Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Lou Dobbs: I worry about whether or not U.S. can survive 15 months of ebbing Bush presidency

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Amerigo Vespucci Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 04:34 PM
Original message
Lou Dobbs: I worry about whether or not U.S. can survive 15 months of ebbing Bush presidency
Beware the lame duck

By Lou Dobbs
CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/16/Dobbs.Oct17/index.html

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Diehard GOP faithful, the dwindling number of Bush loyalists and political pundits of every stripe and medium seem obsessed these days with defining or discerning the "legacy of George W. Bush." Frankly, I spend more time worrying about whether or not the United States can survive the remaining 15 months of his ebbing presidency.

There is little mystery about what future historians will consider to be the legacy of the 43rd president of the United States. Those historians are certain to describe the first presidential administration of the 21st century with terms such as dissipation and perversion.

Bush campaigned for the Republican Party's nomination eight years ago, styling himself as a compassionate conservative. He's amply demonstrated that he is neither.

Although many conservatives refuse to accept the reality, George W. Bush is a one-world neo-liberal who drove budget and trade deficits to record heights while embracing faith-based economic policies that perversely require only blind allegiance to free markets and free trade, without regard for consequence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's cute, Lou, but it won't work. Bush is no liberal of any stripe. He's all yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-19-07 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
21. I hate the term "neo-liberal."
Call Bush a "conservative."

Call anyone who puts the rich above the rest a "conservative."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yes, but wasn't it important to make the mere filthy rich more..........
Edited on Wed Oct-17-07 04:44 PM by Double T
obscenely filthy rich than anyone's wildest imagination, and specially at the expense of several entire nations? C'mon Lou, got to give bushco credit for something!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGKrebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. Jeez, that guy is losing it.
"neo-liberal" = record budget and trade deficits? Riiiight.

"constrain our national prerogatives"? Sounds ominous.

Face it Lou, he's not a neo-liberal. He's just a very bad neo-conservative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. Neo-liberal is the term used in Europe for our neo-conservative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Oh, is Lou broadcasting from Europe now? :) n/t
Edited on Wed Oct-17-07 07:11 PM by quiet.american
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. I think I finally learned what "neoliberal" means ...
and you're right, Tekisu, although I think it's not specifically European.

It's real confusing. My rule of thumb is that Neo = Not.

Also, neoliberal mainly refers to economics -- the whole free market, Hayek, Ayn Rand thing.

Am I right?

But a more important question is why Dobbs uses such a misleading term to an audience where probably only 5% know that neoliberal = conservative. Just muddying up the waters?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. You're right.
Thom Hartman mentions it from time to time, talking mostly about economics. He goes into depth about what it means.

As for Dobbs, I don't know why he would use the term and not give a short meaning of it. Careless and misleading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avrdream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-19-07 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. It's confusing here in Australia also.
The more conservative party is called the Liberal Party. It has taken me 3 years to remember this. Our Democratic Party would be similar to the Labor Party here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. I always thought neo = new
I haven't researched it or nuthin'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-19-07 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Yes, Neo = New, in the formal dictionary and Greek meaning.
But in today's weird political world, where some folks thrive on confusion, the Neo = Not translation is my way of remembering the way Neo is used in Neo-Liberal. NeoLiberals are not liberals, but free-market "what's good for General Motors is good for America" types. Also known as Ayn-Rand, Ron-Paul, "the purpose of America is to turn millionaires into billionaires and screw everybody else" types.

The Neo = Not also kind of works in NeoConservative. NeoCons don't believe in Jeffersonian constitutional democracy, and they want to see radical change in law and economics. So that make's them Not-Conservatives.

It doesn't work with other uses of Neo, where Neo means new, as you remember. Like a Neologism is a New word. And definitely, a NeoNazi is a New Nazi.

The corruption of language that makes Neo mean Not is a sign of the corruption of the post-Reagan political dialogue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Definition of Neo- (prefix)
Definition of Neo- (prefix)

Neo- (prefix): Prefix meaning new. From the Greek "neos", new, young, fresh, recent.

Examples of terms starting with "neo-" include neonatal and neonate (the newborn), neoplasia and neoplasm (new growth = tumor), etc.

The opposite of neo- is paleo-. Although paleo- does enter occasionally into medical usage, it is far less commonly encountered than neo- in medicine (and on the pharmacy shelves where there is Neomycin but no Paleomycin).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
6. The winners write the history books.
It is my fear that Emperor George II will be written about in positive terms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Won't happen
BushCO is so anti-intellectual that anyone writing the history books will not be kind. THese guys aren't winners.

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-18-07 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. I don't understand HOW.
Historians aren't going to be able to bullshit Slapass's legacy the way they did Reagan's and be taken seriously. The simple reason is that we have the internet now. All we knew about Reagan is what his corporate-controlled media reported (yet even then, there was a Dan Rather or two that kept them honest). There wasn't really a widespread underground media such as the world wide web like there is now. We knew of the Reagan Admin's misdeeds, but we were brushed off as "commie, leftie, democrat kookbag conspiracy theorists" by the droolers, which sadly enough was 3/4 of the country.

Let's call a duck a duck: the only people that have really prospered under * were well-monied people and corporations. His elections were dubious at best, stolen by the corporate politburo at worst. Middle class people lost their jobs and those that were lucky enough to replace them did so with either a lower paying job or two lower paying jobs to make up the difference. The worst terrorist attack on American soil happened on his watch (and arguably, with his foreknowledge) and 6 years later STILL has not been avenged. There were two failed ego wars, both of which continue to kill their citizens and our soldiers daily. His administration is wrought with more scandal and corporate corruption than you can shake a stick at. He arguably is running this country the way he ran his businesses - with a drunken hand on the throttle, looking out for himself and his cronies first and screwing the people he's supposed to be serving. He's not done ONE THING RIGHT since the 2000 theft.

There's more of an open communication between real people worldwide that were affected by and still feel the affects of this administration's policies. No matter what political affiliation, we don't easily have the wool pulled over our eyes as we did in the 80s. While many people would have wholeheartedly rah-rah'd a cowboy war back then in the spirit of the country, nowadays this joke of a leader and his failures, most glaringly Vietraq, smell worse than a landfill in 100 degree weather.

You don't want to grave-piss, but seriously, how are historians going to retain their integrity dishing out a shimmering novella of supposed * accomplishments when everyone knew how things REALLY were? How silly would they look when it's obvious these times SUCK? The media can invent their own reality all they please, but history HAS to retain some kind of credibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 09:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. Lou Dobbs, I really use to like you until you bad-mouthed Michael Moore...
now you can eat shit and die bucko...!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-17-07 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
11. neo-liberal my ass Lou.
Try corrupt neocon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-19-07 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
16. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
Lou Dobbs is a demagogue who feeds on and stirs up the worst fears in people.

The fact that he doesn't like Bush does nothing to wash away his ugliness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JimboDem Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-19-07 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
17. Hey Lou
Edited on Fri Oct-19-07 06:11 PM by JimboDem
you've been sleeping with * for the past seven years. You are married. He is yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Azathoth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-19-07 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
18. "Blind allegiance to free markets and free trade" IS modern conservatism, Lou
Just read the WSJ, IBD, or hell, listen to the "compassionate conservatives" in your own party. It's YOU, Lou, who ain't a real "conservative" -- not Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-19-07 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
19. He's this weeks bloviating pompous ass....
I would hate to be a reporter sitting in that chair have to listen to the rants of a modern King Lear...

The fucker was all over the Free as can be Free Market when he was covering Wall STreet....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC