) in 1964. But I enjoy razzing her about being a GG just to get her hack up. She can say she was doing substantive politics back when Hillary Rodham's involvement consisted of touting candidates and cocktail parties.
> Second, as to your suggestion that we consider Blow-Bill-Blow a Republican, let's not and say we didn't. Let me state in no uncertain terms: We don't want him.
YHK: I don't think anyone expects the Reps to take Bubba under their wing, now or ever. I doubt Bubba would like that, either.
> Just because he decided after two failed years as a left-wing president that the only way he could do anything competent in office was to jump on board the new GOP majority's agenda train, hijack it, and take credit for it from a media quite happy to give it to him instead of to the GOP Congress, doesn't mean he's one of us. Yick! Even the suggestion makes me want to shower and wash off the muck.
YHK: This comment is interesting. Pray tell, for what should the Newt/DeLay/Lott/Frist GOP Congress get credit, and what did Clinton "hijack" from the so-called Republican Revolution? The "Contract With (On) America"? The legislative gridlock? The budget deadlock shutting down the government? The impeachment proceedings that were a complete waste of the nation's time and money?
YHK: You must mean the economic boom of the 90's. George "I hate broccoli" "41" H.W. Bush didn't oversee it. Yeah, that was all Clinton's and Dems' doing w/o any Reps help. ;-) And that's the way it's gonna be sold to the public in this election because "43" Dubya did WAAAY worse than Bubba on the economic front, not to mention the myriad of other domestic blunders and scandals. I'm sure the Reps will be more than prepared to blame the Dem Congress, but the Republican Revolution lasted a good long 12 years, so the Dems must have ruined things all in the last year. Darn.
> What a shame that someone so brilliant can have a morality grounded solely in his own aggrandizement. A legacy of which to be proud. Okay, I go that out of my system. On to other things.
YHK: As I mentioned before, GOP is licking their chops to go after Hillary with the Clinton "legacy". Good Lord, how the Reps hate the Clintons! Don't people realize it was a "vast right-wing conspiracy"? ;-) How much you wanna bet that that'll get thrown in her face, if she's the nominee?
YHK: I still recall soon after 9/11 that some people dared to say that Dubya could be ranked among presidents like Lincoln and Washington. Sadly for all of us, Dubya has hit new presidential lows, and his regime is too current even to be referred to as a "legacy". It's more like a living "nightmare" from the Dems and Ron Paul's perspective, which segues me into...
> Third, did Bloomberg switch BACK to the Dems or did he just go independent? I think it was the latter, but I may misremember that.
YHK: This isn't the segue I meant, but does anyone Bloomin' care about Bloomburger? I don't, unless he does the Dems a favor like Perot the Hero. Those lucky-ass Clintons; that's why the Reps hate 'em so much...
> Finally, Ron Paul...Oh, Ron Paul. The best answer he gave in last night's debate was his response to the question that he might not really be a Republican. It was a very rational litany of historically based Republicanisms. Ron Paul is a very rational guy. Unfortunately for him, I think he's also nuts. The most rational process still goes awry when it starts from lunatic assumptions or seeks lunatic results. Please don't use ANYTHING he says/writes/does as representative of the rest of us in the GOP world. Big Tent has its advantages. Ron Paul, apparently, is one of its disadvantages.
YHK: BRM, why do you think Paul is nuts? Granted, "your" Congressman, the kooky Kucinich, publicly declared his belief in UFOs (still wouldn't call DK nuts, though), but I don't see why you label Paul as nuts. Okay, if this Ron Paul Political Report newsletter stuff is actual truth and can be proven as linked to him directly, then I'll call him nuts as well. Other than that I thought he outlined his "not one of the lemmings" Republican principles quite well ("rational litany of historically based Republicanisms") in the debates last night. [Lest you think I watched Fox, I caught the highlights on the Lehrer Newshour.] I didn't see anything nutty in his criticism of the GOP having deserted the conservative ideals domestically and internationally. Yikes, a part of me must be a marginalized Republican. ;-) What's nutty is Huckabee's plan for a national sales tax! Is he serious? Hey, let's have the most regressive tax system and be like Canada. Maybe he'll go for nationalized health care, too. Come on, Huckster, you can do it!
YHK: Man, I haven't heard "Big Tent" since the "kinder, gentler" days of HW, or was it Dubya's "compassionate conservative" days? Has he made good on the "compassionate" or the "conservative" part in the last 7+ years? Tragically for our nation and the world, he is well off that mark on which he ran in 2000.
> Happy prognosticating to all!
YHK: Hear, hear! That's what I'm talkin' about!
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:46 PM PST
Subject: Another Rant-And the flies continue to drop...
CNN is reporting that Ron Paul, in a series of newsletters, published in the 90's, rants against blacks and gays. He says things like, "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."
It's a hoot, check it out.
CNN Link: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/index.html
Well, another one soon to bite the dust, I guess. If the Republicans continue to do this poorly, they might have to start courting New York's mayor, Bloomberg. Oh, that's right, Bloomberg switched to the Democratic party.
Anyway, despair not. Twenty-six years of De facto Republican rule has been a pretty good run. We'll include NAFTA loving Clinton under the Republicans.
Who will be the first Democrat to really slip up? I hope Bill can keep his pants up just long enough...Actually, he is already screwing things up for Hillary undermining Barack, highlighting Obama's inexperience-As if, Hills former job consulting with the White House Executive Chef over the Christmas menu, or her inability to get a health care compromise, is experience enough. How many times did it take her to pass the NY bar exam anyway? Oh, yeah, that's right, she didn't. She had to go to Arkansas and test there, instead.
Oh well, life's a bitch when you describe yourself as a former Goldwater girl. At least she's trying to get to the top the old fashioned way, through marriage, money and connections.