Full Version: Bush a Populist?
In another thread I saw a reference to Bush as a populist. I have seen this before and I find it to be a misleading piece of image making.
There is a difference between having a common touch and appealing to the common man and fighting for the rights of individuals who have been made powerless by the system.
In the true sense of the word, Bush is what the Populist Party would have fought against tooth and nail. He works for corporate interests and those of the wealthier Americans on the philosophy that this is in the best interests of the country. He is a William McKinley, Calvin Coolidge Republican, not a William Jennings Bryan or even a progressive reformer.
He is much more of a "log cabin" president. Someone born in wealth who was handed most of his opportunities in life who can turn a folksy phrase that implies, "I am one of you."
Does anyone out there think Bush is really a populist?
There is a difference between having a common touch and appealing to the common man and fighting for the rights of individuals who have been made powerless by the system.
In the true sense of the word, Bush is what the Populist Party would have fought against tooth and nail. He works for corporate interests and those of the wealthier Americans on the philosophy that this is in the best interests of the country. He is a William McKinley, Calvin Coolidge Republican, not a William Jennings Bryan or even a progressive reformer.
He is much more of a "log cabin" president. Someone born in wealth who was handed most of his opportunities in life who can turn a folksy phrase that implies, "I am one of you."
Does anyone out there think Bush is really a populist?
Bush a populist? 
Bush is a populist beyond a shadow of a doubt. In fact he is more a populist than any other president since Lincoln.
Bush has been drunk and admits it, Bush has tried drugs and admits it, Bush chokes on pretzels and laughs about it, Bush steps in Horse manure and shovels it, Bush has lived a common mans life only he has done it with a little help. As the Govener of Texas he raised the bar for education and promoted small business with several laws.
I would much rather have a president that understands the common mans problems because he has experienced them himself. Bush had a business that failed. As hard as he tried he could not save it. He knows what it is like to have to lay people off. He has had to look them in the eye an tell them there is no more work. Bush knows....he has lived it. You say he has had all the opportunity's etc. Well being the son of a successful man I can tell you that simply isnt so. You see when you are the son of a self made successful man the pressure is on you from day one to do better than your father. This can be a daunting task. GW really didnt have any breaks what he had was a tough row to hoe with the constant pressure of daddy's success. GW didnt want to go into politics etc. he wanted to have fun and enjoy his youth then go into business or something. The point is GW IS the common man if you see it from my perspective. For he and I have some things in common. Do I think that makes him a great president? No not exactly but I do think it makes him a populist in my eyes.
Small businesses are the backbone of the American economy. Millions of Americans own their own businesses rather it is a franchise or a small mom and pop shop millions of Americans are self employed and considered successful because of it. These people have children, GW relates to these people and their children. You see being the president of a company or the president of a country is only a matter of scale. Bush understands that. He understands the scale....
Like it or not Bushes tax plan will work.
Let me give you a small example of how it will work.
Last year 2002, there was a capital expenditure tax cut. We were able to write off 30% of the purchase price of any new equipment we bought. All five divisions of the company started buying equipment. As a company we spent close to $500,000 in a single month on new purchases. This new equipment meant we would have more capacity and could hire a few more people. This we did. My customer base saw us getting new equipment and started sending us more work, now we have hired more people and are looking for a bigger building. More equipment etc etc.
My personal income tax savings purchased several items including a new vehicle. (yes it is an SUV so what...
) The equipment our company purchased plus the new stuff we bought all had to be manufactured by someone. It had to be distributed etc. this means jobs. Jobs mean more spending more spending means a larger tax base on local levels ....Larger tax base on local levels means they can start to do something about some of Americas ills.....
Well thats how I see it.
GBYA
Aahz
Bush has been drunk and admits it, Bush has tried drugs and admits it, Bush chokes on pretzels and laughs about it, Bush steps in Horse manure and shovels it, Bush has lived a common mans life only he has done it with a little help. As the Govener of Texas he raised the bar for education and promoted small business with several laws.
