Who do we like for President? Not a damn one of these clowns

Whenever Capitol Hill Blue publishes an article questioning the actions, policies or beliefs of an elected official or candidate for office, too many of the masses out there assume putting such an article on this web site means we support he other side.

Question any of the GOP running against Mitt Romney?  Well, hell, we’re in Romney‘s back pocket.

Publish an article that shows the frequent ineptitude of President Barack Obama?  Obviously we’re Republicans.

Portray Romney as an empty suit?  We must be left-leaning libs.

Such is the level of shallowness and ignorance that runs rampant on the Internet like a plague of locusts.

It wouldn’t take much research into the history of this site to realize that we don’t support anyone, fall under the spell of any politicians or subscribe to any party, philosophy or position.

But research is beyond the capability of most drive-by posters and emailers who find one of our stories on Google News and assume — wrongly of course — that an article that points out the failures on their favorite son means we’re shills for the other side.

As Forest Gump would say, “stupid is as stupid does” and stupidity is the one constant on the Misinformation Superhighway and in the halls of power in Washington.

So who do we support for President?  Not a damn one of the current crop of failures that have run or who are still running for the job.

Who do we like in Congress? No one. Nada. It may be possible to find a bigger group of losers than the 535 men and women who currently hold the title of Representative or Senator but not one comes to mind.  As monumental failures, Congress, the current occupant of the White House and the wannabes who want to replace him are unchallenged.

So what do we, as a nation and as voters, do when faced with no real choice in the voting booth come November?

Damned if we know.

I’ve been involved with politics for more than 45 years, either as a reporter covering the circus or as an operative working inside and I have never — I say again “never” — encountered a bigger group of losers, lunatics and loons than most of those who are either running the country or seeking the job.

Most are not is, in our opinion, qualified to work as a wash room janitor, much less serve in elected or appointed office in the United States of America.

Enhanced by Zemanta

20 Responses to "Who do we like for President? Not a damn one of these clowns"

  1. SRL  June 15, 2012 at 9:39 am

    Right on!

  2. Jim B.  June 15, 2012 at 10:41 am

    Whoa, Doug, I’d say you took a clearly-defined stand there.

    In some ways, it’s good to know that CHB is a type of “Consumer Reports” for politics. It’s unbiased as can be, even though it’s a poor comparison, because Consumer Reports can do more objective analyses while CHB cannot escape some subjectivity.

    RE: the above question…..Many years ago, I worked a summer as a postal carrier, and to get that…at that time….federal job, I had to take a test and receive a decent score to be considered for the job.

    Politicians do not have to show any expertise in the field that they are choosing to run in. Should we require some type of basic test for anyone running for public office?

    For example, for politicians running for the U.S. Congress or the Presidency…..Maybe a test would weed out the people who don’t know basic geography, fundamental fiscal management, a crude understanding of American and World History, an understanding of the cultural mores and taboos of the important countries, and other important issues that an elected person needs to know?

    Would this help?

  3. Sandy Price  June 15, 2012 at 10:50 am

    Doug, you have defined the current predicament perfectly! When I enjoy the company of my neighbors in the club house or sitting around our swimming pool, it is obvious that trying for a rational political discussion is impossible. When one of us throws out “who do you like for the next election?” and one cannot get a reasonable answer but a simple statement of an angry “well I will NOT vote for (fill in the name) and even a simple “why” brings out the guns.

    Could it be that very few of us know what is basically wrong in either party; therefore, we have no clue on searching for a fix. There is no right agenda over a wrong one and both sides are equally flawed.

    Many of us who have read the words of Ross Perot know that the debt and deficit are basically a very serious problem and needs to be addressed. Our imbalanced deals with China have given away the store with no end in sight. This is wrong and neither Party has taken a stand.

    Many of us realize our immigration costs are wrong and a drain on our resources and yet neither Party has taken a stand.

    The Tea Party has come up with a list of budget cuts but they cover the budget items on women’s health care which of course comes from the ability of women to have legal abortions. The Tea Party also wants to remove the federal government’s involvement our school academics and this would cause a major set back on class room costs. Unless the parents are willing and able to fill in what the Tea Party removes, our kids will suffer another 12 years of poor standards.

    Many of us read the words of Ron Paul and wanted him to have a voice in the 2012 election but he simply sided with the Tea Party and walked away. He fell in line with the nasty plans to remove women’s health care issues from the debate. Sorry Ron, you should have stayed an Independent.

