Is this the third Bush term?
I see this knee-jerk reaction a lot from Democrats who are disgruntled with Jackass. They complain about the Democratic party and their legislation. Some claim that both parties are corrupt and all the bums should go. Then I see phrases like the third Bush term.
Well, this is the third Clinton term to me. The ignorance of terror, the secret health care meetings, the tax the rich solution to everything all bring to mind Bubba. But he’s not the president. Neither is Bush. Get over it.
Bush derangement led to the lukewarm McCain reception. Bitter partisanism made hollow messages about post-partisanship more attractive. By the same token, Clinton hatred made Hillary less desirable compared to a blank slate.
Let’s deal with the situation at hand. A jackass is in the White House. The inmates are running Congress. Only a small percentage more Republicans are better than Democrats. If an incumbent Republican is up against a Democrat, I’m voting for the Republican. I just hope I don’t have to make that choice next year. But I’m not going to fight old battles with people who are already out of office.
I don’t know about you, but I’m frustrated and increasingly angry with all the smarmy talk about “Oh, Republican, Democrats, it’s all the same thing.” It is not, across the board, all the same thing. But for argument’s sake, let’s say it were. Do people not understand that getting rid of the rubber stamp Congress is an emergency because the rule of law by which we live–our Constitution, along with our freedoms, our country, our decent standard of living, are at stake? Do they not understand that our very lives are in peril?
Enough blanket indictments of all office seekers. Our imperative as voters is to free this nation of the Muslim Marxist usurping the Oval Office, and all his worshipful minions in Congress, before the United States of America becomes the People’s Islamic Republic of America.
Not to be disrespectful, but I think you are still fighting about people who are already out of office. Yes, I am willing to grant you that Clinton (in retrospect) was a good deal of the problem. So were Reagan and both Bushes, of course Jimmy “Hamas” Carter, Ford, Nixon, Kennedy… in short, I think you have to go back to Andrew Jackson to find a President who hasn’t been a good deal of the problem. (I might give you Teddy Roosevelt on a good day.) That’s not the problem any more. The problem is getting people to realize that the political game we’ve been playing literally for half of our existence as a nation is strictly a Vegas-style, the house is gonna win in the long run kind of game.
The only way to save America is to abandon our old belief systems and change the rules to suit our own needs. We’ve been polite little playahs for far too long. Stop bickering over team flags and watch the game for what it really is! It doesn’t matter if you drink Coke or Pepsi, you’re drinking non-nutritive crap that will eventually kill you either way.
Will I vote for a non-incumbent R over an incumbent D if there’s no other choice? Yes. Will I vote for a non-incumbent D over an incumbent R? Not as clear cut, but probably not. Will I vote for practically anyone else that runs against either of them? If they agree to vote for term limits – you bet your assets I will!.
GG,
By now we’ve all read the article about Sunstein, obama’s “Regulatory Czar,” i.e., Gestapo chief. There is no time left to the niceties you propose. This is emphatically not politics as usual. In fact, short of divine intervention, there’s no time left for anything.
By next spring, massive Muslim colonization of this country–at obama’s invitation–will be more than one-third accomplished, the Constitution will be a dream of the past, and dissenters will have been disappearing in droves.
Mary,
I know what you’re saying, and I agree we’ll be disappe