Likelihood of Success

Ron Coleman’s pretty good blog

America’s most admired

Posted by Ron Coleman on December 26, 2007

Gallup reportsutterly nearly buried in an article about how Hillary Clinton is America’s most admired woman (not the subject of this post) — that none other than President George W. Bush is America’s most admired man. (Via Instapundit.)

That is the same George W. Bush who lives on Pennsylvania Avenue. Not his father, the mythical super-president invoked by Bill Clinton and others, who used to live there. No; it is that fellow who is such a poor extemporaneous speaker; who is so inclined to cronysim; who has done such a poor job of marketing to the American public his one historic and courageous policy, the Iraq War — that same one.

How can this be? It is taken as a given in both the mainstream press and in any forum in which the elite express their opinions that President Bush is in fact the most contemptible person on the planet, or at least the stupidest. Nothing to admire about the stupid.

Who are these “Americans” who come to such conclusions? Where are they? Is the Gallup Organization some Cheney thing?

It’s easy to write this item, and you may well blame me for plucking the low-hanging fruit. But in truth, you really do have to sit down and ask yourself just how many alternative universes we are all inhabiting. There is no way on earth that I — who admire George W. Bush quite a bit, despite my considerable disappointment in him from time to time — would ever imagine that he was the most admired man in America. I could not fathom that the constant barrage of snark, contempt and calumny directed at this man could not work its way so thoroughly through the populace, even in flyover country, that this could be the result of such a poll.

So yes, it is an irresistible story to comment on, because it is impossible to understate how out of touch the elites that dominate nearly every segment of American life are to what the vast majority of Americans really think and feel. And I mean that in a good way.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News.

Advertisements

45 Responses to “America’s most admired”

  1. Ara Rubyan said

    I think you’re stretching it (to put it mildly) to suggest that elites are out of touch and the survey shows that America really loves George W. Bush.

    The fact is that the sitting president almost always tops this poll (and has every year since 1981 and 50 out of the last 61 years). And Bush’s percentage this year is the lowest of all the years he’s appeared on the list.

  2. I don’t see how you have refuted any of my arguments.

  3. David said

    To say that Bush is the Most Admired Man may not contradict his being the Most Contemptible Man. I suspect he would win that poll too, and that Hillary would win Most Contemptible Woman.

  4. GM Roper said

    Ron, if you are picking “low hanging fruit” then I suspect that Ara and David are complaining about sour grapes.

  5. Eddie Kovacs said

    Well, it beats me. I’m still wondering how Hillary could be doing so well in this poll, for that matter.

    Personally, I admire Bush too. I’ve got to admire the toughness of a guy who’s doing better for himself in the face of a hostile Congress than he ever did when his own party was still in the majority. I’ve heard that vicious rhetoric everywhere I go, though, so I doubt that many share my opinion.

    Still, perhaps some share my other opinion on the matter: Bush I like as much as any friendly stranger I might meet out on the street, but his detractors I absolutely loathe. You cannot find a more egotistic band of know-nothing loudmouths on the internet than the fools who think Bush-bashing will lend anything they say credibility.

    If anything, their slanders and libels have quite the opposite effect. On his own, Bush seems like a fairly ordinary nice guy who’s maybe a little too conciliatory with his enemies for his own good. Next to these vile haters, though, he looks like a saint with a halo and a divine spotlight on him and little cherubs flapping all around him flinging their friggin’ flower petals on the path before him everywhere he goes. It’s really amazing what the power of comparison can do for a guy’s public image.

  6. Count on you, GMR, to put the squeeze on us!

  7. JorgXMcKie said

    Ron, the point is not to refute your arguments, it is to let no even mild statement that might indicate approval of Bush to go unchallenged. And, of course, tho who consider themselves to be of the elite (or who are marching to their beat) get infuriated when anyone threatens to expose their unearned status. (And Ara writes like someone with a journalism degree and a grudge.)

  8. […] America’s most admired « Likelihood of Success Gallup reports — utterly buried in an article about how Hillary Clinton is America’s most admired woman (not the subject of this post) — that none other than President George W. Bush is America’s most admired man. (Via Instapundit.) […]

  9. A.W. said

    As a person who probably would have said “Bush” if answered the question, I don’t find the results as amazing as you do.

