Both the GOP and the Dems continually miscalculate what the American voting public truly wants. The public wants good, sincere non-partisan decision making. Every time one party fails and the other gains some ground the far edges of both parties take that as a "see....they are coming around to our way thinking " thing. So the GOP spokespeople like Limbaugh and Coulter and on the Dem side loonies like Pelosi all begin to delusion themselves that everyone suddenly is on their wavelength. I suggest that a viable moderate party form in this country and they would have a vice grip on true political power in the U.S. for decades. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
Dave, You make a good point to an extent but you continue to refer to the GOP reps as Limbaugh and Coulter, who are not elected officials. They are just talking heads. Meanwhile, you quite accurately refer to the head of the DNC as Pelosi, Obama and Rahm et all.. There's a big, big difference.
I recognize that Corey but hasn't there been a lot of speculation as to just who is the voice of the GOP? One of the party's problems....a big problem is that people still identify with these nutcakes......probably because of the way media like Fox News trots them out so often etc. When good moderates emerge in the party my speculation is that these radical voices diminish their chances to lead the party because these kinds of candidates I refer to don't pander to their foolishness. I tell ya.....if a strongly moderate candidate could force his way through that far right quagmire that candidate would win the next presidential election in a landslide.
Coulter and Limbaugh are to the right what Jon Stewart, Bill Maher and Ed Shultz and maybe even Keith Olberman are to the left they get trotted out daily and nutcakes around the country worship them and have the benefit over Coulter and Limbaugh of television exposure.....they are entertainers, not policy makers.......the country would be in a much better place if Pelosi and Reid were entertainers not policy makers. I don't believe for a moment that the influence of the talk show righties is more significant than the Marxists that are trotted out on television nightly....
Rather than risking your health debating our friend Dave on topic that he is intractible on, may I suggest going outside, breathing some fresh air and banging your head against a tree trunk. 8)
Poor Dems With Bush fading into memory, Newt long gone, they're reduced to turning commentators into "Political Opponents." Kind of silly, but it apparently works.
Just where are the "moderate" Dems these days. Or are moderate Dems socialists and facists? (Oh sorry Joe Liberman)
Bush left office one of the most unpopular presidents ever.....for good reasons. The economy was in shambles....and believe it or not the auto industry meltdown while probably inevitable in a deep recession.....was tremendously accelerated by the highest fuel prices in history by far and by the mortgagae/credit meltdown all of which Bush presided over. Maybe not caused.....but certainly under his watch.
The inevitability of failure of a doomed business model in a cyclical industry extorted into accepting the burden of crushing fixed labor costs from an organized labor arm rife with corruption and an inability to compete effectively against new entrants was a given long before Bush was elected......obvious to all with any reasonable perspective, imho. But it always makes us feel better to blame it on somebody else..... especially Bush.
If you want to blame the auto industry collapse on anyone, go back to the end of WWII. Go back to the US teaching the Japanese our assembly line techniques and expertise. It took a while to show that it was a mistake, but what a mistake it was. They took our ideas and perfected them while we rested on our past success.
Try this one on then..... I have my house, which is located in one of the best school districts in the state of Micgigan, listed for sale for a mere 15% over what I paid for it in 1992 and I have nary an offer in 4 months on the market. That is some unprecedented depression in the real estate market and where do you think my home appraised at in Jan. of 2001? My guess is that it was probably at approx. 1.60 % of where it was when I bought it.
If Intel were to go belly up in Albuquerque, NM, home values would be at 25% of what they are now. When the major employer is gone, home values dive. The auto industry demise is what happened to your home value. See my previous post for that explanation.
Nobody is disputing that the Detroit metro economy has been devastated by the failure of the domestic auto industry and the areas relative lack of diversification which has had a crushing impact on the local housing market......what we are disputing is that that was Bush's fault....not all housing markets are created equal, and not many are as bad as Detroit metro.....
That is one of the main things that drove my desire to leave Intel. The majority of their fabs have been built in areas that were otherwise desolate. They did this to gain tax advantages from areas that wanted industry to come in. What they created was pocket communities where they can make demands that the community has to bow down to. This will come back to bite them sooner than later. The tax rate in Rio Rancho is extremely high because the home owners are paying the taxes that Intel is not paying. The house we had in Rio Rancho was only 1700 sq ft and because of taxes, we were paying house payments that were higher than the 2470 sq ft house we left in the Dallas area. I owe a lot to Intel. They helped to advance my career more than they know. I got out before the possibility of ruin came true. It may never happen. But at least if something happens here in Austin to Applied Materials, there are other major employers here.
The housing fiasco runs just about as deep here in Florida and in many other states as well and you can't blame that on mismanagement in Detroit. Blame it on greed.....financial lack of leadership and ethics on Wall Street and on the Hill....both sides of it if you will.....and yes it occurred mostly under the 8 years of Bush. Maybe he had a blind eye.....was misled......couldn't have stopped it.....whatever......but it is severe in scope and very painful to many, many Americans probably for the next decade or more.
I think that just about sums it up.....greed and lack of ethics - on the Hill, Main Street, Wall Street or anywhere - are elements of the human condition that man has always and forever will struggle to overcome.....I'm sure that is Bush's fault as well...... whatever happened during his tenure was no doubt his doing.....we know where you stand.
However you slice it BT is has been an unmitigated disaster and it continues to threaten our economical well being and the results of this past 8-9 years could keep America down for a long, long time. Woulda been nice if someone.....anyone......Bush.....the Dems.....the GOP....Wall Street....ANYBODY would have cared enough to look in and put a stop to the nonsense.
Therein lies the point.....the structures fundamental to the economic issues we are facing pre-dated the Bush administration. Your time horizon and penchant for selective memory seem to only engage when it fits your arguments......let us not forget the Bush administrations efforts to rein in the excesses and control the risk in Fannie/Freddie - two government sponsored enterprises at the CENTER of the credit meltdown - were rebuffed, indeed ridiculed, by Queen Barney and King Franklin - Obama's key economic advisor. Don't go there with me, I'll call the ******** flag each and every time..... <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/63siCHvuGFg&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/63siCHvuGFg&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>