1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Political Sociology -- SOMEBODY Finally Had The Guts To Write It

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Ben_Hecht, Apr 27, 2008.

  1. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Don't agree with the entire article, but this last line struck me solidly.

    Because we have become an intolerant nation, and that's what gets you elected.

    And let's not fool ourselves...both sides of the aisle have a rather nasty streak of intolerance. It's just that the right feels no reason to hide said intolerance. The left, in its weak-kneed approach, prefers to take a more haughty intellectual stance on it. But it's there all the same.

    As for the two idiot arguments that, for some unknown reason, continue to be throw out: STOP using them! You only sound like more of a goof when you do.

    A) Ted Kennedy was a drunk who killed a woman, therefore you libs have no reason to talk about morals.
    B) If your guy was so good and GWB was such an idiot, why did he win twice?

    The first is so immaterial to other discussions and so out of date, it makes you sound like a third-grade wank.
    The second is so far off the point, it's no wonder we got exactly what we deserved. It's not that GWB was any better than the other candidates. It's that far too many Americans were too ignorant to exercise good judgement in the casting of their vote.
     
  2. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    Wow. Where does one start with what an excreable piece of dung this column is?
    It starts with the obvious hypocrisy of comments such as this: "We must endure "lapel-pin politics" that elevates the shallowest sort of faux jingoism over who's got a better plan for Iraq and Afghanistan."
    Who is perpetuating this crap brand of political analysis? The very Eastern media "elites" that he aggrandizes at the expense of his racist/classist view of Southerners and Midwesterners.
    Let's see. This guy is anti-Catholic, anti-Southerner, anti-Baptist ... he's quite the thinker, isn't he?
    Like in Billy Madison, we're all dumber for having read this piece. I award him no points, and may ... etc., etc.
     
  3. Mystery_Meat

    Mystery_Meat Guest

    Question: if we elected Bush because a) we were too ignorant to vote properly and/or b) we were manipulated by Rovian manipulations, then what happened between 1996 and 2000, since I'm assuming we were smart since we voted Democrat in 96, right? Did we get stupid in those four years? And if we vote Obama or Hillary this year, do we get our smart cred back?
     
  4. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    I don't think it's such a simplistic response. But I will say that many of the people voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004 for reasons other than for what was best for them and the country, despite MANY indications to the contrary.
     
  5. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Prosperity the likes of which we may never see again.

    But we chose a candidate that we'd like to drink beer with instead of the smart, wooden one.

    I hate beer. And I hate Bush.
     
  6. Mystery_Meat

    Mystery_Meat Guest

    *shurg* I voted for him because I thought he had better stances on the issues than his opponent. In both cases it was a game-day call, but I'm pretty sure I put some thought into it. I know one of the memes is that Bush only won because people were more likely to want to drink a beer with him, but I'd be willing to wager that plenty of Bush voters DID use their brains to come to their conclusions.

    Speaking of the whole beer buddy argument, I wonder which one was the last presidential candidate that won on likability but lost at the ballot box? Clinton beat Bush and Dole there, Bush and Dukakis was a boring draw, Reagan beat Mondale ... and while you can make the case that people would rather have a beer with Carter than Reagan, you'd have to factor in the likelihood that beer with Carter would be a Billy Beer.
     
  7. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    I'm not going to say in general that the majority of the population voted for the Shrub because of the beer factor, but I will say that even those elections were marginalized by non-issues throughout. The fact that so many people appeared to be swayed by them is what's disturbing and leads me to believe that quite a few voted without really considering how it would impact them.
     
  8. JayFarrar

    JayFarrar Well-Known Member

    Ugh, yet another Yankee demonizes the South.
    Tired and old.
     
  9. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    Bush is as Southern as Dunkin' Donuts.
     
  10. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    You must not have had to recite Chaucer in Old English or you'd never say that, Bastard.
     
  11. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    And if you don't believe Frank, here it is in all its glory.



    You could NOT possibly make this up
     
  12. ..that longen folkkes to goon on pilgriimages...
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page