Four More Years...

Bush won't need Nader's help like he did in 2000. The Democrats seem bent on nominating a member of the only species Republicans have had no trouble beating, a Massachusetts liberal. Can you say Michael Dukakis?Southern NH has become dominated by Massachusetts transplants who bring their politics with them, providing politicians from their southern neighbor a natural advantage in the early primary race, and often prematurely blowing the other candidates out of the race. While the primary season's outcome is already a foregone conclusion, the general electotate will find Kerry as appealing as fingernails on a blackboard, which was the country's general reaction to Dukakis, too. The Democrats seem unable to heed the words of Santayana, or even of George Will, whose less memorably said over a dozen years ago, but with words as true as ever, that Democrats ignore even crowbars to the head.--Percy

Point understood, but Nixon was notorious for Watergate, for bombing Hanoi, and for just generally being a scary guy, but not for being a right winger. Domestically, and especially economically, he was from the liberal wing of the Republican party, wage/price controls and all that.--Percy

I actually agree that the country has slid to the right. The sea-change event for me was when Clinton allowed welfare work requirements to change. The primary welfare perspective in the country seems to have evolved from overwhelming concern for the downtrodden to one of personal responsbility playing a far less subservient role.The Republican position on welfare is consistent with the economics of demand/supply. They believe that if you create demand for the class of poor, unwed, unemployable mothers in the form of welfare dollars, then this class will inevitably grow in size. This isn't to say that poor, unwed, unemployed mothers don't need help and support, because they do, and this isn't to say that the Republican position doesn't work against legitimate members of this class, because it does. It's in the interests of our country that we look out for this group, because the children of unwed mothers will someday join the ranks of society, and the Democratic position is important in this regard. But the Republican position acknowledges that the dollars attract hoards, from teenagers desperate to escape an untenable home life to welfare scammers intent on making a buck. 10 years ago the Republican position had little public support, and today it does, and that seems a big change.--Percy

Right you are! The Enron's, WorldCom's and Martha Stewart's of this country can rest easy knowing that attention is focused elsewhere. --Percy

Maybe I should have used the [sarcasm] tag instead of the smilie. Had I replied seriously to Crashfrog I might have said that the particular evidence I offered in support of the view that the electorate has slid to the right over the past decade cannot be interpreted as indicative of a slackening of attention in other areas such as corporate fraud and mismanagement. And I might have added that the budget of HHS (Health and Human Services, which includes welfare) is larger than all other federal departments except defense, and of course it's almost always a very large department in any state government.--Percy

Sounds like you're talking about this: Here's another location for those without a CBS MarketWatch account: At one point the article says: You seem pretty certain Bush and Cheney are guilty of wrongdoing. Am I correct in concluding you believe there's been an inappropriate exchange of favors for donations?--Percy

I don't like Bush, but I do like to think that when I make up my mind that it's from accurate information dispassionately gathered and analyzed. I'd feel pretty sleazy reaching a conclusion based on what you presented.--Percy

Discussions about what someone actually meant are pretty pointless. If you want to believe that's an accurate assessment of your post then go ahead, but you might want to follow the suggestion to read your post yourself.I *did* go out on the Internet before I replied. I found articles recounting the same things you said, some of them using the same tone. I posted a link to a more balanced one from CBS MarketWatch back in Message 24.No one suggested or even hinted that the investigation of the Enron collapse should have limits. I hope, and I'm sure ThingsChange hopes, that investigators follow the evidence wherever it leads.--Percy

Oh, yes, that's precisely what I was trying to communicate. Message 15 was a sarcastic jab at Crash with smilie included.--Percy

A point of view? You got it! Balance? Uh...--Percy

Hi Holmes,You're pushing me as if you want me to defend Bush, but I've already said I'm no fan of Bush. I'm not saying you're wrong about Bush (I'm not saying you're right, either), but that I think you're approach is wrong. It seems alarmist and based too much on inuendo, circumstantial information and rushed conclusions. It seems the kind of approach that once the truth is finally out it's too late because the defendant has already been hung. I prefer measured and temperate approaches.I'm already on record as saying they should follow the evidence wherever it leads. On this important point I think we agree.--Percy

I've had my say. Why not direct your efforts toward someone interested in discussing this with you?--Percy

Hi Schraf,One of the things I like about science is that, within the bounds of tentativity and evidence, there *are* right and wrong answers. I'm not familiar with ThingsChange's position, but he exhibits an attitude that I very much share, and that's that where political issues are concerned the possibility of certitude is greatly diminished. I *do* find it interesting to delve into history, even recent history, but when the expressions of opinion become too strong I usually take that as my signal that it's time to leave.There's nothing wrong with you and holmes and others expressing strong opinions on these topics, but this style of political debate isn't to everyone's taste, and so when some of us absent ourselves it isn't from a sense we've been shown wrong, but more from amazement that amidst such a confusion of facts and fallacies and opinions and unknowns that anyone thinks they're likely right.Maybe someone can help me capture the old saying that runs somewhat roughly along the lines of, "Someone who isn't liberal when they're young has no heart, while someone who isn't conservative when they're old has no brain." People change their attitudes a great deal during their lifetimes, and most people find themselves holding conflicting views, just not at the same time.I try to keep such things in mind when I become particular certain of how right I am. If I ask myself, "What could happen to cause me to change my mind about this," I'm usually able to come up with some answers. Often which positions feel like the right ones have some substantial subjective contributions having to do with our lot in life and our background and experience, and none of these things are constants.--Percy

I can't comment on other threads, but after rereading ThingsChange's posts in this thread I found I had the same reaction as before. I grant you that he has some strong anti-Clinton opinions, and by and large I would agree that once made he should stay and defend them, but your counter was a book by a left-wing comedian.Now, I really like Al Franken's comedy. I'm old enough to remember him as half the team of Franken and Davis. But isn't an appropriate counter to his book something from a corresponding right-wing buffoon, perhaps Limbaugh? Everybody's different, and for many people this is perhaps just the turn in the discussion to make things interesting, but for other people it might reinforce the opinion that there's insufficient justification for strong convictions about being right.--Percy

If this seems like an important issue to you then follow it, by all means. Maybe in the end it will turn out to be a big scandal. At the present time this seems to me like the normal amount of hounding a sitting president. The media has an interest in making such things seem as serious as possible. It feels somewhat similar to the attempts to tie the Clintons to the White Water mess, though it's getting much less attention at this point.--Percy