Being dumb and being elitist are not mutually exclusive...at all. Has no one here seen Monty' Python's Upper Class Twit of the Year? Beingelitist and praying are not mutually exclusive at all, and in fact the original parameters of the Christian Church established at the Council of Nicea were much influenced by Constantine's desire to have a holy hierarchy which would reflect and legitimize his temporal one. Since that time Chritianity has often been most practiced more by the extremes of societies ( ie upper and lower classes) for differning reasons than by the middle class.
Outstanding analysis. And I agree that even if Lieberman does not share all of the ideologies that average democrats hold high (hell, probably not even the ideologies that are most important to most democrats in the election year) I think Lieberman is the party's best bet to beat Bush head to head because he comes off to your average citizen as consistent on the issue unlike some of the other candidates. I think the jury is still out on Kerry, but I think Clark and especially Dean have really hurt their chances with their wishy washy stances on the most important issue facing the voting public this year. Of course, it is still very early and if Clark or Dean find the right mud to sling, history certainly shows that you can make a comeback this early in the race.
twhy, it is good that you acknowlege that Dubya is only average intellectually. I guess we could say that about his character and other qualifications, too. I would say that praying or walking on a treadmill does not make one average per se nor does it make a person presidential material. I think it is a wierd false defintion on your part to define anyone as an elitist who wants a president that is smarter or has better character than the average person. Let's face it President of the United States is not your average job.
He can be a dimwit and elitist. Do you actually claim that GW is representative of the 'common man'? The guy had common grades and SAT scores yet got into Yale, was a failure at running several businesses but was always given another chance solely because of his family and insider connections. He was AWOL from military duty during a time of war and yet had no consequences to pay as a result. That's not a 'common man' by any definition I've heard of. I say he's elitest because he thinks he's entitled to some of the things he's taken advantage of above, and the real common man is not entitled to that.
Spin, spin, spin, goes the spinster! Come on Glynch. You know you and I don't see eye to eye when it comes to politics, but can we at least resist the temptation to spin every one of my posts into a reason to attack Bush? The issue being discussed was what me and another poster view as a doomed political strategy by several of the front running democratic party candidates, something I think any democrat wishing to see Bush leave office a year from now should be very concerned about at this point. The fact remains that the #1 issue facing voters in this coming elimination will be national security and the war on terrorism and the majority of the American people (if you beleive what you see in the polls) want someone who will be tough on terrorism, not a war protestor in office. The current geopolitical environment makes it a bad time time to bring in a peace-time president. Personally, I don't think any presidential candidate would seriously handle the war on terror much different than Bush is handling it regardless of what they say now to get elected. They know that the middle east is a problem and that sitting around and letting that problem continue to fester out of control is bad for America (specifically the American economy) and you will continue to see a forceful presence in the middle east whether it's in Iraq or not regardless of which of these candidates enter office. And if any of these candidates do not do so, they will be one term presidents.
It has already been covered a bit, but I have to respond to the Bush = common man while Dean/Kerry types are pure elitists. Bush: Born in New Haven, Conn. (ooh, evil New Englander!) into the royalty-like Bush family, having started mostly with his grandfather's (Prescott was a senator for Conn.) wealth and political influence. Surely we all remember his father, in his sixties, having never seen a price scanner at a grocery store. Attended the exclusive Phillips Academy in Andover, Mass. (ooh, evil New England rich boarding school). Coincidentally, that is where his father went to school. Received BA from Yale in 1968 (another coincidence - where his father went to college) and MBA from Harvard in 1975. (with Princeton, the three most elite, "old boys club" universities in the nation). Admits that his life had "no focus" until he was in his 40's...a privilege only an elite can afford. First poitical venture was working for his father. It can go on, but it is pointless. Please note that I am not trying to say Bush is particularly bad or it is because he is elite that he sucks. I have just found it fascinating that conservatives attack liberals for their candidates being elitist, when they all are on both sides. A few recent exceptions being guys like Clinton and Edward, grew up poor, got wealthy as adults. Whether elitism is right or wrong, don't pretend it doesn't exist and, just because he is stupid, Bush is a "common man." Oh yeah...uh...Dean will never be president.
LOL, I don't go to Internet cafes with a bunch of smelly ass losers and exchange students. Christ almighty, I post from my highly paid, intellecutally demanding, white collar job locale. Your description of George W. Bush as a common man is beyond laughable...Is growing up the scion of a wealthy New England family, prep school, then legacied into Yale and the Skull & Bones the background of the common man? How about his professional career...let's see, daddy pulls strings to get him into the Air Nat'l Guard, of course, Georgie goes AWOL the last year (although he isn't put in a stockade like a 'common man' surprisingly). Harvard Business School ( no doubt the result of his sterling gentlemen's B's and C's at Yale) then a lot of partying with a few sweetheart independent board of director positions (arragned via the Carlyle group and other business interests connected to senior) where he has to show up 4 times a year and cash the check. Then after senior became Pres, he essentially sold influence and parleyed a moderate investment in the Rangers into a huge payout...just like Joe Sixpack could have. The funny thing is that, despite his background and access he has had to the larger world, he remains resolutely intellectually uncurious, arrogantly scoffs at anything that seems cultural and elitist...likes to sit around in Crawford and sweat his ass off rather than see the world or give the impression that he cares. I don't begrudge or fault Jimmy who works at the gas station for wanting to watch WWE rather than to go to the Louvre...because Jimmy doesn't have the opportunity to go to the Louvre. GWB can't say that. And it's not his preferences that I'm criticizing either. Sh-t, I used to watch WWE for christ's sake. It's his attitude that anything cultural is automatically elitist and therefore sucks. That's r****ded. I don't like opera...I would much rather play video games or watch Slamball on TNN than go to the opera...but I don't have a complex about operagoers like GWB does, I recognize that there's value in it, it just doesn't appeal to me personally. I guess that's because I actually don't come from the leisure class like GWB does and hence don't have his inferiority complex. You know, it's funny, I've got a friend here who's father is the owner of a large perfume company...lucrative enough to havve compounds in CT, So. Fla, and the Bahamas, similar to the Bush's. He's a trust fund kid, does a lot of drugs, does a lot of drinking, lays with loose women, but a fun guy to be around. I like him a lot, but I wouldn't want him running the country. I don't know if that makes me an elitist or an anti elitist..nor do I really care. So in closing, Bush is a dimwit, with an eltist background an inferiority complex about it; it's marginally interesting to think about but sort of cliched in a way too....and Twhy, just to fulfill your dreams/nightmares/fantasies...that was one of the dumbest posts I have ever read even by the low standards set by the right wing hack brigade that inhabits these fora...shameful.
