Fit Recovery

Home » Politics » A Note to Jeb Bush: The Reason Democrats are Afraid of You.

A Note to Jeb Bush: The Reason Democrats are Afraid of You.

December 2014
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Sorry for the political rant, normally I try to stay away from that on my blog.  Politics are great fun but these posts generally tend to piss off about 30-40% of the population.  This one will be fun though…

Bob Beckel is, next to my wife, one of my favorite Liberals. He just seems like a really good guy, until it comes to politics where, during the Obamacare debate, he would be dishonest enough to know President Obama was lying about being able to keep your healthcare plan and doctor if you liked them (period), but call you a liar for pointing out that according to the language in the Bill, you would lose your coverage if it didn’t meet Obamacare’s guidelines and that any doctor remotely close to retirement age would throw in the towel and retire rather than continue on under Obamacare (I lost two this way).  He claims, on a nightly basis, to be afraid of you winning the Republican nomination for president.

You get that Jeb? Liberals are liars. They can lie just as easily as they draw breath. These people will tell an ignorant person, with a straight face, that Republicans are the reason Obamacare sucks so bad or that restrictive anti-self-defense gun laws reduce crime… You’d have to be stupid or a liar to buy that (stupid because it’s not true, Republicans weren’t even allowed in the room or a liar, because you know this but blaming horrible legislation on Republicans is an easy means to an end).

Okay, now pay attention Jeb.

If you listen to Liberal commentators breathlessly describe how afraid they are that you might run, you’re falling for the lie of the century, well technically the lie of this month but allow me the flourish. Liberals are praying, every day, that you win the primary. They know for a fact, Jeb, a fact, that they would kick your ass in an election. Hillary could beat you, it’s that bad. Your family name, where it doesn’t inspire ignorant hatred, has been trashed by decades of being run through the mud. Fairly or unfairly, that’s the way it is.

Add to that fact you’re even squishier than your brother and I, a fairly safe vote, would have to hold my nose to vote for you (even you, I have no doubt, would be better than four more years of this bullshit – and make no mistake, Mrs. Clinton would mean four more years).

Rather than go on about this Jeb, I’ll make this real simple: The media want you because you can be beaten.  Not a little beaten, they’ll mop the floor with you and laugh about it the next day.  Your dad had the thousand points of light, your brother already did compassionate conservatism (and let’s face it, how’d that go for him?).  What do you have?  Really compassionate conservatism?  Right, that’s going to play well.

Look Jeb, here’s the deal.  The media plays all nicey-nice with whomever they want to win…  McCain, Romney?  The media carried water for both of them.  Remember?  Right up until, in McCain’s case, the Democrats picked their nominee.  In Romney’s case, they waited exactly 43 seconds after the ink was dry on his nomination.  My friend, they ran a story that Romney once took a trip with a dog in a carrier on the roof and that was news for like two weeks.  They ran stories, repeating lies, stating that Romney skipped out on his taxes.  Romney is possibly the cleanest guy to ever run for President, for either party (except Washington of course, maybe Lincoln) and they slammed him non-stop till the election.  How about McCain?  Oh, they were all buddy, buddy at first but as soon as the Dems got around to picking President Obama as their nominee, how’d that go for McCain?  Note that I used his name and title?  President Obama?  See, for him, you establishment guys will claim that Sarah Palin dragged him down but she didn’t.  She energized McCain’s campaign for Republicans.  Sure she wasn’t ready for prime time but, obviously, their candidate wasn’t ready either.  Not even all “57 States” later.  They ran her down, all war-on-women style.  Point is, all of this good press you’re getting now will not last.  You’re being propped up only because you’re easy to knock down.  Mark my words.

The Democrats aren’t afraid of you.  They’re lying.  They just hope you (and the voting public) are gullible enough to miss it.

By the way, if you can’t already see this, how good a President will you be?


