When in Doubt, Blame the President

Bob McDob · Post by **Bob McDob** » 2004-01-11 04:18pm

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that in recent years American politics has taken on a "blame Clinton / blame Bush" angle.

I mean, from listening to some conservatives talk about Clinton you'd think he burned down their house, killed their mother, raped her corpse and then slept with her cat, while to liberals Bush is the Evil Pirate God XYLOR, with his mindaltering thermonuclear x-ray laser laying waste to large sections of New York City, Godzilla style, AND CLUBBING BABY SEALS WHILE DOING IT, and stealing their oil to boot.

I'm not naive enough to think that personal attacks are anything new in politics, but I haven't seen books attacking other American presidents (unless you count "did Jefferson sleep with Sarah Hemmings" an attack) in my library, and the only thing that comes close is the Watergate uproar. And even that pales in comparison.

So, am I missing something here? Are either of them really that bad? Or has American politics gotten a lot nastier and/or personal in the last decade?

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-01-11 04:22pm

The real problem is that Bush is Clinton Mk. II, only without the charm, intelligence and education of his predecessor.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-01-11 04:32pm

This is nothing new, as LBJ's "Barry Goldwater will NUKE YOU!" ad proves.

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2004-01-11 04:32pm

At the risk of sounding like a whiny kid, the Republicans started it (in recent times at least). They were terrified by Clinton, and he happened to come along at a crucial point. Both Rush Limbaugh and the Christian Right had just achieved their apex of power. Limbaugh was a political shock jock, and we all know about fundamentalists. I think that is why the Right was so nasty about Clinton. With Bush, the Democrats are just returning the favor, though honestly, I don't think Bush has it quite as bad as Clinton. Most liberals don't take him seriously enough to make the sort of self righteous accusations that Clinton suffered. Maybe there is a right leaning bias in the media, but just watching the evening news and paying only a little attention to the political attention whores, I just don't hear as much vitriol against Bush as I did against Clinton.

And while these kinds of attack are somewhat new, back in the 19th century things were a lot worse.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-01-11 04:46pm

Bush would have it worse than Clinton, but since the Democrats don't control any of the branches of government, it's more difficult for them to be as big of a pain in the ass to Bush as they'd like to be. On the other hand, Clinton didn't really have a lot of problems with the Republicans on foreign policy, but had lots of problems with them on domestic policy. Bush, however, can't get cooperation from the Dems on either.

And you're giving Clinton too much slack; he had to be dragged kicking and screaming like a baby to the table before he would even consider cooperating with the Republican Congress on welfare reform, which Al Gore went on to later sell as one of the greatest accomplishments of the Clinton administration.

Maybe there is a right leaning bias in the media, but just watching the evening news and paying only a little attention to the political attention whores, I just don't hear as much vitriol against Bush as I did against Clinton.

Then you haven't been watching the recent Democratic debates.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2004-01-11 04:48pm

The top man always gets the blame for any woes, as that is part of the purpose of being in charge. Whether or not a situation is directly attributable to the one in charge is in the end irrelevant...

Bob McDob · Post by **Bob McDob** » 2004-01-11 04:49pm

Joe wrote:This is nothing new, as LBJ's "Barry Goldwater will NUKE YOU!" ad proves.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the shitspewing end when the elections ended, though?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-01-11 04:50pm

Of course, but only because Barry Goldwater was so soundly beaten that he pretty much disappeared.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-01-11 04:54pm

Joe wrote:
Maybe there is a right leaning bias in the media, but just watching the evening news and paying only a little attention to the political attention whores, I just don't hear as much vitriol against Bush as I did against Clinton.
Then you haven't been watching the recent Democratic debates.

You have GOT to be shitting me, Pyle.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-01-11 04:55pm

We can only hope that Bush so soundly defeats the Democrats in November
that they effectively disappear from the political landscape for four years.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-01-11 04:56pm

You have GOT to be shitting me, Pyle.

Oh, it's mostly polite, of course, as political debates in America are required to be, but it seems like everything is Bush's fault with them.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-01-11 04:58pm

Although I will admit that the debates have recently shifted away from Bush and more towards gangbanging Dean.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-01-11 04:59pm

MKSheppard wrote:We can only hope that Bush so soundly defeats the Democrats in November
that they effectively disappear from the political landscape for four years.

I'm not predicting a landslide. More like a comfortable victory.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2004-01-11 05:01pm

Lying, cheating and dirty politics in general is as old as the hills:

From this article:

But was Jefferson a hero or a hypocrite? Ask Professor Ellis, winner of the National Book Award in 1997 for American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson.

Like the Sphinx, Jefferson proves enigmatic -- a complex and often contradictory figure. On the one hand, Jefferson passionately argued for personal freedoms, yet owned slaves; promoted revolution in America, but did not take up arms himself; advocated no government debt, yet worked up tremendous debt building Monticello; as vice president publicly supported President John Adams but played dirty politics by privately subverting Adams's agenda.

Or as has been written:

King Solomon wrote:Ecclesiastes 1

9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there anything of which one can say,
"Look! This is something new"?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time.
11 There is no remembrance of men of old,
and even those who are yet to come
will not be remembered
by those who follow.
(NIV)

While obviously the above does not apply to technology, it could easily apply to politics and the nature of mankind...

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-01-11 05:14pm

Joe wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:We can only hope that Bush so soundly defeats the Democrats in November
that they effectively disappear from the political landscape for four years.
I'm not predicting a landslide. More like a comfortable victory.