    Bush got 10% of the vote. That means 90% of americans thought someone else was more admirable.

    And of course it ignores the effect of intensity of support. I like Bush because he is one of the few people willing to kill the bad guys. That judgment is not likely to change, and indeed, it is somewhat immune to the media, because i am one of those people who figured out how little we can currently trust the media. After Rathergate, after the AP has lied repeatedly that Bush killed Kyoto, and so on, i am not likely to be swayed by the New York Times.

    The fact you can’t ignore is his approval rating is still in the toilet, although it is climbing. But Bush seems to be more concerned with being right than popular. Which is part of why i admire him. Its also why he drives me crazy on some issues (like immigration) but i digress…

  10. AW, the math is not quite right, as explained here:

    First, he won with a whopping 10% of the vote, so 9 out of 10 respondents felt someone else more deserving of the honor. Second, look at the competition, Gore, Obama, and Jimmy Carter. Wow, beating the likes of them, and by such a narrow margin, that is definitely something to brag about. And third, the current President almost always wins.

    Posted by stevesturm
    December 26, 2007 12:18 PM |

    VICTIM ALERT! VICTIM ALERT!!

    Another victim of outcome-based education…

    If Bush won by a 10 percent margin, that means that in a 2-man race 55 percent of the electorate voted for him, and 45 percent for his opponent.

    That means, in other words, that only 4.5 out of 10 residents cast their vote for someone else.

  11. Ara said

    I don’t see how you have refuted any of my arguments.

    Yeah, I guess I couldn’t pull one over on you. Bush really IS the most admired man in America. What was I thinking? All those other polls must be wrong.

  12. Oh, I’m sorry, Ara — you linked to a poll? That comment must have been lost in the spam filter. Can you repost it?

  13. Ara said

    Here’s a pretty good source for multiple polling analyses.

    As of 12/9/07, Bush’s consolidated approval rating was about 33%. That’s much higher than 10%. So if 10% means “Most Admired Man in America” then 33% must mean he ranks right up there with Lincoln, Washington and Churchill!

    But then we who among the cognescenti already knew that, right?

  14. Neil B. said

    But silly, it’s a *ranking* which isn’t the same as whether a *majority* would pick him! Only 10% pick him, and that is likely the 10% who are his really hard core supporters – so what? There just isn’t a specific alternative to get more votes, but a good way to think of it is: 90% of the people voted for someone else.

    BTW this mess about “out of touch elites” is such bull in this case. Really, do you consider the sort of wealth elites that support Bush so much (“The haves and the have-mores: I call ’em my base” – a quote) are in touch with the people in the street?

    tyrannogenius

  15. Neil B. said

    BTW, if Hillary is the most admired Woman, then does that prove that the elites really are in touch with things after all? 😉

  16. Harry said

    It certainly looks like Ara is not paying attention. Are there a certain percentage of people that dislike Bush? Certainly. After all, I have not seen any polls where Bush has a 100 percent approval rating. This poll does not make that claim. The claim that this poll makes is that Bush is more popular than others, which is entirely possible since he won at least two other such polls, one in 2000 and another in 2004. What I like about Bush is he kills our enemies and makes people like Ara look like idiots, both of which are not as hard as some thought.

  17. tbrosz said

    You know what? Aside from those who just wanted to blow off the interviewer with a name off the top of their head, I suspect a lot of ordinary people would put someone they knew personally high on such a list, not somebody likely to make the cover of a news magazine.

    I know that’s true for me.

    If you total up all of the top ten “admired men,” you get 43 percent of the responses (if I added it up right). Do the same for all of the “admired women,” you get 52 percent. I’d like to think a lot of the rest are men and women the respondent knows personally, someone who doesn’t get on the news (outside of maybe a small-town paper), or is famous in any way. The percentage such people would get under these circumstances would be 1 in 1,011, or about 0.1 percent. The result? Hundreds of admired unknown people lined up next to each other at the bottom of the list.

    But I’d bet most of these unknowns would, in any objective analysis, be more admirable than most of the “top tens.”

    I don’t have the poll answers handy, so this is, of course, only speculation, but it would be nice if it were true.

  18. Harry said

    no. 17.

