?

Log in

No account? Create an account
DAGRON! - Chaz Meyers — LiveJournal [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Chaz Meyers

[ website | chazmeyers.com ]
[ profile | view profile ]
[ archive | view archive ]

Links
[Links:| chazmeyers.com Twitter ]

DAGRON! [Oct. 8th, 2004|11:32 pm]
Chaz Meyers
I'm not going to comment on the debates because side-by-side press conferences aren't interesting to talk about, nor a good judge of who would a good president. (That said, although Bush had a decent showing this time compared to the first debate, I do think that Kerry had a stronger presentation both times. I'm just disapointed that such antics have such a strong sway on people's opinions.)

Instead, I leave you with a Daily Show quote from a few nights ago because it really amused me:

"Apparantly there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and their capabilities had been degraded and they pretty much stopped trying anything back in '98. Both the President and Vice President came out today in response to the findings and said that they clearly justified the invasion of Iraq. So... uh... Some people look at a glass and see it as half full.... and other people look at a glass and say that it's a dragon."


PS. For those of you who haven't heard, Poland is leaving. Such sorrow.
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: duckssaymip
2004-10-09 08:35 am (UTC)
The flip side of that, you know, is that the Austrians elected a neo-Nazi a few years back.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: catch2002
2004-10-09 09:15 am (UTC)
that's a fair point..or that france had someone that made pat buchanan look liberal running against chirac a few years ago. Basically, I think the libertarians are a legitimate party with novel, yet not psycho, ideas and I would like to see them get more attention....they are in stark contrast to both parties brutal spending policies. even republicans have become pretty much big government...at least Bush has. I think Libertarians would be interesting because civil rights advocates who can't stomach kerry would like him and fiscally responsible, small government republicans would too...but the two big parties hate each other so much that they wouldnt take a chance and vote for the third guy because they rather have their guy, who they may disagree with on 3 issues win than the other big party guy, whom they see as satan with a tie.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: duckssaymip
2004-10-09 09:34 am (UTC)
You know, it's a shame that the libertarian economic ethos is lunacy, because I really like their social program, being the pro-2nd amendment, pro-choice type of guy that I am. But I'm sorry - the whole philosophy of "let's trust big business to do what's best for the country" is pure idiocy, particularly in the post-Enron era. Moreover, if Reagan's ideology of neoliberal economics was really practical, I'm pretty sure that Reagan would have done it himself LOL Ahhh well...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: catch2002
2004-10-09 12:33 pm (UTC)
yeah ecnomically they are living in the 1920's....however the small government idea I like...the getting rid of the useless drug war I like....the live and let live social program I like...I think maybe what they should do is figure out a way to approve of a mixed economic system as opposed to their love of pure capitalism...and yet still hold true to small government. is that possible? I think so...I think efficiant in the areas in needs to control, yet still small is possible, at least in theory.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: duckssaymip
2004-10-09 03:51 pm (UTC)
Yeah, we're going to disagree on this, because in terms of economics, I'm pretty much a socialist. LOL

I don't think you're crazy or anything. I see the appeal behind small government. I just don't buy it, myself.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)