Comments on: Fred Thompson — The Favored Candidate in the Blogosphere?

By: Jacques

Jacques — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 05:57:04 +0000

If you haven’t made up your mind yet who to choose/vote for maybe this helps:

http://www.electoralcompass.com/

Discover your position in the political landscape for the 2008 USA presidential election.

Dutch initiative, English version

By: no2liberals

no2liberals — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:06:16 +0000

Henh…Ignatius J. Reilly, haven’t heard that name in a while.
This is funny, and I could see Adam doing this.
Ignatius J. Reilly responds to an African spam email.

Too bad the Boethian era ended so feebly.

By: Preston

Preston — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:53:43 +0000

I haven’t read it in 15 or 20 years but it was the funniest book I’d ever read at the time.

By: adam

adam — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:02:06 +0000

i had to dump him into the wiki, but i’m surprised how close you are. a few drastic differences but dead on otherwise. are you recommending the book?

By: Preston

Preston — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:39:39 +0000

i need nothing from you

You must be a real pleasure to be around. I’m thinking: Ignatius J. Reilly?

By: adam

adam — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:27:12 +0000

and my world is oversimplified?
for the final time, since you again misconstrued, my diagnosis is that the general public appears lacking in the motivation department, yet not in the loud mouth “why doesn’t the government save us” department.
my “prescription” since you assumed incorrectly is to encourage accountability and personal responsibility among the masses, not drown us in legislation and expand government to accomodate the apparent laziness. please feel free to quote where i recommended large scale immediate changes to the media and/or electoral politics.
“Do you really need me to point out that this(individual change) isnâ€™t going to improve anything?”
i need nothing from you; we can agree to disagree here.

“Conservative doesnâ€™t have to be a synonym for impotent.”
agreed; nor sedentary, dormant, anti-change, or laissez fair, as you often misunderstand.
it should, however, be synonymous with patient and cautious.

on the other end of the spectrum, liberal doesn’t have to be synonymous with victimized!

By: Preston

Preston — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:47:55 +0000

Man, kudos on being so optimistic. I donâ€™t think it will change jack on discrimination. Marc- Well, of course it doesn't change everything but take a look at an example outside of politics. When Jackie Robinson broke into the Major Leagues African Americans in many different sports began to reap benefits. From a different perspective, when Lance Armstrong won the Tour de France many Americans suddenly saw new horizons in the sport. It's not like they didn't know they could ride fast on a bicycle before but the limits of possibility expanded. Adam- your prescriptions simply don't fit your diagnosis. Just look at your first post where you repeatedly rail against the dysfunctional systems of media and electoral politics. Then you propose individual change. Do you really need me to point out that this isn't going to improve anything? Conservative doesn't have to be a synonym for impotent.

By: adam

adam — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 05:17:33 +0000

press,

“I think your complaint was with the media, not the voters”
you think incorrectly. “their largely liberal bias encourages the dumbing down of news” is an issue for folks to overcome, but i’m not complaining.

“Your solution is no solution.”
wrong again; i just think if people want change, they should stop endorsing shit.

“Whatâ€™s your problem?”
you say “i don’t want to get into it…”but then you get into it. if you want to discuss something, by all means.

“African Americans and women have and continue to be discriminated in the workplace.”
i assume you meant discriminated against and there isn’t an adult alive who hasn’t discriminated and been discriminated against. please go easy on the victimology.
“a competent performance by Clinton or Obama will reduce that discrimination.”
are we talking sanctioned bias, personal bias, or both? by your logic it’s reasonable to assume that a competent performance by bush2 and/or clinton1 would reduce discrimination against people with a southern twangy accent. can you provide proof?

“Thatâ€™s exactly the problem ”
wrong a final time (at least until you retort). you misquoted me. i didn’t say:
“problem isnâ€™t our current system; itâ€™s a lack of participation”
i said: itâ€™s a lack of participation in it (the current system)…

By: marc

marc — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:45:13 +0000

Wow so much to comment on, feel overwhelmed.
1. anyone today that does not know about a candidates positions is either lazy or just does not care which I would call stupid.
2. I like Fred, but I just don’t think he will play nationally. He is not exciting and as I hate to say it that does count. In this day and age you have to have a spark to catch and grab someones attention away from the buffet lines and reality TV.
3. Wow there will be less discrimination in the work place if a woman or black gets to be president? Really? Man, kudos on being so optimistic. I don’t think it will change jack on discrimination. It has always existed and always will. It is a dog chasing his tail to think that we will EVER live in a color blind society. Yeah it can get better, but come on people will always judge others and look down on some, it is encoded into human DNA. that is how we evolved by recognizing differences and fearing what is different. That’ why people hate change, it takes you out of your comfort zone.
4. I think if the repubs want to win, it has to be Romney. This guy is the complete package. Has actual business skills, the strongest on stopping the illegal flood we are drowning in, for lower taxes, strong on military, strong on the economy and wants to help keep jobs here by rebuilding manufacturing, strong on healthcare without taking it over, he is a good family man with strong values. Yes he has problems, but WHO does not??? All the rest are WAY weaker than this guy. Just listen to what he says, his voting record. Don’t listen to the talking heads.
5. the two party system sucks. we have NOT always had 2 parties. it is the dems and repubs playing ping pong that we the people are getting screwed. they just flip flop every few years, get behind closed doors then do what they want and screw the rest. If we had 3,4,5 parties it would be exponentially harder for them to get all those parties on the same page. I completely think the 2 party system is horrible. Why do you think the dems and repubs don’t want a 3rd party and try hard to keep them out of the debates or off ballots??? Cause then we would have another option other than the two do-nothing choices we have now.
6. Are Americans stupid? NO. but we have gotten lazy and distracted by all our toys. Of course to anyone with open eyes realizes….that is exactly where the elite want us. Distracted, fat, and in a sugar coma. Because a distracted, fat populous is much easier to control than one who is lean and mean and has laser focus on these empty suits. Of course the laws, judges, and left leaning media does NOT help. Those with weak minds are easily influenced by the herd mentality and what the talking haircuts have to say. I could care less who is leading in the polls or who has momentum or who cooper Anderson is for…who gives a damn. I like who I think will save this sinking ship. We are in big deep trouble, this is not some academic conversation. We are in BIG trouble so the smart people who pay attention better do their research on voting records and think HARD about whom they vote for .
8. This election is the most important election in decades, we better make the right choiceâ€¦not the popular choice. This is not high school.

By: Preston

Preston — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:15:27 +0000

That should read without “throwing their votes away”.