    I still do not fully understand the academic standards found within the Libertarian agenda and I am still hoping for a simple explanation of capitalism that would give me a clear choice of a Presidential candidate.

    I cannot blame Doug for my inability to comprehend who should be supported and why. We have had adequate time to analyze these two Parties and the men chosen to lead them.

    Maybe the job is too big for one man to step into. If this is true, where are the men and women who will be put in place to handle the decisions so necessary to cover the complete job? In our anticipation of who we slander next has negated any suggested assistant.

    I had hoped that our candidates might want to use the internet for suggestions in what can be done in our classrooms and on our sports fields. How about some help in bringing the community colleges into working with the future graduates in our high schools? I love the new on-line trade schools that are being offered on the internet.

    My girls attended Berkeley and got their degrees but that was in the 1970s. I talk to many residents here who have no hope for their grandkids to make it through any university. Why? Many claim the cost is too high and are thrilled that their grand kids made it through high school. What has changed?

    There are many members of CHB who would love to discuss a third party but we would be laughed off the site. The style of today’s political debate is done for the rudest of comments and followed by a comedy zinger.

  4. glennk1949  June 15, 2012 at 11:04 am

    NONE OF THE ABOVE is the party I choose this fall. Might be the 1st Presidential election cycle since 1972 I don’t vote. The simple truth is BOTH so called parties and I use the term loosely since neither party is anything more then a Vanilla or Choc. wrapper for a group of people who only join one or the other out of the necessity of where their located or their particular prejudices. Both are wholly owned by the 1% and serve their clients interests NOT the 99%’s interests. We live in a PLUTOCRACY with voting much as the Romans did. Enough with this notion that America is a democracy it is not and never has been. It’s a Plutocracy with a Republican screen saver. The Screen saver though is wearing out rapidly.

  5. Sandy Price  June 15, 2012 at 11:37 am

    Glenn, do you have a site where you have defined what issues you would support? We all seem to agree on what we will not support. Is there anyone who gets closer to what you want?

    Even if we find Mr. Ideal how could we ever work for him when it is in the House and Senate we first have to weed out. Had the voters dumped any number of Republican Congress members, President Obama may have been able to follow through on the corrections he promised.

    We are a Democracy in that we elect our Representatives and have the ability to throw the House out every two years. It is the voters who have no agenda and we often put in some new face only to realize he/she is not what we wanted.

    I would love to see CHB get into a discussion of what issues we need to support and what issues need to be thrown out or rewritten.

    There are some new interesting commentators forming around an updated Republican Party. Will they be accepted or laughed at?

    • glennk1949  June 16, 2012 at 10:44 pm

      If we didn’t have the Senate ( a manifestly undemocratic body) I would agree were a democracy of sorts, but as long as we have the Roman Senate crafted onto the Parliament were less of a democracy then England even with a King/Queen.

  6. Jon  June 15, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    I hafta point out, as an aside, that C.H.B. does indeed subscribe to at least two philosophies and positions (paraphrased):

    1) That nobody’s life, liberty, or property is safe from the government.

    2) That it is the duty of journalists to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comforted.

    They may both be perfectly reasonable positions and practical philosophies, but to deny their existence or identity is incorrect.

    J.

  7. Jon  June 15, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    PS – If you think you can do better, you can always write in your own name on the ballot. It’ll get thrown away, because even write-in candidates have to be registered, but hey… ;-)

    • Jon  June 15, 2012 at 12:11 pm

      Of course, when guests see my bathroom, they concur that I’m not qualified to be a washroom janitor either… :)

      j.

  8. woody188  June 15, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    I’m sure I’ve never seen so many people either wholly disgusted with, or entirely enthralled by our government. Certainly more people depend on government hand outs now more than ever in our countries history. This includes those on corporate bail-outs and military welfare.

    It does seem like more people have simply given up and are just waiting for the spark that ignites the powder keg. None of this bodes well for our nation as violent confrontation increasingly becomes the only means of political change.

    The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men. -Samuel Adams

    False and designing men…sound like anyone we know?

  9. Rick  June 15, 2012 at 8:01 pm

    I may move to Greece as it makes more sense there.

  10. Sandy Price  June 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm

    You are probably right and the government is functioning only for the safety net of the American people. There should be no restrictions on what the government can do and let the money come from China.