I would much rather have a president that understands the common mans problems because he has experienced them himself. Bush had a business that failed. As hard as he tried he could not save it. He knows what it is like to have to lay people off. He has had to look them in the eye an tell them there is no more work. Bush knows....he has lived it. You say he has had all the opportunity's etc. Well being the son of a successful man I can tell you that simply isnt so. You see when you are the son of a self made successful man the pressure is on you from day one to do better than your father. This can be a daunting task. GW really didnt have any breaks what he had was a tough row to hoe with the constant pressure of daddy's success. GW didnt want to go into politics etc. he wanted to have fun and enjoy his youth then go into business or something. The point is GW IS the common man if you see it from my perspective. For he and I have some things in common. Do I think that makes him a great president? No not exactly but I do think it makes him a populist in my eyes.
Small businesses are the backbone of the American economy. Millions of Americans own their own businesses rather it is a franchise or a small mom and pop shop millions of Americans are self employed and considered successful because of it. These people have children, GW relates to these people and their children. You see being the president of a company or the president of a country is only a matter of scale. Bush understands that. He understands the scale....
Like it or not Bushes tax plan will work.
Let me give you a small example of how it will work.
Last year 2002, there was a capital expenditure tax cut. We were able to write off 30% of the purchase price of any new equipment we bought. All five divisions of the company started buying equipment. As a company we spent close to $500,000 in a single month on new purchases. This new equipment meant we would have more capacity and could hire a few more people. This we did. My customer base saw us getting new equipment and started sending us more work, now we have hired more people and are looking for a bigger building. More equipment etc etc.
My personal income tax savings purchased several items including a new vehicle. (yes it is an SUV so what...
) The equipment our company purchased plus the new stuff we bought all had to be manufactured by someone. It had to be distributed etc. this means jobs. Jobs mean more spending more spending means a larger tax base on local levels ....Larger tax base on local levels means they can start to do something about some of Americas ills.....Well thats how I see it.
GBYA
Aahz
I believe my comment inspired this thread, let me clarify what I meant. Bush is a populist with a small p. He does not have a core philosophy. Before Sept. 11, he was governing to the left. Remember the steel tariffs? (not a coincidence he narrowly lost PA. in 2000). The largest farm boondoggle in history? His plan to open up the border with Mexico? I am a Texan, I have seen Bush operate. He talks right and governs left. He is responsible for the largest increases, as a percentage, in federal spending since LBJ. Democrats underestimate Bush.
Bush achieved unprecedented vote percentages, from hispanics, for a Republican candidate in his two governorship campaigns. I would not be surprised if Bush anticipated the reaction to Estrada's nomination and I know he will use it in 2004.
I label all our Presidents, since WWII, as populists, with the exception of Truman, LBJ and Reagan. I believe these three men had core philosophies that governed their actions. I believe these three men would, to paraphrase a Populist with a capital P, "have rather been right, than President"
Bush achieved unprecedented vote percentages, from hispanics, for a Republican candidate in his two governorship campaigns. I would not be surprised if Bush anticipated the reaction to Estrada's nomination and I know he will use it in 2004.
I label all our Presidents, since WWII, as populists, with the exception of Truman, LBJ and Reagan. I believe these three men had core philosophies that governed their actions. I believe these three men would, to paraphrase a Populist with a capital P, "have rather been right, than President"
QUOTE
Bush has lived a common mans life only he has done it with a little help
Common men do not have ranches. They do not have ivy league degrees. They don't have former presidents for fathers. They are not carrying an entrenched political name. They don't have a brother who governs Florida. And finally, common men are not among the anointed oil barons.
Yes Hugo, you inspired me. Your small p populist definition seems to apply to anyone that seeks 51% of the votes in an election.
I admit I took your sentiment and made a somewhat different issue here, but Aahz has only confirmed my belief not undermined. He has directly benefited and is from the highest income or wealth brackets. (Let's just say top 10% here)
I admit I took your sentiment and made a somewhat different issue here, but Aahz has only confirmed my belief not undermined. He has directly benefited and is from the highest income or wealth brackets. (Let's just say top 10% here)
QUOTE(Eeyore @ Feb 16 2003, 01:00 PM)
Yes Hugo, you inspired me. Your small p populist definition seems to apply to anyone that seeks 51% of the votes in an election.