Sam, you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty? How about your attempts to pirate my posting techniques? I counted no fewer than EIGHT instances of you stealing my favorite tactics in your last post alone. Often imitated, never equaled JORGE
It's truly remarkable how Bush's phony common man image... his, "...heck, I'm just a good ol' boy from Texas. How ya like my accent?? Hell, I've worked on it long enough!" persona has duped the country because people take so little time to examine the facts and buy into the media spin. Texas bought it by electing him Governor. The country by electing him President. With any luck, the truth is sinking in and that sinking feeling among many Americans that they've been taken for suckers is starting to make itself felt. The Democrats have a golden opportunity to end this guy's career like they ended his father's. All they need is a decent candidate. I honestly don't think Bush's gigantic war chest will matter that much. People are ready for a change.
YEEEAAAAAARRRRHHHHH!!!! Dean's making a comeback. Dean Gains on Kerry After Post-Iowa Free Fall Monday, January 26, 2004 PLYMOUTH, N.H. — As the clock ticked down to the nation’s first primary, there were some signs that former front-runner Howard Dean (search) had recovered from his post-Iowa free fall and was once again in a position to come out in one piece in New Hampshire. Polls, which are seldom reliable so close to a primary vote, showed Dean climbing back Sunday night to within striking distance of Sen. John Kerry (search), who delivered a stunning win in the Iowa caucuses last week. A few polls even showed Dean within the margin of error. The former governor of Vermont stumbled badly after coming in a disappointing third in Iowa and delivering a raucous concession speech that TV news networks subsequently replayed over and over again. With a week to go until the New Hampshire primary (search), Dean’s campaign quickly went into damage-control mode, granting Diane Sawyer an interview with the candidate and his media-shy wife, Judy, and allowing him to poke fun at himself on “The Late Show With David Lettermen.” Dean’s media makeover may have made a big difference. Several prominent and uncommitted New Hampshire Democrats have recently said that Dean may actually pull off a win there. But any declaration that a particular candidate is a shoo-in may be folly, particularly this early in the election process. Kerry aides said their polling numbers stabilized around 30%, which in a multi-candidate race in the Granite State would normally be a winning target. Kerry's crowds have mostly been committed supporters. There were also many undecided voters and new backers at his events who credited their warming toward Kerry to his Iowa win. But that may not necessarily seal the deal. The Massachusetts senator may have a problem winning converts because he is already well known in his neighboring state, where a large "anybody but Kerry" vote has developed. The Dean camp, meanwhile, argued that his poll numbers have ticked up 1 to 3 points a day since Thursday, setting the stage for a strong second. At the risk of raising expectations, several top Dean aides told Fox News they thought there was a slight chance he would still win. If Dean does not make it to a strong second (or better) his candidacy would be in trouble, despite the argument that Dean has the money and largest organization with which to fight back in later primaries when and where others can no longer compete. Polls, voters, crowd size, campaign spin and candor all suggested Dean was back in contention for a strong second or better – as Kerry himself has admitted. Though just a little over a week ago pundits were writing off his campaign, Kerry now faces enormous expectations for a win on Tuesday. Anything less than a victory in his own backyard might raise questions about his ability to go the distance with a more cash-flush Dean. www.foxnews.com
I agree wholeheartedly with all of this. I read about the infamous "rebel yell" before I saw the actual footage, and was expecting some kind of total freakout. Then when I saw it, I was surprised. So he yelled a bit. Big deal? You go from that momentary display of emotion to commentators openly asking "Is Dean's campaign now a joke?" One funny bit, though: when I was listening to the Dean speech with the volume turned up, my wife was in the other room and she asked "Are you watching wrestling?"
YEEEAAAAAARRRRHHHHH!!!! Dean's making a comeback. New Hampshire has to be smarter than to breathe life into his campaign... ugh..
That's cool. You would support Dean as a candidate. But for those Democrats who want Bush to be defeated, just remember that he's ripe for the picking. But only if the Democrats select a candidate who's seen as moderate, has a message that comes across, is capable of getting the Democratic base energized and appeals to Independents and Moderate Republicans... the numerous Republicans who are wondering who the hell this guy is that they got elected President. That's my take, anyway. Fair or not, deserved or not, I don't think Dean fits that parameter for the average American any longer.
I just a Poll on MSNBC on the New Hampshire Primary. Kerry at 31% Dean at 28% The margin of error is 3%. There is now a statistical dead heat in New Hampshire.
I actually like this as long as Edwards can keep getting higher (latest polls I've seen have him doubling from 8% to 16%). I don't think Dean will get the nomination and I want Edwards over Kerry, so anything to halt his momentum is fine by me.