    I agree wholeheartedly. When I talk about people that I admire most, they are people that I know and respect, not any celebrity of any sort. When we talk about a president’s approval ratings, people are not out there saying, Gee, I think George Bush is a great guy. They are evaluating what he does. Does Bush satisfy me on every point? No, because there are still illegal aliens in the USA. But I approve of much that he is trying to accomplish.

  19. Godblogger said

    If you get to bring up that old conservative saw about the liberal elite (as if your hero Bush, who went to Andover, Yale, Harvard, and was a member of Skull and Bones isn’t elite) then I get to bring up the lefty canard of reverse liberal media bias. This is where media outlets with educated, intelligent, professional reporters like the New York Times (interpreted as “liberal” by the right wing) parrot dogma of the right wing they know is not true in order not to appear so “liberal.” E.g. someone who writes for the Times suggesting he is “ignorant” because he didn’t realize that 10 percent of the population would name Geroge Bush as the most admired man in America. Re:#16. I would remind you that the Current Occupant did NOT win that poll in 2000, at least not nationally. He was 500,000 votes short.

  20. ron said

    500,000 huh? i think this map says it best…..

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap2000.htm

  21. Ara said

    Ron, is there an emoticon for rolling your eyes?

    Because those maps really take the cake.

    You know, just screw the electoral college, screw the popular vote. Let’s just total up how many square miles of land each candidate gets and then declare the winner.

    Makes sense to me. How about you, Ron?

  22. Koiquoe said

    Ron,
    The same intellectually sedentary bunch that elected Bush twice are the same ones that believe that he is the most admire man in America – so what’s the big surprise? They rely on the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity to do their thinking for them. Personally, I am hardpressed to come up with any redeeming quality in Bush that I might admire.

    It will appear that even you too are challenged in this regard as you can only enumerate those abject qualities of Bush – “[…] a poor extemporaneous speaker; who is so inclined to cronysim; who has done such a poor job of marketing to the American public his one historic and courageous policy, the Iraq War.” And this is just the tip of the iceberg, frankly. Or perhaps you might want to disabuse your readers otherwise by enlightening us of those quintessential qualities that seem to be eluding the rest of us. Incidentally, all of Bush’s qualities you have named thus far are easily defensible.

    You may opt to take the customary tact of name-callings – elitist, Bush bashers, etc. So let me disabuse you of this hoary argument by saying that I believe, despite my antipathy for the superficial self-righteousness of Republicans, Jeb Bush would have made a much better president. I am absolutely certain that the endearing qualities of George W. Bush that you have listed could never apply to Jeb. As a matter of fact, I would have preferred any Republican senator as President instead of Bush. So this is not about Bush bashing; it is about facing reality – Bush is absolutely unqualified to be president.

    So you see, I am very confused about this “most admired man” accolade. I will be looking forward to your enlightenment on what qualities constitute the “most admired man in America”

  23. Koiquoe, I did not write a piece about why George W. Bush should be admired. I wrote a piece about why, despite the contempt of the people like you who dominate elite opinion in this country, he is admired.

    I am sorry you are confused by the results of the poll. Do you want me to explain how a poll works?

  24. zregime said

    Yep, folks like Ara and Koiquoe make it clear that BDS is still alive and ragin’. Dubya wins one (pretty meaningless) poll and these guys STILL spend minutes and hours of their days, their lives, trying to deconstruct it. Makes one wonder…if George W. Bush, in front of dozens of witnesses and raw video, pulled a small child that was about to get creamed by a bus off the street, would Ara et al spend even more time coming up with some theory about how the whole thing was staged?

    In the last seven years, I have been able to purchase not one but TWO Mustangs (an ’05 V6 and an ’06 GT), two vacation properties, fund my daughter’s college education (Let’s Go-o-o, Mountaineers!), triple my 401(k)…oh, and I wasn’t killed by AQ either. Good times. REALLY good times. I’d vote for Dubya again, in a heartbeat.

    If Ara and his ilk would get out of their dark, dank places and get on with things, live their lives, maybe they could have a Pony or two as well. Who knows? Nothing has changed regarding the incredible opportunities that exist in this country.

    It’s your choice, Ara…be a hater, or be a Mustang rider. Your choice.

  25. Diggs said

    I’m not sure I understand what on earth this means: “media outlets with educated, intelligent, professional reporters like the New York Times (interpreted as “liberal” by the right wing) parrot dogma of the right wing they know is not true in order not to appear so “liberal.”
    Then again, I’m not liberal, or elite. If what Godblogger says was true, then the reporters would be lying to curry favor with people they disdain. Hardly believable. But I do believe a good Lefty would think such. They do inhabit a “reality-based community”. I’d hate to see how far to the Left Godblogger really is if he thinks that the things the MSM do report (Bush’s obvious fake TANG letters, imminent defeat in Iraq, Bush killing Kyoto, etc) is conservative “dogma”.

  26. Ara Rubyan said

    Makes one wonder…if George W. Bush, in front of dozens of witnesses and raw video, pulled a small child that was about to get creamed by a bus off the street, would Ara et al spend even more time coming up with some theory about how the whole thing was staged?

    No need to ask. Remember when he landed on the flight deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln and stood in front of the Mission Accomplished sign? I actually got off on that! Then, later, we found out the whole thing — the war, the WMD, intelligence — had been staged. It was all phony.

    After that, I lost my appetite for stunts like the one you describe.

    In the last seven years, I have been able to purchase not one but TWO Mustangs (an ‘05 V6 and an ‘06 GT)

    Dude, you rock! Were either of them that Bullitt Mustang I keep reading about? Were they making them then? I grew up in Detroit and the 60s Mustangs were the cars I counted.

    Good thing you got your Mustangs now. After Hillary or Barack get to the Oval, the first thing they’re going to do is trade FoMoCo to the Chinese in return for our debt — and then throw your ass in jail for causing global warming.

    Hadn’t you heard?

  27. Koiquoe said

    Ron,
    Having read some of your postings, I find that many of your non-answers are similar to the one you just gave. All I am asking is for you to explain what qualities make Bush, “The most admired man in America” – a concept that you wholeheartedly believe in from your prior response – whether you directly expressed it or not. This is emblematic of the Bush lovers – they are incapable explaining why they love Bush. Hopefully you will begin to see the pathology in this kind of thinking of the right-wing zealots.

    This is no different from your ardent belief that attacking Iraq was the appropriate response after being attacked by terrorists from Afghanistan. Do you see the inexplicable pattern in your thinking? Your pal Zregime is at least being original by trying to explain why he loves Bush, so let us examine that for a moment. Hopefully, you will begin to see that it is unreasonable to love Bush just because it is the popular, right-wing thing to do.

    Zregime,
    I am glad for you that you have had such a stellar financial time under Bush. The energy companies and top one percent of wealthy Americans will welcome you in their “ilk.” Unfortunately, the rest of America is facing foreclosures of biblical proportions under Bush’s deregulation policies where banks had a free rein to dupe the masses with their sub-prime lending. The dollar is equivalent to the peso, so most people are facing the mother of all inflation. Americans have no choice but to scapegoat Mexican illegal immigrants for menial jobs because Bush told them they would be better off if he shipped their best jobs overseas.

    I will stop here for now, but I am sure that you and the other 100 connected Americans who had your windfall under Bush are beginning to catch my drift, if that is remotely possible. Is it any wonder that the vast majority of Americans sees this administration as the worst administration ever, and can’t wait for the missing village ____ to return to Crawford? So far most of his ilk are returning in disgrace – Rove, Miers, Gonzo, Scott McClellan, etc. They have shown America that they know how to pull the great election heist, but they know nothing about running a government.

  28. Koiquoe said

    Incidentally, Zrigme, speaking of “staged,” I believe that the famous ground zero event that was supposedly the defining moment of Bush’s leadership was a staged event. I am talking about the one when the firefighter yelled out, “I can’t hear you!” And Bush responded, “I [Bush] can hear you, the rest of the world can hear you, and soon the people that did this will hear all of us soon!”

    To begin, that event is singular in that I have never seen anyone yell out in such an unruly manner when an American president was speaking before or after that singular event, especially during such a solemn moment. Secondly, have you ever heard Bush being so eloquent since? That supposedly impromptu line was of Shakespearean calibre spontaneously coming from a guy who is the protagonist of several volumes of Bushism. Go figure!