I admit I took your sentiment and made a somewhat different issue here, but Aahz has only confirmed my belief not undermined. He has directly benefited and is from the highest income or wealth brackets. (Let's just say top 10% here)
I admit I took your sentiment and made a somewhat different issue here, but Aahz has only confirmed my belief not undermined. He has directly benefited and is from the highest income or wealth brackets. (Let's just say top 10% here)
Let me just say I see Reagan , Truman and Johnson as Presidents who wished to lead that 51% in their direction. Carter, Clinton and the Bush's as those who followed that 51%.
QUOTE(Aahz @ Feb 16 2003, 03:45 PM)
Bush has been drunk and admits it, Bush has tried drugs and admits it, Bush chokes on pretzels and laughs about it, Bush steps in Horse manure and shovels it, Bush has lived a common mans life only he has done it with a little help. As the Govener of Texas he raised the bar for education and promoted small business with several laws.
Since when does the common man's life include getting into Yale with a C average?
AuthorMusician,
You say common men dont have ranches...I say common men in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona,Montana,Wyoming,South Dakota,North Dakota,Oklahoma,Nevada,Colorado,Idaho,Utah do have ranches. Just like a lot of common men in the mid west have farms. You people tend to look at the big cities and say that represents America well I am sorry to burst your bubble but most of America doesnt live in the big cities. Most of America is either self employed or works for a small firm of less than 100 employees.
If GW was among the oil barons why did his company fail? Surely if he was one of the anointed they would have saved his company wouldnt they? Wouldnt do to have a future governor own a failing business would it?
When I say GW is common and understands the common man I mean it from the perspective of a man who has been arrested for driving drunk and paid the price. A man who has struggled with a losing business and managed to climb back up. A man who can shed a tear for a lost stranger, a man who gets *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** off and says things that maybe he shouldnt have. A man that doesnt really care what the intellectuals think of him. That to me is a populist.
Eyore,
What exactly is the upper ten percent? The upper 10% of charity givers? Upper 10% of tax contributors? Upper 10% of employers? Upper 10% of what exactly and why is it usually said with such a negative connotation?
How many of you here do not strive to be part of that upper 10%? Just as Bush did for his family....that IS the common man living the common dream...cant you see that? All Common men strive to be all that they can. It is the uncommon ones that are freeloaders, beggars, criminals etc. Everyone else is the common man.
GBYA
Aahz
You say common men dont have ranches...I say common men in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona,Montana,Wyoming,South Dakota,North Dakota,Oklahoma,Nevada,Colorado,Idaho,Utah do have ranches. Just like a lot of common men in the mid west have farms. You people tend to look at the big cities and say that represents America well I am sorry to burst your bubble but most of America doesnt live in the big cities. Most of America is either self employed or works for a small firm of less than 100 employees.
If GW was among the oil barons why did his company fail? Surely if he was one of the anointed they would have saved his company wouldnt they? Wouldnt do to have a future governor own a failing business would it?
When I say GW is common and understands the common man I mean it from the perspective of a man who has been arrested for driving drunk and paid the price. A man who has struggled with a losing business and managed to climb back up. A man who can shed a tear for a lost stranger, a man who gets *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** off and says things that maybe he shouldnt have. A man that doesnt really care what the intellectuals think of him. That to me is a populist.
Eyore,
What exactly is the upper ten percent? The upper 10% of charity givers? Upper 10% of tax contributors? Upper 10% of employers? Upper 10% of what exactly and why is it usually said with such a negative connotation?
How many of you here do not strive to be part of that upper 10%? Just as Bush did for his family....that IS the common man living the common dream...cant you see that? All Common men strive to be all that they can. It is the uncommon ones that are freeloaders, beggars, criminals etc. Everyone else is the common man.
GBYA
Aahz
You didn't answer my question.
QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Feb 16 2003, 08:44 AM)
Bush a populist?
I couldn't agree more!
