NYT/CBS Poll results

[prole]

Here's one of my favorites from Thomas Friedman when he was cheerleading for an American Empire and shoving deregulatory schemes down Third World throats in an equally grandiloquent turd:

For globalism to work, America can’t be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is.…The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist—McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley’s technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.---Thomas Friedman "What The World Needs Now" NYT, 3/28/99

 

Edited September 23, 2008 by prole

[olyclimber]

AMERICA!

[prole]

It's nearly unfathomable how many Americans in positions of power have been so wrong these past couple decades. No wonder people turn towards conspiracy in order to make sense of it. "They're fucking up so epically, they must be doing it on purpose."

[Buckaroo]

I have decided to minimize my responses to conspiratorial kooks who tend to not be reality-based in any facets of life or who are consumed by a single idea they recently read in a book written by yet another member of kookdom. I could easily name dozens of Democrats recently revealed as corrupt--and so could you if you even cared to try. But you never even got back to me with your homework on Jamie Gorelick. Why should I give you more? Try Harry Reid or Charles Schumer. Hell, just type in 'Chicago Democrat' for God's sake.

 

 

So I named one conspiracy theory 911, and you can't answer all the posts about the level of repug corruption, or the fact that the repugs are running the vote machines, because those are facts not theories.

 

Do you deny that Reagan had more convictions than any other prez?

 

Do you deny that Cunningham was convicted for the largest amount of bribes ever?

 

You want Jamie Gorelick? She earned $26 MIL at Fannie Mae over a period of SIX years. Our current treasury secretary (imagine a fox hen-house scenario) is Paulson REPUBLICAN, he earned $38 MIL at Goldman Sachs in ONE year. And his "bailout" (corporate welfare) package benefits Sachs more than any other firm... imagine that.

 

Sure I can name many corrupt dems, my point is I can name more repugs and to a greater degree.

 

Like I said it's all a matter of degree. But not to people like you, oh no. To you the only thing that matters is the "R" after their name, if they have that they are A-OK.

 

You state computer voting is wrong, you state party connected officials are wrong, but when faced with the fact your party does it worse, we don't hear from you again.

 

I'll say straight up, get rid of all the crooked dems. I do not support crooked politicians unless, A- I have no other choice, and B- they are the lesser of two evils.

 

You still haven't answered the question of your stance on the bailouts? It's up to $1.4 Trillion now. Maybe because it's your party of "fiscal responsibility" and "small government" (BIG LIES) that's doing the dirty deed? ROTFLMFAO!!!!!

[Buckaroo]

I suppose we never landed on the moon either?

 

That was a Faux News test to see how effective their propaganda machine was. I'm sure they conducted a survey right after the "faked moon landings" to see if the Fairweather types ate it up or not.

[Fairweather]

THIS libtard thinks Krugman makes some sense.

 

How to get America's groove back

By Thomas L. Friedman

 

Syndicated Columnist

 

Of all the points raised by different analysts about the economy last week, surely the best was Rep. Barney Frank's reminder on "Charlie Rose" that Ronald Reagan's favorite laugh line was telling audiences that: "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.' "

 

Hah, hah, hah.

 

Are you still laughing? If it weren't for the government bailing out Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG, and rescuing people from Hurricane Ike and pumping tons of liquidity into the banking system, our economy would be a shambles. How would you like to hear the line today: "I'm from the government, and I can't do a darn thing for you."

 

In this age of globalization, government matters more than ever. Smart, fiscally strong governments are the ones best able to empower their people to compete and win. I was just in Michigan to give a talk on energy. I can't tell you how many business cards I collected from innovators who had either started renewable-energy companies or were working for big firms on clean-energy solutions.

 

It just reminded me how much innovative prowess and entrepreneurial energy is exploding from below in this country. If it were channeled and enhanced by better leadership in Washington, no one could touch us.

 

If I were to draw a picture of America today, it would be of the space shuttle taking off. There is all this thrust coming from below. But the booster rocket — Washington — is cracked and leaking energy, and the pilots in the cockpit are fighting over the flight plan. So we can't achieve escape velocity to enter the next orbit — the next great industrial revolution, which is going to be ET, energy technology.

 

In many ways, this election is about how we get our groove back as a country. We have been living on borrowed time and borrowed dimes. President Bush has nothing to offer anymore. So that leaves us with Barack Obama and John McCain. Neither has wowed me with his reaction to the market turmoil. In fairness, though, neither man has any levers of power to pull. But what could they say that would give you confidence that they could lead us out of this rut? My test is simple: Which guy can tell people what they don't want to hear — especially his own base.

 

So what would get my attention from McCain? If he said the following: "My fellow Americans, I've decided for now not to continue the Bush tax cuts, because the most important thing for our country today is to get the government's balance sheet in order. We can't go on cutting taxes and not cutting spending. For too long my party has indulged that nonsense. Second, I intend to have most U.S. troops out of Iraq in 24 months. We have done all we can to midwife democracy there. Iraqis need to take it from here. We need every dollar now for nation-building in America. We will do everything we can to wind down our presence and facilitate the Iraqi elections, but we're not going to baby-sit Iraqi politicians who don't have the will or the courage to reconcile their differences — unless they want to pay us for that. In America, baby sitters get paid."

 

What would impress me from Obama? How about this: "The Big Three automakers and the United Auto Workers union want a Washington bailout. The only way they will get a dime out of my administration is if the automakers and unions come up with a joint plan to retool their fleets to get an average of 40 miles per gallon by 2015 — instead of the 35 mpg by 2020 that they've reluctantly accepted. I am not going to bail out Detroit with taxpayer money, but I will invest in Detroit's transformation with taxpayer money, provided the management and unions agree to radical change. At the same time, while I will go along with the bailout of the banking system, it will only be on the condition that the institutions that got us into this mess accept sweeping reforms — in terms of transparency and limits on the leverage they can amass — so we don't go through something like this again. To help me figure this out, I'm going to keep Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson on the job for a while. I am impressed with his handling of this crisis."

 

Those are the kind of words that would get my attention. The last president who challenged his base was Bill Clinton, when he reformed welfare and created a budget surplus with a fair and equitable tax program. George W. Bush never once — not one time — challenged Americans to do anything hard, let alone great. The next president is not going to have that luxury. He will have to ask everyone to do something hard — and I want to know now who is up to that task.

 

Thomas L. Friedman is a regular columnist for The New York Times.

 

2008, New York Times News Service

 

 

 

Matt - you do understand that Krugman and Friedman aren't the same person, right?

[mattp]

Good catch there, Fairweather. I had very little time on break at work and just liked the sentiment. I didn't really pay attention to who wrote it or whether I had previously thought the author was in the "good" or "bad" column.

 

Question: beyond pointing out my error, do you have an reaction to the piece itself? I personally think it makes a good point about how the candidates are not addressing real issues in an honest fashion. I think the same can be said about discussion here on cc.com. Gotcha and slam wins out over stating a position every time...

[dmuja]

 

Dude, this is the most asinine commentary on the current state of political affairs that I've read on this website, hands-down. Our "innate ability to judge from the gut"???? You've gotta be kidding me...

 

Asinine? Really? I thought it was fucking brilliant!

 

Im sure you can look up the pseudo-scientific psycho jargon that may back up the phenomena that I was referring to but I'll try to spell it out for you.

 

Sticking to present context, in our style of politics, (many) people are swayed NOT by following their gut (ie intuition, first impression, instincts, subtle signs and body language etc..) they are instead swayed by being dazzled and confused into THINKING that "this guy makes sense" or "this guy looks like what I THINK OF as a nice guy" or "this guy just spoke all the right WORDS, the ones that I THINK too" or "this guy LOOKS like someone I can trust" etc... This is by design. Its called campaigning and campaign advertising and it works (on some people).

 

Its the same technique that persuades people to join cults for example.

 

Its not "emotion" that Im talking about so you misunderstood me. What Im talking about is closer to "common sense" or "intuition" or "first impression". Maybe you don't believe it exists but I'll bet you use it every day. It has served me well thus far and I would think a climber would do well to not neglect it.

 

Have you ever met someone and instantly KNOWN that they were someone to steer clear of? Salesmen (and many politicians) make an art out of defeating your innate wisdom to instantly make a sound judgement of a situation or person. As you go about your daily life, if you had to think everything through you would barley have a chance to survive because predators (politicians) would find you easy pickins.

 

Turn on the TV and have a look at the Sunday morning preachers, what do you think, are they lying to you or will you buy what they're selling?

 

At first impression (from the gut) they are OBVIOUSLY salesmen trying to bullshit me. But, ADVERTISING WORKS! So guess what, people send them money and phony preacher boy gets to live in heaven on earth - all because people doubt themselves and doubt their gut instinct.

 

 

 

[Mal_Con]

Latest ABC/WaPo poll has Obama 52% McCain 43%

[dmuja]

 

My "gut" tells me its still not enough of a lead to overcome republifraud

[tvashtarkatena]

A few things about polls:

 

* There are a lot of them, and they produce a broad range of results. The NYT publishes all the major national polls on its campaign site.

 

* They fluctuate day by day a lot.

 

* Some are a lot more scientific than others.

 

* They tell me that Obama will win in a landslide, as does God.

[Fairweather]

 

Sticking to present context, in our style of politics, (many) people are swayed NOT by following their gut (ie intuition, first impression, instincts, subtle signs and body language etc..) they are instead swayed by being dazzled and confused into THINKING that "this guy makes sense" or "this guy looks like what I THINK OF as a nice guy" or "this guy just spoke all the right WORDS, the ones that I THINK too" or "this guy LOOKS like someone I can trust" etc... This is by design. Its called campaigning and campaign advertising and it works (on some people).

 

Its the same technique that persuades people to join cults for example.

 

 

 

 

You have just described the average Obama voter.

[dmuja]

 

I don't think so. Obama's run is phenomenal and rare, more like JFKennedy than any other politician recently. Sure some people are swayed by the typical politics, but that doesn't explain the "Obama Phenomena". He has gut appeal.

[Fairweather]

Good catch there, Fairweather. I had very little time on break at work and just liked the sentiment. I didn't really pay attention to who wrote it or whether I had previously thought the author was in the "good" or "bad" column.

 

Question: beyond pointing out my error, do you have an reaction to the piece itself? I personally think it makes a good point about how the candidates are not addressing real issues in an honest fashion. I think the same can be said about discussion here on cc.com. Gotcha and slam wins out over stating a position every time...

 

Friedman is usually a fair guy, and I can't disagree with too much in his piece, but he blows it in the last paragraph about Bill Clinton--who did NOT write welfare reform, but, rather, was dragged to it kicking and screaming by a Republican congress. I doubt either of the current candidates grasp the issue very much at all. I'm not sure a 'politician' is what this country needs right now.

[prole]

I'm not sure a 'politician' is what this country needs right now.

 

Great Caesar's ghost, I do not dare to ask!

[Fairweather]

 

* They tell me that Obama will win in a landslide, as does God.

 

My wager still stands. But you have less than 24 hours to demonstrate the true level of your confidence in Obama by accepting my proposal.

[tvashtarkatena]

Um...why do you have a tutu?

[Fairweather]

I'm not sure a 'politician' is what this country needs right now.

 

Great Caesar's ghost, I do not dare to ask!

 

You're a moron.

[Fairweather]

Um...why do you have a tutu?

 

I'll have my wife pick one up at a thrift store. What size are you?

[tvashtarkatena]

Don't bother. Your idea's as dumb as your voting record.

 

Tell you what I will do, however, cuz, like, I'm actually a sane person who doesn't get off on the humiliation thing. Or tutus, for that matter. If McCain wins, I'll donate $20 to the non-profit of your choice. If Obama wins, you donate $20 to the non-profit of my choice. Can you guess which one?

[tvashtarkatena]

Oh, I forgot. You've got 24 microseconds to respond to this challenge or you're a tutu-wearing pussy.

[prole]

I'm not sure a 'politician' is what this country needs right now.

 

Great Caesar's ghost, I do not dare to ask!

 

You're a moron.

 

Which "strong man" are you sizing for a crown and scepter?