    During the initial 911 episode, Bush had only been seen on TV going from one undisclosed hideout to another. The public was seeing it as cowardly. Obviously, the challenge of the team from Texas was to devise the perfect machination to make their guy look like a hero. Giulliani was stealing the show and being extolled as the brave leader. And that great moment of theatre at ground zero, devised by the band of tricksters from Texas, was one for the annals of chicaneries.

  29. Koiquoe Sez:

    that event is singular in that I have never seen anyone yell out in such an unruly manner when an American president was speaking

    Well, gee, that’s definitive. Anything outside the personal experience of Koiquoe is automatically suspect. As for Bush’s “eloquence,” you have obviously missed the large number of stories which recount the fact that the man is generally far more relaxed and fluid in non-staged situations.

    It’s a silly habit for a politician, but there it is.

    As for Ara (hi again, Ara!) I agree with him about that map. I’ve seen more detailed versions which show variations in voting patterns by the intensity of the color, which is quite (excuse the pun) illustrative. Not to mention most of the blue areas contain the greatest population density in the United States.

    I have to disagree about the “staged” aspect of the “Mission Accomplished” stunt, at least to a degree. It turns out some of the generals thought it would be useful in persuading other countries to join in re-building Iraq. Does no one recall the pre-invasion hysteria and paranoia? Quite a few folks didn’t even think the US could pull off the invasion properly. The landing was just an attempt to nudge some of our alleged allies into joining the hard part; rebuilding.

    Oh, almost forgot something: Koiquoe, your ignorance of economics is embarrassing. The loan companies were pretty much forced into giving loans to people with bad credit. I don’t doubt Kennedy, Pelosi, and company were delighted that lower-income groups had a chance to buy into the “American dream” of owning a house.

    Do you know the problem with loaning money to people with bad credit? The tend not to pay the money back. But naturally this is all Bush’s fault, just like Katrina and Kyoto.

    BTW, the dollar is trading 10:1 to the peso right now. Just a little tip.

    The more I peruse your (second to-) last post, the fatuity I find. Take your ignorant whine that “attacking Iraq was the (not the) appropriate response after being attacked by terrorists from Afghanistan” for example. You are absolutely right! That’s nearly as dumb as FDR invading North Africa after being attacked by Imperial Japan.

    The rest of the post is standard drivel; rich people get richer, poor get poorer, Bush as tool of the Wall Street class, mindless drone conservatives, etc. That’s as weak as the righties who go on about libs as America-haters who want to destroy Christian Marriage while they traitorously protest the war! The bastards. Feh.

    Quit speaking in cliches and you might gain a serious audience.

  30. Alex said

    “Utterly buried”? It says he’s the most popular man in the first 16 words of the article. The fact is the first sentence’s first independent clause. I know some people only read headlines, but at few of us still read the first sentence.

    No need to go into the fact that he and his Veep got less than the previous pair, or other underwhelming aspects of his tiny 10 point showing.

  31. Koiquoe said

    Casey et al,
    Can you please explain to me a simple concept – what are the qualities of Bush that makes him the most admired man in America? I have redundantly sought an answer to what would be deemed a simple question, but all I get back from Casey are smug remarks and invectives. It is a sad commentary when all of you learned Republicans cannot proffer basic reasons for your positions, but will resort to your indoctrinated name-callings. My arguments are blatantly stirring you in the face if you care to take a legitimate stab at them.

    Now, let’s address your economic genius for a moment. The loan companies were forced to give loans to people with bad credits? By whom? What is the source of this incredulous assertion you are making? You must have a knack for prevarication, my friend. The loan companies made these lucrative sub-prime loans because they could immediately bundle these bad loans as assets and sell them to unwitting investors thereby reaping enormous windfall with minimal possibility of financial loss to themselves. In other words, investors were left holding the bag. This was made possible because of the Bush administration’s deregulation policy that allowed for free and unchecked rein for these companies to do as they please.

    But what can I tell you? You even believe that the breathtaking incompetence that was shown by this administration during Katrina was the fault of the victims of Katrina. Brownie did a great job, I am sure you agree with Bush.

    You have also shown another infamous tact of you right-wing zealots – put the blame on anyone else you can find. It was the generals’ fault that Bush was playing fighter pilot during the “Mission Accomplished” stage show. It was the generals’ fault that the “Mission Accomplish” banner was displayed (this had nothing to do with the commander-in-chief). According to you, “The [staged] landing [on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln] was just an attempt to nudge some of our alleged allies into joining the hard part; rebuilding.”

    This is contradicted by one small fact though Casey – Cheney had publicly declared at the time that no ally who did not participate in the invasion would participate in the rebuilding of Iraq. The booty was to go to Halliburton et al. You see, Casey, the fact is a very stubborn thing and will continue to kick you in the head if you don’t lose your mendacious habit of prevarication to win an argument.

    So quit the invectives, Casey. I am seeking enlightenment. Help me understand the thinking behind these perverse behaviors demonstrated by you and your right-wing ilk. Arrogantly dismissing my arguments and resorting to insults is anathema to argumentation, as I am sure you know. I believe you guys call it ad hominem?

  32. Alex, you’re right. It is in the first sentence, but the flow of the article is that it gets right down to business with Hillary Clinton. I happen to think the Bush piece is more newsworthy. I changed it.

  33. Koiquoe, it’s not a non-answer. Your question is a non-question. What actually, as a factual matter, makes President Bush the most admired man in America under the terms defined by Gallup is that he won the poll.

    I know you don’t think much of him. But the fact is, he won the poll. My article is about the fact that he won the poll. It’s not an argument as to why he should have. I would not have named him my most admired man. I wasn’t saying anyone else should, especially those of you who believe he was responsible for a hurricane.

  34. Ara said

    Every year since 1981 (and in 50 of the last 61 years) the POTUS has “won” this poll. Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43.

    Dog bites man–it isn’t newsworthy.

    But it’s your blog and you can write anything you damn well please.

  35. Koiquoe said

    Casey must be waiting for the next dose of slogans from Limbaugh, Hannity and Coulter to update his playbook to produce a response. I have always thought that the Republican Party seems like a cult organization. I am more convinced by the day. This little episode is a case-in-point. How is it that all these Bush rabble-rousers and flamethrowers, arguably of some intelligence, cannot articulate why they love Bush. Go figure!

  36. It’s newsworthy, Ara, because this president is the subject of unprecedented contempt. You disagree, you’ve said so about six times, and you get a big mazal tov. Koiquoe, you are just an anonymous lout, and if you have nothing really else to say — or if you are actually as stupid as you are pretending to be — be a good lad and take a hike.

  37. Koiquoe said

    Whatever Ron; I will leave your cursing game to you and your fellow proud Republicans.

  38. As long as you leave.

  39. Let’s summarize. Bush, whether the left believes it or not, won the 2000 election. Gore brought the courts into the mess, Bush responded by doing the same. Independent recounts gave the election to Bush. Then cam 2004. Bush ran with many negatives, the Iraq War being chief amongst them.
    The left snugly thought that Kerry would run away withe the election. Are these guys ever right? Go back to when he won the governorship of Texas. He beat a very popular incumbent. Stupid he ain’t. A man of principle, he is. He is doing the job his way and, even with some acknowledged mistakes, he continues doing what he feels is right for the country. Have you been through a terrorist attack lately? He has the toughest job in the world and the die hard liberals cannot see their hands in front of their faces. Now, they may run Hillary. Some never learn.

  40. Benn said

    Ron, when you speak of an elite in this country like its one organized block of people, this is a generalization meant to feed your republican readers. Is Fox News part of your elite? They certainly have enough positive things to say about Bush to push the half of America holding a bible or a gun into picking Bush over a list of other celebrities (both political and otherwise) that would acutally have a chance at winning this silly poll. I know many political pundits (and good friends of mine) that would certainly rank Hillary their most hated woman in America BY FAR – I don’t see you questioning the absurdity of her winning most admired women even with all the hate. Really what is that different between Bush and Hillary? Both have their diehard base, and then a lot of haters. They are polarizing people so what do you expect? Please try to write about something worth our time in the future, oh wait – i could care less because your blogs are worse than watching wolf blitzer. I know Fox news and other republican “elites” have critcized Bush so don’t try to give me that whole argument that they are pretty centrist. Thanks for trying to reassure republicans that they didn’t elect the worst president in our history – its not the “elite”, whoever they may be in your mind, but you who is distorting the truth about politicians in the country.