Joe if you had alumni from Harvard or Yale pulling for you, you could get in too. It is quite common..
bush a common man? let's see: his grandfather Prescott Sheldon Bush, was a very wealthy banker (he financed Hitler's rearmament of Germany BTW) and was a member of the senate from 1952-1963 ( http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodi...l?index=B001167 )
his other grandfather, Marvin Pierce, was the president of the McCall corporation, a publishing company. ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstlad...adies/bb41.html )
beyond Prescott and Marvin I am having trouble finding much info, but it really isn't that important.(though I am sure Samuel Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker are famous somehow, here is Bush's family tree if you wish to do more research. it goes to his great grandparents. I think the blue names are famous people) I now that Prescott bush, and George walker were members of Yale's secret society, skull and bones. and if you're interested a story about the bush family and Germany(it may be an opinion piece- http://www.clamormagazine.org/features/iss....3_feature.html )
yes Bush is just an ordinary guy, from an ordinary family
his other grandfather, Marvin Pierce, was the president of the McCall corporation, a publishing company. ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstlad...adies/bb41.html )
beyond Prescott and Marvin I am having trouble finding much info, but it really isn't that important.(though I am sure Samuel Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker are famous somehow, here is Bush's family tree if you wish to do more research. it goes to his great grandparents. I think the blue names are famous people) I now that Prescott bush, and George walker were members of Yale's secret society, skull and bones. and if you're interested a story about the bush family and Germany(it may be an opinion piece- http://www.clamormagazine.org/features/iss....3_feature.html )
yes Bush is just an ordinary guy, from an ordinary family
Ok UNA what you are obviously not getting here is the simple fact that the COMMON man in America wants the same things in life Bush wants. All of us are striving to make it better for ourselves and our children that is a common goal. It is extremists like yourself that are NOT common.
The very fact that GW got into Yale with a C Average should tell you how common he is. Not the fact it was Yale but the fact he had a C average.
It seems that if someone is successful in the dream we all have they are scorned and considered to be something of a monster.
What I am trying to convey here is a common objective of success is shared by all. Bush and his family have realized it that doesnt make them uncommon. Those who do not desire success how ever defined by them....those are uncommon people.
GBYA
Aahz
The very fact that GW got into Yale with a C Average should tell you how common he is. Not the fact it was Yale but the fact he had a C average.
It seems that if someone is successful in the dream we all have they are scorned and considered to be something of a monster.
What I am trying to convey here is a common objective of success is shared by all. Bush and his family have realized it that doesnt make them uncommon. Those who do not desire success how ever defined by them....those are uncommon people.
GBYA
Aahz
QUOTE(Aahz @ Feb 16 2003, 09:21 PM)
It is extremists like yourself that are NOT common.
Just because someone has a different opinion than you, does not make one "extremist."
QUOTE
When I say GW is common and understands the common man I mean it from the perspective of a man who has been arrested for driving drunk and paid the price. A man who has struggled with a losing business and managed to climb back up. A man who can shed a tear for a lost stranger, a man who gets *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** off and says things that maybe he shouldn't have. A man that doesn't really care what the intellectuals think of him. That to me is a populist.
Okay, I'll buy that, but this is looking at the US as consisting of property owners, which is how this nation began. Property owners banned together to get out from under colonial exploitation.
Most citizens now do not own property. Most citizens own mortgages (if lucky) and, as I suspect, own jack squat. Most do not get DUIs, and most have not snorted cocaine (a felony). Most have not even had the opportunity to fail at a funded business (although some have tried unfunded businesses: MLM junk).
Enumerating states that have ranches isn't convincing. Yeah, Colorado has a lot of ranches that use BLM public lands on the cheap. A very small number of Coloradans own ranches.
Why did Bush fail leading a funded company while being an anointed oil guy? Shoot, I don't know. I imagine he's not very good with his MBA--or, to be fair, he hit a string of bad luck--common in the oil business and a whole lot of others.
Common people work for a living and work for the Bushes of the world. Common people get laid off, live out of station wagons, and beg on the street. Common people go to dubious wars and die. Some come back alive and become bitter, enraged, guilty (why did I survive?) and psychological messes. Common people go to some cheap university, earn degrees, get some level of credibility, and criticize the anointed few.
I guess those are the intellectuals you've brought up.