Even if for no other reason, I'd be cheering for Bush to lose to hear the anguished screams of every online conservative who ever was.

StimNeuro · Post by **StimNeuro** » 2004-01-11 06:39pm

Iceberg wrote:
Joe wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:We can only hope that Bush so soundly defeats the Democrats in November
that they effectively disappear from the political landscape for four years.
I'm not predicting a landslide. More like a comfortable victory.
Even if for no other reason, I'd be cheering for Bush to lose to hear the anguished screams of every online conservative who ever was.

If Bush wins, you'll hear the anguished screams of every online Bush hater that ever was. Either way, I'm going to be avoided alot of threads come the day after the results are announced.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2004-01-11 08:02pm

People are attacking Clinton and Bush more than others in the past because they're less moderate and more outspoken; so, their respective opponents hate them even more than other presidents (who tend to get a lot of flack anyway, as jegs pointed out).

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-01-11 08:05pm

StimNeuro wrote:
Iceberg wrote:
Joe wrote: I'm not predicting a landslide. More like a comfortable victory.
Even if for no other reason, I'd be cheering for Bush to lose to hear the anguished screams of every online conservative who ever was.
If Bush wins, you'll hear the anguished screams of every online Bush hater that ever was. Either way, I'm going to be avoided alot of threads come the day after the results are announced.

I personally can't wait. I wanna see Florida rise up in Civil War after another deadlock in Palm Beach County...

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2004-01-11 08:17pm

Xenophobe3691 wrote:I personally can't wait. I wanna see Florida rise up in Civil War after another deadlock in Palm Beach County...

The Democrats should begin an intensive education campaign with their constituents on how to properly use voting machines before it's too late...

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-01-11 09:07pm

jegs2 wrote:
Xenophobe3691 wrote:I personally can't wait. I wanna see Florida rise up in Civil War after another deadlock in Palm Beach County...
The Democrats should begin an intensive education campaign with their constituents on how to properly use voting machines before it's too late...

See this card here? It has NAMES on it, yes, NAMES. See this little hole right here, with the line from the name to it? Push it out if you want to vote for that person...yesss...there you go. No...no...only push out one of them...there you go.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-01-11 09:27pm

Follow the red lines.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-01-11 09:31pm

If anything, the republicans need to learn that telling DBT to purposefully fuck up felon lists is not the proper way to run a campaign. Republicans also need to learn not to make sweetheart deals with Diebold. After all, its CEO, Walden 'ODell, said he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

Jegs wrote:The Democrats should begin an intensive education campaign with their constituents on how to properly use voting machines before it's too late...

Nah, they should be telling those republican fuckheads in Florida that malfunctioning and improperly maintained voting machines are a bad thing. And that sending staff members to riot and disrupt recounts is kinda illegal. Not to mention the vote fraud with the two corner detatched standard that was prohibited by legal precedent (but ended up getting Bush votes anyway).

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-01-11 09:41pm

Glocksman wrote:Follow the red lines.

http://glocksman.webhobbit.net/ballot.gif

IIRC that ballot was illegal, therefore should not have been in use. The common red-herring response to that was "but a democrat designed it, so it's ok". I can see how it would confuse people (especially the elderly), but regardless of that, it was an illegal ballot.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-01-11 10:16pm

Hamel wrote:
Glocksman wrote:Follow the red lines.

http://glocksman.webhobbit.net/ballot.gif
IIRC that ballot was illegal, therefore should not have been in use. The common red-herring response to that was "but a democrat designed it, so it's ok". I can see how it would confuse people (especially the elderly), but regardless of that, it was an illegal ballot.

It may have violated the Florida law on putting the 2 major parties first on the ballot, but only a moron would get confused over following those black arrows to the correct hole.

You want to vote for Gore?

Find his name and look over to the right. You'll see a '5' with a big black arrow in front of it. This arrow points at the hole you should punch to vote for Gore. Stick your stylus in the hole indicated by the arrow and punch.

Simple, no?

Confusing, my ass.

The real problem if you trust WND, is that many of the voters didn't even look at the damned ballot before punching their vote. Instead they went by the cards handed out by the condo commandos

Century Village residents are used to relying on "palm cards" to help them vote. As the name suggests, a "palm card" is a printout that's small enough to fit into the palm of one's hand, and they are distributed en masse by condo commandos prior to the election.

"This is a card that has the numbers of candidates we recommend residents vote for," said Oser, who describes it as an aid for elderly voters who have poor eyesight or are vulnerable to confusion in the voting booth. Unless there's a polling station set up within the retirement community, as is the case at Oser's Century Village, condo commandos arrange to bus residents to the polls. It is common for residents who take the journey to the polling place sponsored by the retirement community to arm themselves with the palm card issued by that community.

As reported by the Palm Beach Post, the Democratic Club of Greater Boynton Beach got the candidates' numbers mixed up in their voting recommendation published in its November newsletter to members. A few days prior to the election, according to the Post, the club issued postcards headlined "Oops!" which explained that members had been incorrectly instructed to "punch #3 for Al Gore" but that number 3 would actually be a vote for Republican George Bush. The postcard further instructed members they should "punch #5 for Al Gore."

I have no sympathy whatsoever for those people who are too damned lazy to even look at the ballot and see exactly whom they are voting for.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-01-11 10:31pm

You gotta be kidding me

Yeah, they're pretty stupid

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

When in Doubt, Blame the President

Am I right, or aren't I right?

When in Doubt, Blame the President