Quote:
|
You've missed my point entirely.
|
Likewise.
Quote:
|
I'm saying there's no goose and gander. There's goose and tomahawk missile. There's no kick in the teeth vs punch in the balls. It's kick in the teeth vs knife through the heart.
|
I disagree.
Quote:
|
I reject entirely that there's ANY equivalency between what's being said about Obama and what was said about Bush, and I assert that an attempt to create an equivalency both minimizes the disaster Bush was, and rationalizes away the damage these sore losing tea partiers are doing.
|
And -I- reject entirely that there is any workable difference between the two, -or- what was said about them, -or- the damage they have done and will continue to do to this country. Bush fucked the economy (more). Obama took that fucked-up economy, propped up the people who fucked it up, and nationalized a significant portion thereof, thereby hitching my (and everyone else's) collective wagon to that enormous collection of bipartisan up-fuckery for the rest of forever whether we wished it or supported it or no. Two roads are being taken to the same horrible destination; stagflation, loss of national and international prestige and influence, eroded personal, economic, and civil liberties, devalued currency...I can go on, but won't.
Mr. Bush started wars under false pretenses.
Mr. Obama is continuing those wars, under equally false pretenses.
Mr. Bush fucked up the economy and nationalised the results, what several Wall Street Journal commentators at the time referred to as "Socialization Of Debt."
Mr. Obama has instituted steps that will, I believe, -further- fuck up the economy, nationalised much thereof, and will further nationalise any further up-fuckery just as his predecessor did.
Both people carried out these actions at the behest of vested-interest parties only out to aggrandize their power and enlarge their purses. Mr. Bush made his payments in deference to various Wall Street banks and multinational trading conglomerates, Mr. Obama to leftist pressure groups and Unions. Both sold their constituents a bill of goods in order to pass favours to the people who both got them elected and pull their strings.
Mr. Bush was a right-collectivist with his thumb on the Big Red Button.
Mr. Obama is a left-collectivist with his thumb on the Big Red Button.
Given that collectivism in general is built upon the premise that "the needs of the many (no matter how many) outweigh the needs of the few (no matter how few, and no matter the needs)," I do not trust collectivists with their thumbs on buttons to not destroy the world. If a large/persuasive enough collective wants some destructive act to occur, collectivism guarantees that it will occur. I have been "reminded" here repeatedly that "there is no right or wrong; political consensus is all that's required." I do not trust that mentality, whencever it springs, with the power to destroy.