Michael Moore ("Bowling for Columbine") is a common man. He is also a millionaire. I respect him as a populist a LOT more than GWB.
Count me in there, except I have no degree, just four years of college and a freaking published book.
Working on the next one too. I'm a common hard scrabble English miner. Come from a hard scrabble miner family. Bush ain't my kin.I also have rhythm
and a mean blues harp
LOL I agree Jaime however I think one would have to also agree that with a name like Unabomber and some of the sites he visits would eb a strong indicator..
GBY
Aahz
GBY
Aahz
aahz, dude, shrub got into Yale with a C average because his dad was a senator. you don't get into Yale with a C average, unless you are from an influential family! I could never get into Yale with a C.
I really wish people would quit using forum grenades, like calling me an extremist, or discounting all my sources as "conspiracy theorist" it simply shows you have no real argument. this is a very common tactic among conservatives, isn't it? can't attack someone's arguments? attack them instead.(this isn't an "attack" on you, rush does it, savage does it, as do many people that call themselves conservative. I have no problem with conservatives, just this tactic)
common people don't have rich families, they work hard for what they do got, bush was handed life with a silver spoon. he deserted in wartime (something that would land you or me in jail, possibly for life) he gets ivy league education with a C average (neither of us could get into Yale with a C average)
and who said I wasn't trying to make the world a better place for future generations? I simply want to make the world better for all future generations, not just my offspring.
everyone has a different idea of what being successful is, so that is not a good measure of commonality. I think staying out of the system for as long as possible is being a success. because that may not be your thought of success, I am uncommon. when people say common people, they mean what the majority of people are like (i.e. hardworking, not extremely rich, uninfluential) I consider people that work five days a week, year round and don't take bi-yearly vacations common.
dictionary.com defines common as:
(2)Widespread; prevalent.
(3)
a. Occurring frequently or habitually; usual.
b. Most widely known; ordinary
(4)Having no special designation, status, or rank (there are some others, but they are really irrellevant to this disscussion) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=common
and they define common man as: n- a person who holds no title and common people as: n- people in general.
bush does not fit any of these definitions, therefore he is not a common man!
I really wish people would quit using forum grenades, like calling me an extremist, or discounting all my sources as "conspiracy theorist" it simply shows you have no real argument. this is a very common tactic among conservatives, isn't it? can't attack someone's arguments? attack them instead.(this isn't an "attack" on you, rush does it, savage does it, as do many people that call themselves conservative. I have no problem with conservatives, just this tactic)
common people don't have rich families, they work hard for what they do got, bush was handed life with a silver spoon. he deserted in wartime (something that would land you or me in jail, possibly for life) he gets ivy league education with a C average (neither of us could get into Yale with a C average)
and who said I wasn't trying to make the world a better place for future generations? I simply want to make the world better for all future generations, not just my offspring.
everyone has a different idea of what being successful is, so that is not a good measure of commonality. I think staying out of the system for as long as possible is being a success. because that may not be your thought of success, I am uncommon. when people say common people, they mean what the majority of people are like (i.e. hardworking, not extremely rich, uninfluential) I consider people that work five days a week, year round and don't take bi-yearly vacations common.
dictionary.com defines common as:
(2)Widespread; prevalent.
(3)
a. Occurring frequently or habitually; usual.
b. Most widely known; ordinary
(4)Having no special designation, status, or rank (there are some others, but they are really irrellevant to this disscussion) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=common
and they define common man as: n- a person who holds no title and common people as: n- people in general.
bush does not fit any of these definitions, therefore he is not a common man!
The debates around here are sure going downhill.
Aahz, you are not persuading me on anything here. I agree he has the common touch. And in many ways he is a common man. But his policies are not populist and the populist movement took off from your state.
Even with these points, your attempts to say Bush represents the common man stretch logic fairly severely. He got a lot of favors along the way and he still failed as a CEO. He got a loan to buy a baseball team and he traded Sammy Sosa.
Even with these points, your attempts to say Bush represents the common man stretch logic fairly severely. He got a lot of favors along the way and he still failed as a CEO. He got a loan to buy a baseball team and he traded Sammy Sosa.