  41. Oh, Koiquoe, Koiquoe… You are such red meat… Snerk.

    First of all, chuckles, I am neither conservative nor Republican, although I to ascribe to certain “conservative” principles such as the 2nd Amendment. It would be more proper to describe me as an independant with certain libertarian (small “L” thank you!) tendencies. But no, you ascribe to me the position “learned Republican.” As for “invective,” I do plead guilty to the use of “fatuity,” although I must also plead guilty in that case to “accurate assessment.”

    I would respectfully submit to Koiquoe (Ok, gotta ask: that sounds very nearly Inuit; where did you get that?) that he did not read my reply very carefully if he insists upon carrying the “most admired man in America” theme when I never even mentioned it? In fact, I agree with Ara that it’s a fairly non-newsworthy event, especially if the analysis revealed here is correct that Bush only accrued about 10% of the potential vote. Ron got a fairly cute “whaaat?” post out of it, and that’s that. For those who actually read my reply, I took issue with other statements previously made.

    I made my statements about the loan situation from general reading, and I will admit I have no specific cites to hand. On the other hand, when I encounter someone who relentlessly rants about “deregulation,” my suspicions are raised. On the other hand, I hold to the same level of scepticism to those who are overly fond of no regulation at all. Ayn Rand aside, minarchists are as far off the mark as are mid-20th-century big government regulationists.

    The very fact that you have to label me as a “right-wing zealot” illuminates your ignorance. Ask Ara; while we can (and have) vehemently disagree on various topics, he can tell you that I am very much not a “right-wing” anything.

    BTW, just in case you ever try to develop any economic common sense: credit agencies generally try to loan money to parties who are statistically likely to pay said money back. It’s called “probability theory.” You might want to study it sometime as I have. Otherwise you wouldn’t try to sell the idea that loan companies would deliberately loan money to people who are unlikely to pay it back. Whoops, silly me! They are going to sell those loans to people who are presumably too stupid to perform a simple credit check on the debtors before buying the debts. Oh, those crafty loan companies!!

    After that you fail to address my contention that so many on your side of the fence blame Bush for, well, everything. No refutations with respect to Katrina, Kyoto, or the loan situation. I’m sorry, you did posit that loan companies are somehow able to dump bad debts on companies/investors who are incapable of performing a simple credit check…

    I’ve already addressed the “right-wing zealot” fatuity, so I’ll roll right along to your claim about Cheney. Sorry, I’ll have to ask for a reference for that very specific claim of fact, especially considering that most of Europe did in fact eventually contribute to Iraq’s reconstruction later on. “The fact” as you say isn’t very persuasive if it isn’t (in fact) a fact.

    And you’ve used the word “prevarication” twice, now. For the slow of mind (whoopsie, an actual, real-live insult this time! Dearie me) the word “prevarication” defines either a deliberate ambiguity (something you are required to demonstrate) or a deliberate lie (something else you are required to demonstrate). So you need to retract that term, or demonstrate a deliberate ambiguity on my part, or a deliberate lie. Good luck on that.

    Which reminds me; back off on the “invective” crap too, bunky, as I haven’t engaged in any. Yet.

    You have in fact also completely ignored the fact that I also criticized unthinking conservatives in my last reply, as well as unthinking liberals.

    Whoopsie, there’s another idiot claim(ok, two examples of invective; “Our two weapons are fear and surprise…and ruthless efficiency…”; I listen to neither Rush, Hannity, nor Coulter, nor do I extend to them any respect for their points of view. Are you still talking to the voices in your head?

    You have demonstrated (by your explicit need to label me some sort of “right-wing zealot” who mindlessly follows the standard conservative/Republican cant) that you don’t have a clue about my actual political position. Try asking Ara, he has a clue. 🙂 You have also demonstrated your own fatuity by claiming I used “invective” when this was not the case in my original reply. Sarcasm and skepticsm, yes; but no invective. Finally you completely ignored the specifics of my last reply and instead replied to the voice in your own head. I never said anything about that absurd poll, and I never indicated I “love” or in any way mindlessly follow George W. Bush.

    Myself, I have more than a few criticisms of the current administration, and they frequently run crossways to popular lament. Alas, you chose to listen to the voices instead of what I had to say.

    I repeat: ask Ara. He’s known me (electronically) for a fair number of years, and although we disagree on various specifics we still manage to retain a level of mutual respect. I suspect the reason is that neither of us are dogmatic True Believers.