    On Morning Joe this morning some of the charts were discussed and only 30% of the people are concerned with equality of all Americans. That right there throws me under the bus. I noticed that a group of Evangelicals have finally come up with a final plan to force their own equality standards and will take over how others will be taken care of. Again this throws me under the holy bus and I will never be recognized as being worthy of living in America.

    Well, we could not locate any leadership for even the illusion of equality. Americans are comfortable with their white Christian supremacy and cannot step away from this culture for any reason.

    It will be interesting to see what a President Romney will do when the Evangelicals finally put him in the White House. They checked their hats in the door this morning and are ready to take over the government. They despise Mormons.

    Anyone here ever try to live under the authority of the Mormon Priesthood and the Prophet? Would you all be comfortable with the rejection of African Americans and the Gay community? Somehow I think many are uncomfortable with them living in your neighborhoods anyway.

    The concept of equality among Americans is simple and the only safe way for any of us to survive as individuals. But 30% is not enough to make it happen.

    How will this bigotry ever end? Of course when Romney is installed into the White House, he will take on Islam and the final war to end all wars will be declared and America will be blasted off the map. Why would anyone even bother to stop it?

    It will come down to the words of the Prophet who is committed to his church to destroy all who are not baptised as Mormons.

  11. Keith  June 16, 2012 at 8:41 am

    As Forest Gump would say, “stupid is as stupid does” and stupidity is the one constant on the Misinformation Superhighway and in the halls of power in Washington.

    Doug,

    It’s not stupidity.

    It’s IGNORANCE you’re writing about. And, there’s a distinct difference between the two.

    Stupidity is congenital. Ignorance, on the other hand, is most often self-inflicted.

    In a culture where who gets to be the next NFL Super Bowl Champion or who will win the next go-around of America’s Got Talent is now FAR more popular fare among the masses than who we decide to elect to govern us, we are simply “reaping what we, ourselves, have sown”.

    And THAT, I believe, is a FAR more apt explanation for the “silly circus” you are now describing.

    • Jon  June 17, 2012 at 1:57 am

      Which is why wrecking public education is so high on their priority list. Them School Board elections have paid off, in a big way. Ignorance is Strength – to those who’ve done much to keep everyone else that way.

      Write wacky ‘zero tolerance’ regulations. Enforce completely implausible punishments for trivial offenses. Make the rules so complicated and involved that everyone’s guilty of some infraction somewhere, and then slaughter those you don’t like.

      Sue when your kiddie gets any grade less than “Stellar!!”. Sue for them not teaching things, then sue again when they teach something you either don’t like or don’t understand.

      Sue to push your religion into science, then sue again when it gets pushed out.

      Eviscerate the textbooks (while accepting bribes from publishers). Make them so equivocal that they’re useless. Give them a trivial rewrite every couple of years so the district has to buy an entire set of new ones.

      And sue, sue, and sue again until everyone from the principal to the janitor is petrified with lawsuit fear.

      Then cut taxes, cut funding, bust up the unions, impose giant and inflexible regimes of standard testing and punish those who deviate.

      Lock schools down like prisons. Raid them with SWAT teams. Let the infrastructure rot in the name of ‘excessive government spending’. Squash independence, and home-school your kids anyhow.

      Oh, and then sue for tax dollars, those few that remain, so you can have a ‘voucher’, aka public money, funneled to private institutions, mostly including yourself and those who believe in the same number and type of God(s) you do.

      It’s not a bad strategy, actually. It worked. In the same sort of way that firebombing Tokyo in 1945 “worked”.

      There’s a pet peeve. You’d almost think I had school-age children here.

      J.

  12. Lillibet Hunt  June 16, 2012 at 9:10 am

    Doug, you’ve nailed it again. NONE of the above is my choice, and NONE ain’t on the ballot. NONE should be on the ballot, because without that candidate, voting makes no sense whatsoever.

    We’ve allowed corporations to run our country, while ideologues complained too much regulation is the problem, that George W. Bush wasn’t enough of a regulation free sort of politician. Claims that a pure market would have avoided all the problems caused by those hundred$ of Trillion$ of credit default swaps and related financial shenanigans are hollow. The bad acts of banksters brought the world to its knees with bankers the last guys standing. And those dollar donors are funding and running politicians — on both sides of the party divide that is barely a wrinkle in the carpeted halls of government.