No Author common people do not live out of station wagons. Come on man. We are talking about ideals here. We are talking about what Bush understands and what he believes in.
Let me ask you this....Would you rather have a professional politician that has never held a real job, never had an altercation with the police, never shouted out an obscenity at a ball game, never gotten angry and shown it? Do you think a person like that is more in touch reality of the common man in America?
GBY
Aahz
Let me ask you this....Would you rather have a professional politician that has never held a real job, never had an altercation with the police, never shouted out an obscenity at a ball game, never gotten angry and shown it? Do you think a person like that is more in touch reality of the common man in America?
GBY
Aahz
Well heck Eyore it wouldnt have been much fun if no one took this side now would it?..
All I am trying to do is argue the philosophy of what Bush believes. He is trying to help the common man it is just that the common man seems to be blind to it...
Take for instance what we did with the tax cuts last year. Is that not a good thing? Getting people off unemployment and stimulating growth?
Consider this also I happen to be aware of a revolutionary new gizmo that will be going into your cars air conditioners soon. It will greatly improve the efficiency of same and lower the cost of the unit. This project was well into development when the Automotive supplier ran low on funds. The project had to be set aside. The tax cuts of 2002 allowed them to redistribute the budget and now the project is moving forward. This one project will mean at least 20 new jobs in our facility alone. The tax dollars created by those new jobs will feed right back into the community. This is populist in my view. This is taking care of the common man. Helping anyone that works hard and wants to thrive and start a business of their own is what it is about sir.
So I say his policies are populist...he is a bit left in fact in some of his ideas. A bit left of where some of his contributors would like him to be.
Bush has huge support from Mexican Americans and blacks in this country...are these not also part of the populace that makes up the common folk?
I think it comes down to a difference in economic strategy... I see it one way....and you see it another.
I know my way/Bushes way works I see it in action directly. I also saw what happened during Carter. Almost killed us with taxes etc.....but that aint the point here..
Like I said Eyore someone had to take this side...since I am kinda in a similar boat as Bush figured at least I had room to talk...LOL
GBYA
Aahz
All I am trying to do is argue the philosophy of what Bush believes. He is trying to help the common man it is just that the common man seems to be blind to it...
Take for instance what we did with the tax cuts last year. Is that not a good thing? Getting people off unemployment and stimulating growth?
Consider this also I happen to be aware of a revolutionary new gizmo that will be going into your cars air conditioners soon. It will greatly improve the efficiency of same and lower the cost of the unit. This project was well into development when the Automotive supplier ran low on funds. The project had to be set aside. The tax cuts of 2002 allowed them to redistribute the budget and now the project is moving forward. This one project will mean at least 20 new jobs in our facility alone. The tax dollars created by those new jobs will feed right back into the community. This is populist in my view. This is taking care of the common man. Helping anyone that works hard and wants to thrive and start a business of their own is what it is about sir.
So I say his policies are populist...he is a bit left in fact in some of his ideas. A bit left of where some of his contributors would like him to be.
Bush has huge support from Mexican Americans and blacks in this country...are these not also part of the populace that makes up the common folk?
I think it comes down to a difference in economic strategy...
I see it one way....and you see it another. I know my way/Bushes way works I see it in action directly. I also saw what happened during Carter. Almost killed us with taxes etc.....but that aint the point here..
Like I said Eyore someone had to take this side...since I am kinda in a similar boat as Bush figured at least I had room to talk...LOL
GBYA
Aahz
QUOTE
Let me ask you this....Would you rather have a professional politician that has never held a real job, never had an altercation with the police, never shouted out an obscenity at a ball game, never gotten angry and shown it? Do you think a person like that is more in touch reality of the common man in America?
Reagan, Truman, FDR, Lincoln, and Washington pulled off the common man myth. It is a myth, but a usefull one if the politician in question is competent. I'll concede that Bush is a common man. He's just not a competent president. I believe you need both myth and reality to be effective in politics.
So I'd take the pro politician any day. Politics is a real job. Many common people's lives are at stake.
QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Feb 17 2003, 04:21 PM)
QUOTE
Let me ask you this....Would you rather have a professional politician that has never held a real job, never had an altercation with the police, never shouted out an obscenity at a ball game, never gotten angry and shown it? Do you think a person like that is more in touch reality of the common man in America?
Reagan, Truman, FDR, Lincoln, and Washington pulled off the common man myth. It is a myth, but a usefull one if the politician in question is competent. I'll concede that Bush is a common man. He's just not a competent president. I believe you need both myth and reality to be effective in politics.
So I'd take the pro politician any day. Politics is a real job. Many common people's lives are at stake.
Politics is a real job
OMG!!! Please tell me you didnt mean that....
Aahz
Most politicians (at least here) are hard working and extremely under-paid, and I hope to be one of them with the help of a degree that is slowly coming together.
School Board Trustees, local counsellors, municipal counsellors, etc., are all decently paying but extremely exhausting jobs which open a person to limitless stress and sparse praise. Say what you will about political ideologies, but MOST politicians work extremely hard for what they and their constituents believe in.
School Board Trustees, local counsellors, municipal counsellors, etc., are all decently paying but extremely exhausting jobs which open a person to limitless stress and sparse praise. Say what you will about political ideologies, but MOST politicians work extremely hard for what they and their constituents believe in.
QUOTE(Aahz @ Feb 16 2003, 10:14 PM)
Bush has huge support from Mexican Americans and blacks in this country...are these not also part of the populace that makes up the common folk?
Bush has huge support from blacks?
QUOTE
In fact he is more a populist than any other president since Lincoln.
Clinton!!!
What if his name was George W. Clinton; I think if he worked hard he could sell insurance. Bush's father was a rich politician and Clinton's father was dead. Bush is not a populist. He gave a huge tax cut to the top 1%. Yeah, just like FDR.
QUOTE
All I am trying to do is argue the philosophy of what Bush believes.
I have trobule thinking that he believes anything other than in a weird chistian morality. Was Bush a right wing activist in 1970? Does he ever say anything that isn't about Saddam or how great America is?
QUOTE
Would you rather have a professional politician that has never held a real job, never had an altercation with the police, never shouted out an obscenity at a ball game, never gotten angry and shown it?
Bush has never held a real job other than politician. Sounds like you want a good ole boy like Clinton
!!
Aahz
Yep, absolutely.
One of the wonky propaganda tidbits that the right wing has pushed since Reagan is that professional politicians are somehow evil things. You know, tied into the systems and entrenched so that new ideas never come to light. This is absolutely false and just a trick to gain power.
Watch as the ones who pushed for term limits suddenly get the idea that experience counts! Shoot, that has already happened across the board.
We now witness the results of an amateur holding the reigns of power. No pro politico would have ever made the adle-headed mistakes in foreign policy that Bush has done.
You don't think commanding the most powerful military in the world is a real job?
What about managing trillion dollar budgets?
Okay, taking it to the streets, how about managing a city bleeding citizens left and right during the worst economic times since the mid-80s, during the worst drought since the 70s, and prone to very expensive wildfires? This is not a real job?
Get real.
Ultimatejoe
Kudos and good luck!
QUOTE
OMG!!! Please tell me you didnt mean that
Yep, absolutely.
One of the wonky propaganda tidbits that the right wing has pushed since Reagan is that professional politicians are somehow evil things. You know, tied into the systems and entrenched so that new ideas never come to light. This is absolutely false and just a trick to gain power.
Watch as the ones who pushed for term limits suddenly get the idea that experience counts! Shoot, that has already happened across the board.
We now witness the results of an amateur holding the reigns of power. No pro politico would have ever made the adle-headed mistakes in foreign policy that Bush has done.
You don't think commanding the most powerful military in the world is a real job?
What about managing trillion dollar budgets?
Okay, taking it to the streets, how about managing a city bleeding citizens left and right during the worst economic times since the mid-80s, during the worst drought since the 70s, and prone to very expensive wildfires? This is not a real job?
Get real.
Ultimatejoe
QUOTE
Most politicians (at least here) are hard working and extremely under-paid, and I hope to be one of them with the help of a degree that is slowly coming together.
Kudos and good luck!
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.