Thursday, September 8, 2005

The war is over; time to blame the liberals

The war is over; time to blame the liberals - Of course it is. Isn't it always? For decades, so-called "conservative" media shills have shrieked and howled that liberals are responsible for absolutely everything bad in the universe, without exception. Millions lap up their bile and beg for more.

Everything will be blamed on the liberals. Just watch.


nedhead said...

A. I would like to see the verbal SAT score for the writer of the article you linked. He likes to throw big words around. Good thing I gots my dictionary handy!

B. His analysis seems dead on, unfortunately. "The Buck Stops Here" mentality no longer exists (has it ever?), especially with this administration (and Congress). Why does the general public allow this? It befuddles me. My ass would be in a sling if I denounced responsibility for my mistakes. (Trust me, I've made a few gafs, in public mind you - apparently, I like the taste of shoe leather) The only solution is for a public refusal to accept this type of behavior and childplay. That may not happen any time soon.

I call for a New World Order! I am going to wait patiently for someone to start it, then I will jump on the bandwagon.

Scarlett said...

1. Excuse me but didn't Democratic leadership and elected office holders sit back while Bush stole the White House from Gore?
(remember what republicans were able to do to Clinton)

2. While rank and file Democrats marched against invading Iraq didn't Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards and others vote to give Bush the power to invade Iraq anytime he chose?

3. Didn't the financial elites in the Democratic Party tell Al Gore that they would not finance him or back him and thus forced him to not run for the presidential nomination - even though he had been elected POTUS once before and most Democrats supported him and he was the one who led in our polls? He was anti-war and represented opposition to Bush?

4. Didn't the leadership in the Democratic party leave Al Gore and Dennis Kucinch to swing in the wind and foist John Kerry, who represented no oppostion on the war in Iraq off upon us?

Sorry to ruin your self pity, righteous indignation party.

Scarlett said...

PS clinton and the rest of these democrats are STILL supporting our occupation of Iraq. did you forget that or do you see what you want to see and know what you want to know just like a rightwing dittohead.

romablog said...

Maybe it's because Clinton knows that a minor argument like leaving Iraq now or leaving Iraq in 3 months isn't as important as appointing people who know _SHIT_ about their jobs.

It'd be great to get someone I agree with in office, but right now I'd rather just get rid of people like Bush

Brown, Chertoff, Gonzal, etc.

SheaNC said...

Point taken, Scarlett; however, there are posts in my archives addressing the very items you list. Since you've missed them, I'll just sum up by saying that I have no love at all for those democrats who betray their supporters by supporting neocon actions. Kerry was the worst of all; he betrayed half the country in the end... that's why I remain an independent.

Mike V. said...

I blame the Internets.

Unadulterated Underdog said...

You are correct. As with everything else, the right wingers are flopping the blame, trying to maintain their false belief that Furher Bush is innocent of wrongdoing. It's like this.

Bush put a stop-build on the levee/pump system that would have slowed and lessened the damage to New Orleans and instead sent the money for that project over to Iraq. Then, he watched as his unqualified FEMA director, Mike Brown, did as little as possible to help the afflicted. Then, Bush himself did as little as possible for those in need until public opinion became very weighted against him. Then, he waited top enter the afflicted regions until military convoys got there so he could try and play the role of hero. Then, he suspended the law that guarantees decent wages to the workers that will rebuild the region and in doing so is funneling money to his rich corporate compadres at the expense of the little man. Then what did he do?

"Let's not play the blame game", he said. Well, that's all fine and good except that most of the blame is in his lap. All of that stuff he did and didn't do really hurt the Gulf Coast. And add to that the fact that the Right-wing is blaming most of the tragedy on two Democrats: Mayor Nagin of New Orleans and Governor Blanco of Louisiana. The rightists are saying that the tragedy was so tragic because these two didn't have better evac plans. While that is true, it is also true that in the face of suc ha crisis, a local community is very limited in what it can do, particularly after it is sitting under 10 feet of water.

Effectively, Bush is to blame moreso than any other one person. He will never accept that responsability because that will ruin his cult of personality but that is the truth.

SheaNC said...

Well-said, okliberal. It appears that the rightists' support for "states' rights" actually means Neocons shifting blame and responsibility to local officials.

Mike of the North said...

Dude! Maybe the liberals are to blame. If the system is broken beyond repair, which many of us believe is the case, then trying change it by working within it is pointless. Worse than that it makes us accomplices in perpetuation of the problem. I am personally coming to the conclusion that the only way to take control out of the hands of religious capitalism is to pry it out of their “...cold dead fingers”

Mike of the North said...

Hey! check out Filthy Hippies.
It rocks!