    We’ve suffered a studied and carefully executed plan of Constitution shredding, aided and abetted by a cadre of justices that seem to believe a paper entity is the equivalent of a living breathing being. The paper “person” is entitled to all the rights the living breathing beings are not entitled to, under the various iterations of military funding bills and safety promoting acts that regulate speech, assembly and approved thoughts.

    Candidates are pandering using money that comes from unidentified sources as they promote whatever the money wants. Without the money, they don’t keep or get their jobs.

    Money, or more accurately the love of it, is truly the root of the present day political evils, including government run for the few at the expense of the many. Money sets social policy, determines environmental regulation, develops educational standards, makes industry and finance function in any of the myriad possible ways functioning can occur. Money determines wars and money determines peace.

    Ideology combined with money gets crusades or cooperation, defines honesty or graft in society, provides a framework for health care providers and patients alike. Money determines how controlling a society will be over its inhabitants, and determines the course of government in the community of nations.

    We are thus back to elections, which are referendums on who has what money to obtain which office. None of the current crop deserve a single vote, yet unless and until we achieve transparent control over campaign finance, we’ll get officeholders with the best funding winning the day for any of a myriad of special interests. Sadly, money is not a good indicator of smarts or ethics, nor is it an inverse measure of sycophancy toward the fountainhead of funds by candidates.

    This promises to be another election season of disappointment, brought to us all by funding sources we’ll never know about until the next term is well underway, if at all. All together now, say thank you to the folks that brought us Citizens United and legalized purchase and sale of elections.

    Sheesh.

  13. Sandy Price  June 16, 2012 at 11:42 am

    Lil, it may be up to us to start fixing the problem. From my point of view, it should start by working to reform the Republican Party to get with the program and start working for instead of against the Democrats. If the Democrats sat down and came up with 25 new programs it would simply trigger the Republicans into fighting the programs. I think we know the problem sits on racism and that would make it 4-times harder to expose it.

    My living all my life in California has made it impossible for me to recognize the attitude that I discovered in Arizona and now even back in California. I live in the center of a retirement community that is quite openly anti gays and racism is very apparent. Hell, I was only gone 12 years and can’t believe what I’m hearing. Sure, my area is filled with gays but in my small golf park it is not an accepted life style. Why?

    I’ve got to stop thinking about this which is exagerated by it being an election year.

    • Lillibet Hunt  June 19, 2012 at 7:39 am

      Sandy, I agree we need to get the Republicans and Democrats working together. I fear the solution runs deeper though. We need to change the effect of money, limiting funds given for campaigns rather than expanding the definition of “person” to allow ever more money into the system.

      Both parties are playing toward the fringes, while Americans are firmly in the middle. Those that want government run by law, not men, are out of luck. Government runs on the money of men. (“Men” being used in a gender free, sexual preference free manner.) The fringes are now defined and controlled by which money runs what.

      At this point, while the Supreme Court decides things based on political preference and not precedent, we’ve got no chance to change a thing in 2012.

      When Congress, along with the Judiciary, decide things based on special interests that favor corporate interests, we have fascism by fiat. Executive orders round out this rule, also by fiat, and favoring the money interests. Over all, the Federal Reserve runs what is left to manipulate, based solely on banker and corporate desires.

      Citizens, who are the ones paying the bills as individual humans, have no chance in such a system, nor do their numbers matter. All that matters is money.

      Our only hope is campaign reform. Unless money and politics are separated, our systems will continually fail and nothing will change for the better.

  14. david  June 16, 2012 at 3:30 pm

    we are living in a failed society. realize it.

  15. Tony Magazine  June 16, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    Corrected Comments:

    Hello Mr. Thompson,

    People just do not get it when you tell the truth and facts to them. It does not make a bit of difference what political, religious, ethnicity, or gender affiliation
    one aligns themselves.

    Just because you call things the way they are is a strength not a weakness. You are old, and, wise enough to call them as you see them. I am a retired military person and like you I am beyond being polite when it comes telling the truth and facts.

    By the way, I have been a non-partisan registered vote for decades. You take care.

    • Jon  June 17, 2012 at 7:40 am

      It’s worth noting, Tony Magazine, that you are correct.

      People with a firmly held belief who are confronted with facts contradictory against such generally return to that belief even more strongly than they held it before.

      This has been studied, with carefully-designed double-blinding, and it’s what people do.

      We’d probably get a much happier government if the bonobos selected our officials.

      J.

Comments are closed.