Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Should the Conservative not be a wing to fly some substantive ideas . . ..
rather than a wring of their hands and the tears from their self-sacramental robes
the while the ring of the carillons of their empty concept-cathedrals?
Should the Conservative be more of programs and procedures promulgated
rather than piteous protestations prated by pompous and prosperous pedants?
. . . . psemi-preponderantly pertaining to the President?
1 Whose Presidency has effected significant salvage of economic
collapse caused by the preceding (at least) 8 years. The cash
reserves of Corporate America represent the substantive
surplus of stability since Obama . . . . the record high DOW
represents the speculative robustness of at least that echelon
of the populace who can afford “bias-benefit ‘sharing’ “.
2 Whose administration’s policies (the President of the US is not
a dictator, king, or other determining “singularity”) have
a on the one hand collaborated and coincided with US
military assessments and advisements (such as
actions to be (or not) taken re. Iran, Syria, etc.
Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and elsewheres.
b and on another hand been contained as well as curtailed
by the checks and balances of partisan politics (evidenced
by Guantanamo still in operation, gun-owner control
defeated (or blocked) just to mention two biggies.
3 Whose administration has been in office the while the number of
banking-buckaneers subpoenaed to hearings has been a very small
fraction of their counterparts back in the S & L scandal/collapse, a
significant number of the latter were convicted and served.
4 Whose administration has conducted more deportations than his
predecessor . . . . has proceeded with drone-hone terrorist-targetting,
probably more than his predecessor
5 Whose administration has, no doubt, made mistakes perpetrated by
underlings, or underhandedings, or under-the-influence-of-misunder-
standings of the efficacy of neoconservative’s delusion that overthrow
of third-world stability would automatically result in democratization of
the thus-released rabid ranks . . . . if not Christianapitolism conversion too.
a During the preceding period, it was from the very administration
apex that the collusional concatenation of Saddam Hussein and
9/11 attacks was proclaimed.
b How about the African “yellow-cake” confabulation-fiction?
c That the small arms fire from the villa in which Saddam’s sons
were located was returned by a US ground-force assault and
rocket attack which incinerated the lads (a euphemistic or
“exhonorific” way of saying DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE.)
This discovery”and “incinery” of the sons took place
and took over the media ‘s mounting revelations that
there were no WMDs and that “evidence thereof had
been not so much faulty as fraudulent.
Be that about Obama et admin., just what are the specifics of which the Rightists rave their
revile-ations? That Barak’s administration managed to push through a healthcare
program (significantly a nationalization of Mitt’s Mass state-statute)? Or is it that Barak
sometimes manifests a seeming ivy league/Negroid elan? Or that, to say the least, the
while of him we’ve recovered from the wiles of being blinded to the forest of folly by the
Cheney (et al) in the Bush . . . . administration’s wilderness of wisdom?
But be the above all stated as my premise and position . . .. .
What the hell has the Conservative to offer in the way of categorical substantives??
I have yet to hear but bitching and moaning and deprecating and worse.
About Iran What should be done and why and what repercussions
(or “retropercussions” – Islamo-extremists) might take over
About Syria same, plus how much weaponry we’d provide vs. Assad
would become the projectiliing props of an act II of our arming
the proto-Alqaedans in Afghanistan. Hey Righty, what’d you do?
About No. Korea what should be done about the little fat guy? What would
China do worse in effect to us if we did a Saddam on Kim? Have
thoughts at least, even maybe procedure-policy to promote? Or
is the Conservative efficacy at its epitome in criticizing and castiga-
ting the President?
Ah yes, and finally I return to a bottom-line issue. If, to balance the budget, we cut funding that provides for the barest of basal being for a mass of a class of people, what’s going to happen here in this country? Have any ideas? Suggestions? Alternatives to disenfranchising a significant segment of a populace from necessity – because all that elitism’s distorted assessment of situation sees is that its only to “buy the enfranchisement (the vote) of those people that the Liberal gives unto them some food and shelter and other . . . . goodies . . . .