    Ron: sorry if this dis-railed the original thread, but I couldn’t resist. Besides, I tend to agree with Ara that this survey doesn’t “prove” much; what’s the percentage in being the top 10% of the other 30% who didn’t vote for someone else?

    It does make for a lovely little snark, though… Heh.

  42. I actually agree, Casey — this poll proves little. It was a very little point I blogged about. But the BDS on display here, that proves quite a bit more!

    Benn, I simply didn’t write about the Hillary piece. I would say, however, that many women who will not vote for her may nonetheless admire her for various reasons. You say I am “distorting the truth about politicians in the country” … and I didn’t write a thing about politicians in this post.

  43. Koiquoe said

    My Friend Casey,
    I see that you have inundated your readers with a lot of bunkum in your effort to conceal your defective reasoning. But I will cut through the meaningless cant and deal with the sum and substance of the issues.

    First off, on the issue of the much-publicized sub-prime loans, one’s ivory tower will have to be situated under a massive rock to be so uninformed about this debacle as you are. As incredulous as it may seem, and as anti-regulation as you may profess to be, the account proffered in my posting is the unadulterated truth.

    Have you never heard about the “No income verified” loans? What about the “No credit verified” loans? You have to be alone on this count. These are the kinds of packages that were offered to consumers by mortgage companies over the last few years. I hope I don’t have to further explain their meanings to you, Casey. These were the kinds of loans underpinning mortgage-backed securities. Naturally, when these hapless homeowners could no longer afford the massive adjustable interest rates and defaulted on their loans, these securities instruments became worthless, hence the sub-prime loan debacle.

    Incidentally, at the time that this began to materialize as a problem, Bush appointed the billionaire owner of Ameriquest Mortgage, the chief perpetrator of this problem, as Ambassador to the Netherlands. Another “Brownie” appointment, you think?

    On the issue of whether America’s allies were precluded from participating in the reconstruction of Iraq to stoke the ravenous greed of Cheney, I will present you with the following quote from the New York Times:
    “The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, saying it was acting to protect
    ‘the essential security interests of the United States.’
    The directive, issued Friday by Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, represents the most substantive retaliation to date by the Bush administration against American allies who opposed its decision to go to war in Iraq.” [New York Times, 12/10/03]

    So, again, you are dead wrong (prevaricating) when you asserted that, “The [staged] landing [on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln] was just an attempt to nudge some of our alleged allies into joining the hard part; rebuilding.”

    What is your argument on Katrina, Casey? Do you believe that an American city submersed in water does not deserve the help of the federal government? What, then, is the purpose of FEMA – just to employ incompetent cronies like Brownie? Do you know how many Americans died in Katrina? It is safe to conjecture from your arguments that Americans left to drown in a hurricane is alright by you, but you are the same crowd that will vilify anyone who questions the wisdom of squandering $1.6 trillion in Iraq. I hope you are beginning to see how wry your thinking is, my friend.

    On Kyoto, I can only surmise that you and Bush are the only two who do not believe that global warming is occurring. At this point, I am sure even Ron is wondering if you are playing with a full deck.

    So Casey, when one cuts through all of your flowery words, it becomes manifestly clear that you are very uninformed on the issues. You can fool Ron all the time, but I am going to be the one holding the mirror to you Casey.

    By the way Casey, you are a Republican. You see, you assign all kinds of labels to yourself – Libertarian, Big L, Small l, etc., – to consciously disavow what you truly are. But you have no control of what you are subconsciously. Trust me, you are a Republican.
    No need to thank me – just holding the mirror to you as I promised.

  44. Jeanie said

    Where in all the world do you get a poll that Hillary Clinton is the most admired women in America.

    As a leader of women’s group, she is the least like of all women.

    My question therefore is again is “Where do they get these phony polls from.

  45. Ara Rubyan said

    Your guess is as good as mine, Jeanie.

    Ron:

    But the BDS on display here, that proves quite a bit more!

    You know, I was thinking about what y’all call “Bush Derangement Syndrome” this very morning as it were. In reality, it is a label that Republicans slap on to any kind of dissent against the anti-Constitutional actions of Dear Leader. Stalin himself used the same technique and eventually put many of his political enemies in insane asylums. Thank goodness we have a modicum of free speech left in this country…so far.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: