<< ROOTER ~ MAIN ~ DOVE MENACED >>
APE-LIKE MORON CANDIDATE STEALS TWO ELECTIONS SOMEHOW
Michael Costello on the non-idealistic Left:
How has it happened that the Left of politics across the world has ended up opposing a foreign policy philosophy of spreading democracy in favour of supporting the traditional conservative agenda of stability, sovereignty and the status quo? Because that is what the Left is doing in its hostile reaction to George W. Bush’s second inaugural address …
The key thing for those on the Left to understand is that intense dislike of Bush and echoes of Vietnam do not make a foreign policy. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Bolton - they too will pass. What will go on is the great human desire to be free, which should be at the core of our foreign policy. The great danger for the Left is that its Vietnam and Bush obsessions may mean that it will end up on the wrong side of history.
Where syndicated columnist Robert C. Koehler determinedly resides:
The 2004 election was stolen — will someone please tell the media?
Can’t someone explain gently to this pea-brain that the Left have always een on the wrong side of history?
Posted by Susan Norton on 2005 04 15 at 12:22 AM • permalinkNo, No, No - not on the wrong side of History? Surely not. That wouldn’t happen.
Just look at all the very fine communist regimes supported throughout most of the 20th Century. They were even made fashionable by reiteration of how cool they were. Then along came economic rationalisation, globalisation, democracy, freedom - to stuff up a really great bi-polar world. One where you always had mates to sing the Internationale with on special occasions.
I’d better stop before I make myself cry!
How are you supposed to be Left any more?
How can we maintain that manic-depressive demo-fuelling mix of compassion for the downtrodden, followed by incandescent anger at the murdering bastards like the Big End of Town and Governments who
tear down our castles in the air?
I feel ... empty ...Left Behind.“The 2004 election was stolen - will someone please tell the media?”
Uh, the media would be YOU, Mr. Syndicated Columnist carried in multiple papers across the nation. And perhaps you were too busy churning out leftist macros to notice stories in CNN, the Washington Post, and elsewhere alleging voter fraud in Ohio, or coverage of Barbara Boxer’s hissy-fit protest of the election results?
Criminy, make us at least work a little.
A few days ago, Terry Neal wrote in the Washington Post about Bush’s inexplicably low approval rating in the latest Gallup poll…. This is, by a huge margin, the worst rating at this point in a president’s second term ever recorded by Gallup, dating back to Truman
The objective measure of “lowest” or “highest” should not be equated to the value classification of “worst” or “best”. I have limited experience in statistics, yet I think if we’re to gain anything meaningful from comparing different poll results on the subjective question of ‘approval rating’, we’d first need to convert each result from an absolute number on the 0-100 scale into a number representing the difference between expectations (base) and perceived results (displacement).
This is, in reverse, what managers do when setting annual targets (baseline expectation) for different staff members derived from the individual’s ability and experience against the company or department goals. Thus a top performer with a goal of 100 somethings who produces only 95 might get a rating of 60/Missed Expecations, while an average performer with an expected result of 50 somethings who delivers 60 might rate a 90/Exceeded Expectations.
My expectations for GWB are much higher than they ever were for Clinton, and Bush’s agenda is certainly the most ambitious goal setting by an administration that I can recall. I have to think this difference of expectations would influence my response a great deal were some one to ever include me in their polling sample.
YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!
They’ve been on the wrong side of history for some time now.
Their hatred of Bush isn’t even real, it’s automatic, contrived and reflexive…in other words mindless, dictated by shallow fashionable, indulgent, adolescent dogma. They simply oppose everything America does, Bush, Clinton or whoever. If it were up to them Milosevic would still be in power, let alone the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. That’s some bleeding-heart! In Australia you have obscene idiots like Senator Kerry Nettle, head of the Mamdouh Habib Cheer-squad…Man! Maintaining the status-quo…is that what they’re calling ‘progressive’ now???I,for one, Looooooooovvvvveee this stuff. It keeps all those crackhead Lefties occupied. They’re not only too busy to make any real trouble, they turn off anyone with an ounce of sense (which they don’t believe anyone but them has anyhow). This is not as much fun as listening to them call anyone who doesn’t agree with them “knuckle-dragging, Bible-pounding, mouth-breathing rednecks” but it’s close.
They are just so divorced from reality that it’s like watching a bad sideshow. A little more of this and they’ll be as isolated in the American electorate as the Know-Nothing Party.
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2005 04 16 at 12:36 AM • permalinkThis is not as much fun as listening to them call anyone who doesn’t agree with them “knuckle-dragging, Bible-pounding, mouth-breathing rednecks� but it’s close.
Mouth-breathing? Dang, that’s me! I don’t think I often pound Bibles or drag my knuckles (wouldn’t that hurt?). But I do breath through my mouth at times.
That’s it, I’m purty near being a redneck. Might as well trade my Audi for a pickup with a gun rack. Actually I think I could use a good chew right about now.
Posted by wronwright on 2005 04 16 at 02:39 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
“end up on the wrong side of history”? already there, mate