17 Comments

  1. Interestingly, Jeb Bush has the same awful background with his finances and companies as Romney. Those two fighting it out in a primary would be like two horrible pit bulls tortured from birth going at it. I don’t support dog fighting, but that’s what this would be. Add in the likes of that hateful man Rick Santorum, all cloaked in his Catholic sweaters and it would be like Sunday afternoon in the Colosseum. All thumbs up and thumbs down, blood in the sand. Liberals would not have to raise a finger to defeat that group of wealth-obsessed mongrels. So you’re right, they are their own worst enemy. And that makes them the enemy of the country as well. So who else do you suggest the Republicans can run that doesn’t carry the horrid baggage of a recent political legacy that relies upon calling liberals liars to obscure, as Dick Cheney has recently tried to do, their horrid fears that their own failures to govern are (in Cheney’s own words) a form of torture? You can point fingers all you want at Obama. His Presidency has produced an economic recovery that would have been even better without the obfuscations and government shutdowns of a band of Republicans in Congress that have done absolutely nothing to benefit this nation. And aren’t you sad that McCain didn’t get elected, so that Sarah Palin could have spent four years or so torturing people with her insane logic? Until the Right owns up to its own sordid history of mismanagement, economic crashes and wars of choice, there is no level of credibility in your rant or those of any other conservative pundit.

    • bgddyjim says:

      You are so funny man. I can’t tell if you really believe that stuff, about the economic “recovery”, or if you’re just gullible. The economy “recovered” in spite of the presider-in-chief’s economic plan not because of it. What kind if Kool Aid are you drinkin’? I suppose we should both stick to runnin’ and ridin’.

  2. If Bush were President would you give him all the credit? or McCain? Or Romney? Interestingly the Right refuses all responsibility for 8 years of flummoxed mismanagement of the government. It’s like there is no cause and effect to any of this in the minds of Americans. Bush played with the law like no one ever before, and the Supreme Court makes it worse with shit like Citizens United. Denial of responsibility and denial of response that works to those mistakes does not constitute some form of truth. It’s pathetic.

    • bgddyjim says:

      What credit? Bush got the dot com bust and he managed to bring us back in three years. As for the United case, businesses are taxed, just as people are. They get to spend their cash on for their “voice” just the same. You libs would just rather have it where the deck is stacked against everyone else. I’ll just leave that last sentence to dissipate in the breeze as you’re from the Peoples Republic of Illinois.

  3. It hadn’t occurred to me to 1) take Jeb’s potential run seriously or 2) that if he did that it would improve Hilary’s chances. To be honest, I’m not 100% sold on Hilary, but I probably like her better than a lot of other choices.

    So, if I read this right, your wife is a liberal and you are a republican? I’m assuming you mean liberal=democrat (vs the Liberal party)? That sounds about like my household (actually, I’m the only non-republican on either side of the family except my son who I suspect just wants to be the opposite of his dad). I wouldn’t even say I’m a democrat, I’m probably more socialist with anarchist leanings, if that philosophy could even work, lol.

    I hate politics for the most part because its all a big fat lie. Anyone who wants to run has some sort of screw loose/Jesus complex/power issue. IMHO. I was married to a guy who is still in the thick of politics in DC, and the ways he convinced himself he was some sort of selfless do-gooder was sort of sad. And I even think he’s one of the more straight up people I know.

    • bgddyjim says:

      Socialism is the surest way to make your country suck, ask Hugo Chavez. Oh wait… If you’re truly into socialism, Mrs. Clinton will be right up your alley. She’s got a bit of a “Communism is neat” bent to her. Please do us a favor and look into that a little bit though. Honestly, it’s all bad. There’s a reason the US went from an upstart to the best freeest country in the world in under 200 years, and socialism wasn’t it.

      • You reminded me why I don’t talk to people about politics.

      • bgddyjim says:

        Just a suggestion Judith, no pressure. The tough part is it’s hard to know if, when people mention their “socialist” tendencies in passing whether they know how much destruction is involved in socialism itself. Imagine you build and grow a company that, after four years of scraping by on beans and weanies, is finally turning a decent profit. Rather than collect their taxes and be happy, bureaucrats swoop in and take everything leaving you broke, for “the State”. That’s socialism. What you end up with is everyone doing the minimum to get by because the government will take what you worked for anyway. Socialism isn’t about spreading the wealth, bureaucrats take it all. It’s about spreading what’s left: misery.

        Sorry, it’s a hard habit to break.

      • MJ Ray says:

        Yes, just look across the water at England, repeatedly ruled by socialists and social Democrats during the twentieth century. Look at the terrible damage of universal healthcare, public education and social security… maybe the bureaucrasimilarly tic totalitarian socialism that USA residents like to demonize isn’t the only way?

        While I’m writing, is the USA media really that leftist, or just not as rightist as the Republicans? UK media is crazily rightist, in general, mostly privately owned and probably further right than our Conservatives. Isn’t most USA media owned by venture capitalists, moguls and other stalwarts of the Right?

      • bgddyjim says:

        I hear you MJ, I do but there’s a problem with your line of thought… You call it universal healthcare but it’s not universal. It’s great if you have a boo-boo and need a stitch or two but what happens when you tear a ligament? Well, then it becomes universal get in line and wait till that ligament atrophies healthcare. It takes 3 months just to get your MRI (you get one in a week or two here) to see if there is a problem to begin with. See, it’s not really universal of you have to give your life (time) to get it. Then there’s the cost. You are paying for your universal healthcare, you just don’t know it. Public schooling costs double what it needs to, money is completely wasted on administration (see also healthcare). We have what are called charter schools and they are providing a better education, graduating smarter students, for less money. Imagine that!

        As for the media, your understanding of our media is a bit off. Fox is middle-right to right (depending on the show). MSNBC is bat-shit crazy left, CNN is left, as are the three main (ABC,CBS,NBC) networks to a varying degree. New York Post is right, New York Times and Washington post are left. In this country political belief is not taken into account when establishing a business (at least not yet). In fact, I’m rather surprised by your prejudice there, but I digress… In plain words, no, not even close. Humorously enough, NPR (national public radio) is the left’s Fox News. In fact, Fox got its format for many of its shows from NPR: Take three or for conservatives/Republicans and pit them against one liberal… The one main difference is that NPR always uses a barely there Republican (a squishy Republican, like Jeb) who will agree with half of their Statist ideas. Fox mixes that up a little better, often using legitimate left wingers. Juan Williams being the squishy lefty, Bob Beckel and Kirsten Powers being a couple of the legits. While there is a more balanced representation in America nowadays, the left used to have a monopoly on the media.

        As for the government itself, it’s repleat with leftism. Recently the IRS targeted conservatives for delay and extra scrutiny, often causing damage to daily operations. That very charge was the second article of impeachment against Richard Nixon. He tried doing the same thing to his political opponents but found the IRS so dominated by left wingers he couldn’t find anyone to carry out his desire. Put that shoe on the other foot and it’s covered up and tucked under the rug. The game is rigged.

      • MJ Ray says:

        I know that our right-wing nutters go to the USA and spread lies about our National Health Service, but please don’t believe them. I had a potentially-serious medical problem a couple of weeks ago. I escalated through four medics in less than a day (basically two stages of triage, then a specialist and a double-check), which dealt with the acute problem, then I think 6 days wait for a fuller consultation where I started a longer-term treatment plan. The “3 months” you refer to I think is the maximum delay for all diagnostic tests permitted by law, not the wait for one test. Of course, sometimes someone screws up and if the whole process takes too long, but then we have the law on our side and it’s not exactly unknown for US healthcare to screw up either!

        I know we still pay for this healthcare, but when you look at the money spent on healthcare in US and UK and the coverage or outcomes like in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HC-Graph.jpg (don’t take it too seriously – you can bend things a bit by choosing your measures carefully, although I’m not sure what the OECD’s axe is) then it does make the US system look very odd.

