(no subject)

[darthbeckman.livejournal.com]

Comments

[goumindong.livejournal.com]

That is the most distubing drawing of Bush i have ever seen.

Also, this nomination baffles me.

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I haven't quite placed it. I haven't been able to tell if Bush has finally waken up to the idea that he has to do something as president besides take vacations, or not. He's really very sheltered and isolated from everything. So the question is, is this his nomination, or someone elses? If it is his, he might be in over his head. If it is someone else's, such as Roves, we could be in over our heads. Its so hard to pin down the psychology of a committee.

[chrisfrap.livejournal.com]

my roomate brought up an interesting coincidence.

Dick Cheney was on the committee to find a VP.
Miers was on the committee to find a S.C. Justice.

I'm not a conspiracy nut, so I really don't think much of it.

[goumindong.livejournal.com]

What, you think your friend deals in conspiracies of 1?

It isnt really suprising, i mean if she thought she was good for the job of course she put in a good word, and if she is on the committe then she has power to enact that change.

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

He does seem to spend a lot of time trying to find people to do his job for him, at that point are they self serving like Dick Cheney, or professional? It strikes me more of an abdication of his responcibilities then a personality judgment of who is picked.

For what it's worth the problem with Bush seems to be almost that he is involved too little. He's not doing his job and the people under him are having a field day!! I don't even think he's reading the bloody bills set in front of him, he hasn't vetoed anything!

[wyzwun.livejournal.com]

How often is Bush going to veto bills presented to him by a republican controlled congress?

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

Every president has issued vetos.-issuing none is rare! I don't care how much you like your teammates, its designed to take out the more ludicrous examples of fruad and interest-seeking. Then again he doesn't believe in government, does he?

It could also be his level of intimacy with economics: I'd say he could compete with most Freshmen, and about as cocky.

[neonleonb.livejournal.com]

I have a theory, but I was foolish enough to post below (http://www.livejournal.com/community/politicartoons/501952.html#t7499968) instead of responding to you.

[kitsuneluke.livejournal.com]

This drawing made me go 'what the fuck'. It's pretty badass to see an elephant doing a flip, but it hurts at first.

[neonleonb.livejournal.com]

Surely this comic must be kidding. It suggests that Bush is somehow screwing over the conservatives with this nomination.

Much more likely, he's picking someone with no history (like Roberts) who he personally knows will do exactly as he (and the religious right) wants. Because of the lack of negative history, no one has any grounds to fight Bush on the nomination, and he gets to fill the courts exactly as he wishes, no matter how warped the nominee's viewpoint. It's a depressingly shrewd move.

The real story is that the conservatives' wildest dreams are coming true.

[towith.livejournal.com]

Tin hat on stand by.

[neonleonb.livejournal.com]

Really, how can you come to any other conclusion? What does Bush have to gain by screwing the religious right? What would he gain from appointing someone unpredictable? How would he benefit from appointing a moderate? So why didn't he appoint a known hard-line conservative? We know he'll appoint unpopular people if that's what it takes to get what he wants (e.g. John Bolton). So why not do the same thing now? He must have a better option--a judge who will give him what he wants while not costing him any "political capital".

[towith.livejournal.com]

Maybe because she's from his own flock? Has known her for 20 years? Has employed her for over ten? Because she's more than qualified for the position? Because she too is religious? Because he doesn't want to rock the boat after Katrina?

Or hey, maybe he's really sneakily putting a moderate up there to you know... turn the country in a fascist theocracy. That sounds likely.

[disturbed-kiwi.livejournal.com]

I'm not American so I don't understand, but why can't Democrats say "There's no history so I'm not voting for her."

Or is there a positive history?

I keep seeing news where the Republicans get angry at the Democrats for not approving of someone and I'm thinking, but they don't approve because he/she sucks! I don't get why this is a problem.

[city-of-dis.livejournal.com]

I don't get it, either and I'm an American. Bush could appoint a petri dish of yogurt and conservatives would respond to detractors by saying, "You'll just hate ANYONE that Bush appoints!" It's baffling, to be sure.

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I've noticed that! It's really getting on my nerves how fucking loud everyone is about their particular views or supposed cause. Everyone has gone nuts it seems, at least the left has legitimate complaints about Bush's record (even if they are confused about the particulars), but the Christian Coalition just baffles me. What scary scary people....

BTW. I have to say, you are absolutely gorgeous. :)

[city-of-dis.livejournal.com]

I think a lot of it is information overload. The mainstream media, trying to be balanced, presents both sides of the argument, regardless of how ridiculous and nonsensicle one side may be, then refuses to point out any folly. The online world is filled with misinformation and contradictory sources. Most liberals rely on only liberal sources. Most conservatves rely on only conservative sources and then both sides wonder why it seems like they aren't even speaking the same language.

With the possible exception of some of the Katrina coverage, the mass media hasn't been too good at calling anyone, liberal or conservative on their bullshit and most Americans get so frustrated and confused that they just pick the side that sounds right to them, based on what little they know and go with it.

And, erm, thanks for the kind words. *blush*

Cheers! :)

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

I've noticed the separation of press. It's silly in so many ways that people are only aware of the crisis in their own political camps, both have been falling apart rather spectacularly for years. Even the Independants were taken back by the vitriolic that both sides spewed on each other, and many moderates rolled their eyes and settled in to let the two parties hang themselves. The Internationals aren't much better. As much as Europe wants to be well informed, I don't think US History was a priority until they started trying to following our legalize- and got lost.

It is nice that it is coming to a head, now that the conservatives have finally stopped pretending to be happy allies. Hopefully their devotees will pause long enough to stop spewing rhetoric, give us all a break, and become as cynical and grumpy as many Democrats. Then we can all get on with this bloody realignment that we've been preparing over the last decade.

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

It's basically just making everyone uncomfortable because there was this big build-up and no one can figure out what the fuck he is doing.

[fleaplus.livejournal.com]

I'm not American so I don't understand, but why can't Democrats say "There's no history so I'm not voting for her."

They don't have majority, so if they wanted to keep her from getting in (and couldn't convince enough conservatives not to vote for her), they'd need to filibuster.

[goumindong.livejournal.com]

Just like Peanuts isnt about Lucy, this cartoon isnt about Bush.

It is about how the Conservative base FEELS about Bush's nomination, and not Bushs motivations.

I.E. Conservatives feel betrayed.

[neonleonb.livejournal.com]

I feel that I explained why they shouldn't feel betrayed: Bush has nothing at all to gain by betraying them, but he has much to gain by camoflaging his candidate.

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

It also depends on which conservative base the administration is catering to, the pro-life loonies or the corporations. So if it is to either extreme, the other will cry foul- because they really don't have that much in common.

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

The zealots seemed to want someone more obvious, some of their louder members are really fucking nuts. The reason they are so quick to point out "activist judges" seems to be more of a projection then anything else, they are all about skipping congress.... as long as it's for their agenda.

[choobie.livejournal.com]

agreed

[carlomelo.livejournal.com]

Hahahahhahaha! :D