        Any system can waste money – and they often do. I don’t think that’s a necessary feature of socialism.

        MSNBC, CNN, NBC and ABC on the left? We get all of those to some degree in Europe too (at least their flagship news and talk shows – we have/had CBS and NBC channels, but they’re completely unlike the US ones) and I’ve also seen them while visiting the US. If you think they’re left-wing, then you have an odd idea of what left-wing is! NPR possibly as I’ve not listened to that much.

        Like they say, the Bald Eagle has no left wing…

      • bgddyjim says:

        I didn’t get it from your right wing nutters. I got that from a person who is living through it right now. Running injury.

      • bgddyjim says:

        American left wing is tricky… They won’t just come out and say what they truly believe because they’d never get elected, say if they were like some of those French nuts. They hide it and then when they start going all crazy on us the media jump in to cover their butts. It’s tricky.

      • MJ Ray says:

        OK, I’ll bite: the typical median wait time seems to be just under three weeks as far as I can term, so if they’re facing such a longer wait time, why haven’t they choose-and-book’ed another hospital with a wait time nearer the average?

      • bgddyjim says:

        Brother, I have no idea. Same thing happens over in Canada. Few weeks ago now a lady left a comment that she was in the middle of a three month wait to get an MRI on her messed up knee (running injury). I figured something was odd because you can get an MRI in ten minutes here in the States (unless you’re on government run healthcare -Medicare, then you wait) so I replied, “Which country, UK or Canada”? She came back a bit later that she was from your kneck of the woods.

        This is beyond the point though, really. It is, beyond argument, the honest to God truth and reality: If you want something to cost a ton more than it should because of excessive administration costs, if you want something to be run incompassionately, if you want something run incompetently, give it to the federal government.

        Look at it this way… On 9-11 of last year (I think you write that 11-9) our Embassy in Libya was burned to a shell and our embassador and some of his staff were murdered. It was a coordinated attack. Our government officials, all the way up to the president, thought it was because a protest group was angered by a crappy YouTube video. They completely missed the day’s significance. This is, without a doubt, sheer stupidity, all the way to the top. You’d have to be ten kinds of crazy to trust that with your health.

        It sounds great, I know… You don’t ever have to pick up the tab for illneses, you don’t have to worry… But don’t you? One way or another, you’re giving up a lot to have that serviced managed by the government. I simply don’t trust politicians. It surprises me that you do.

      • MJ Ray says:

        OK, well, one person apparently making a bizarre choice to wait instead of book another hospital doesn’t really tell us much. It’s fairly easy to find odd examples of long waits in the US system.

        I’d say US privatised healthcare seems far better at wasting money than our NHS trusts (which are semi-autonomous non-profits – healthcare isn’t run directly by the UK government) and you can look at the relative spends on UK and US healthcare to see that. US healthcare doesn’t seem to be performing better than ours – or even other European systems which are even more public-controlled than the UK.

        The US government still manages healthcare through laws and running second-class fallback systems, but it’s wasting a ton of money trying to make it look like it doesn’t because healthcare companies have got the US electorate believing that healthcare should deliver private profit. We don’t trust politicians any more than you do – that’s why their management is limited to broad-brush National Insurance policies (such as the maximum time from problem to treatment that I mentioned earlier) and allocating budgets, while the real management of the trusts is led by medics and specialists and the management of one’s own healthcare is led by the patient, their General Practitioner and whoever else they sign up (a Friendly Society, an additional private insurer, whatever).

      • bgddyjim says:

        First, I was going by that comment and the half-dozen web-based news outlets that you have that regularly cover this. Second, the US is better. It is commonly known that differences in how we choose to report births and deaths, which are far stricter than the rest of the world, drag our numbers down giving it the appearance we’re not up to par. Apparently it still works. Finally, if your system works for you, great. I just know in our case, if it runs through the government, politicians have a hand in it and they will make it suck. Liberals and “progressives” can’t even be trusted to levy taxes fairly in this country. Forgive me if I have a level of distrust.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: