Doug Henwood's frightening quote from Citibank chief economist re: Bush

[AP]

Today I heard Doug Henwood on Working Assets Radio with Laura Flanders.

He described a Council on Foreign Relations seminar he attended at which the chief economist at Citibank was asked whether Wall St was worried about the defecits Bush is running. The reply was, no, because they expect Bush to start making the cuts in spending to match the reduced receipts in his second term.

This raises two concerns: (1) that the Republicans will be drowing the Federal Gov't in a bathtub soon (which will mean the end of the federal government as the referee and the cop who keeps the playing field level and keeps the hands of the private sector out of your pocket, except when you invite them to reach in), and (2) that, in this room full of serious people, talking seriously to their cronies about the government and their strategies, they're all planning on a second term for Bush. This wasn't a room in which anyone was trying to spin. It was a room in which people were making serious plans for 2005 and 2006 and 2007.

While we sit around saying, things are going our way, and everything's falling into place, the insiders on Wall St are looking at all the same facts and circumstances and coming to the opposite conclusion that everything's falling into place and it looks like Bush will be president for a second term.

[HFishbine]

1. They're overlooking at least one fact

People Power!

[Walt Starr]

2. I think you're overlooking one fact

The people power is trumped by black box voting.

[AP]

3. No they're not.

People power is the fact that is probably giving them the most comfort.

In Kung Fu, the trick is to take your enemy's strength and turn it into a weakenss.

The Republicans right now are the Kung Fu masters and we're the grasshoppers. They're taking people power and anger towards Bush and anxiety and using it to encourage the Democrats to nominate someone they know they can beat in 2004.

They did this in '68 and '72.

We aren't using our heads. We aren't the Kung Fu masters.

[TacticalPeek]

24. Like that.

Of course, sometimes the money class projects their fantasies like anyone else. I recall several assuring me that Raygun's reelection would sugar up capital gains. A good guess, but wrong.

[HFishbine]

37. I see

and just how are "they" encouraging Democrats to nominate someone they know can't beat Bush in 2004?

[redqueen]

48. Do "they" have to worry about keeping Bush?

Seriously, if the next Democratic president is friendly to their goals, all they have to do is ensure their interests are addressed, and it's easy street.

[mmonk]

4. Yes

I've heard the same from an investment broker (and they ARE confident). Really bothersome.

[AP]

8. I have a friend who was at a wedding with very wealthy TXans in attendance

on Martha's Vineyard in 1997 and she was told by these people she sat next to that Bush would be the next president. My friend said, 'no way.' The TXans told her it was a fait accomplis. It was already decided and done.

[Supormom]

16. And after dubya it's Jeb's turn

[AP]

20. No doubt.

I totally believe this.

And then it will be George P's chance.

[maggrwaggr]

67. interesting. Kinda like Arnold

it was a done deal two weeks before the "election" here in CA also.

[RandomKoolzip]

5. In 1995, lots of republicans were calling Clinton a lame duck....

Unless they have insider info we don't have (well, obviously they do, I guess) I just don't see the public rallying behind Bush much longer. Oh, wait, I forgot about BBV.....shit, maybe we're doomed!!!


Now I'm terribly confused.

[AP]

9. Kung Fu. Making weaknesses strengths and strengths weaknesses.

I already see how this is playing out now.

Look at who the Dem front runner is today. Look at how the media is acting.

It isn't tea leaves.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

19. Yes, and the defeat will be blamed on the "liberal activists"

and we'll be forced to run a "centrist" candidate in the next election. Stunning how effective is it, isn't it?

[AP]

21. Exactly. The party should be moving left to adjust to changing demograph's

However, the Republicans and the media have a plan for Democrats to move them closer to the center.

They're going to replace Democrats with Libertarians.

Everything is very fucked up right now, and I just hope the Dems come to their senses before votes are cast in primaries.

[Rich Hunt]

54. and a lot of the "libertarians" are....

they are really just plain-old right-wingers.

See the mysterious Koch brothers and their support of the Bushes.

I don't think there are too many true libertarians left. It seems like most of them are just right wingers who don't like to wear bedsheets.

[alfredo]

79. Not all of them. My friend was a campaign manager for a Libertarian

candidate. He got audited three times during the Raygun Bush I years. He hates the Republican agenda and has promised me he will work for the Democrats.

[Spazito]

6. Given that Citibank was shoulders deep in the Enron sludge....

I would believe them as much as I would believe......Bush.

[AP]

10. They know how to make money, and that's what they were talking about.

Do you understand the implication? They have built into their forecasts a Bush victory because they see everything going accorording to plan. At least that's my reading.

[Spazito]

13. I unerstand the message they were sending...

I just don't buy into it. What interests me is that any of these guys are given any credence given the mutual fund scam, the enron scam, the bank scams. Why is it they carry such weight?

[Supormom]

17. Americans don't care about the Enron scam..

As long as they get to keep their tax cuts!

[Spazito]

18. Ahhh, but most americans AREN'T getting a tax cut.....

they are getting a burden transfer.

[ima_sinnic]

29. see "everything going according to plan"?

that's what the neocons said about Iraq--AT FIRST. One of the hallmarks of righwingers is lack of foresight. they are good at seeing some immediate circumstance that seems to fulfill their plans but they miss the bigger picture that later materializes in painful, butt-biting ways.

anybody who's confident about the outcome of 2004 is either a prime jackass fool, or knows BBV is in place.

[loudsue]

65. It's the latter....they know BBV is in place.

They were telling us Ahnold would win while he was still down in the (legitimate) polls.

BBV IS THE ONLY ISSUE THAT COUNTS!!

FIX THAT & YOU CAN FIX EVERYTHING ELSE

DON'T FIX IT, AND WATCH THE RE-RUN OF 2000, 2002, 2003(Calif.)


:kick:

[mhr]

7. With a 200 Million Campaign War Chest From These Folks

I am worried as well!

[Donna Zen]

39. And they own the media

They are using the media to chose the Democratic candidate, and many here are cheering that action. Do you really believe that the media will not chose junior over Dean? With one hand tied behind their back my friends.

We have 3 strong candidates against bushco, and Dean is not one of them.

If it wasn't for a few thinkers on this board, I'd just give it up.

[juajen]

43. As for that 200 million war chest

After our candidate is selected (I hope its Wesley instead of Howard) we can overcome this war chest by pledging to ourselves to send a regular amount to our candidate, even if it's only 25 dollars a month. We can beat that war chest, as has been proven by Howard Dean; that is, unless it is true that the pugs have been giving to Howard to make him the candidate because they think * can beat him.

If that is the case, and Howard is nominated, I hereby pledge to support him with a monthly amount to at least give him an even playing field. I believe every dem now needs to put their money where there mouth is. There are more of us than them; and "them" will depend on the large corporations giving and will keep their pocketbooks closed.

Additionally, we all need to find out if we can do exit polling at the voting precincts. We can do this, we just have to outsmart them. With this polling we can prove to ourselves and others that they are stealing votes and storm the whitehouse, this time yelling "get out of Wesley's or Howard's house". Yes, it will be war, hopefully a bloodless one. Please, get ready. Save your money now for a trip to Washington, D. C.

[rogerashton]

11. These are the same people

who lost bundles on Enron, Worldcom, and every dot-com that never made a nickel.

[AP]

12. and just had record profits last quarter in a down market.

(thanks to mortgage refinancing, by the way).

[adriennel]

14. resist the power of suggestion

In the past few weeks, I've been told:

-we have to re-elect Bush so he can finish what he started
-we have to re-elect Bush because only he can win this war
-we have to re-elect Bush because there are no qualified Dem candidates

Don't believe it! Don't be another complacent American!
Of course Republicans are speaking as if Bush has already won a second term--they're trying to convince people that it is a done deal. It is not unless we allow it.

[AP]

22. This wasn't propagandizing. The was a CFR meeting for INSIDERS

and I didn't hear this on ABC. It was on working Assets Radio. Me and maybe 2,000 other people heard it.

The Republicans think it's a done deal because we're doing exactly what they wanted us to do -- rally behind a Democrat who won't beat Bush.

[ima_sinnic]

25. you are as usual making snide innuendos against Dean

. . . though his name hasn't come up on this thread, I've seen way too many of your posts not to know who you're talking about.

No matter which of the 9 candidates you look at, any one of them can be spun not to be able to beat Bush. Any candidate will be pounded ruthlessly and unethically--it's just the nature of politics, and DIRTY politics the way the Repukes play it. I don't believe you've indicated whom you ARE for (all I've seen has been nonstop Dean bashing from you) but I can give you 20 reasons why that person can't beat Bush, just as you think you can give umpteen reasons why Dean can't beat Bush.

You are dead wrong about Dean. The Repukes do not understand the revolution that is taking place and neither apparently do you. It is a whirlwind that is going to transform the USA and the only thing that worries me is the spin from people like you who misinterpret what is going on and misinterpret Dean and his ability to mobilize the people to stamp out Bush like a cockroach.

[AP]

27. If it was innuendo, I apologize. My intention is to be clear: I think Dean

is one of the big reasons the Citibank chief economist is confident that Bush will get a second term.

I see the same media that is helping Dean appeal to angry democrats as being the people Citibank is trying to make money with and for.

Is that clear, grasshopper?

[ima_sinnic]

31. with Dean there is so much going on beneath the radar of

corporate-controlled media. This is a people's revolution, it is being spread by word of mouth, over the internet, in letters to friends, to potential voters, to the editors of papers, in everyday one-on-one conversations, everyday, day after day after day. Dean is giving the people the power to mobilize to defeat a common enemy: the cheap-labor, vote-rigging, cronyistic Republicans. He is not a candidate so much as a galvanizing force. His specific policy points are less important than the empowerment he is inspiring. Traditional politics is going to be left in the dustbin and the Repukes just don't get it.

[HFishbine]

44. Thanks for clearing that up

Now, who do you think would make the Citibank economist worried that Bush won't get a second term?

[AP]

47. Obviously, Clark, because he's the one

they are most actively trying to destroy. Probably Edwards, because they aggressively ignore him. And Probably Kerry, because it looks like they went into a frenzy when he changed his staff.

[Eloriel]

81. And it will be one of their biggest miscalculations ever

The ONLY way Dean can be defeated is (1) some awful scandal that none of us know anything about (very, very unlikely) or (2) Diebold and other computerized voting machines plus the standard fare of vote suppression tactics.

Eloriel

[mikehiggins]

34. Perot

I don't want to rain on your parade but we said the same stuff about Perot back when dinosaurs ruled the earth. Wasn't true then, isn't true now.

I support Clark because his background and personality will sit well with the average american voter WHEN the average american voter looks up from the SI Swimsuit Issue and realizes there's another election looming. That's when the visual comparison between Dubya and Clark can only hurt Dubya.

With George Soros in the mix putting up money for anti-Bush campaigns the $200 million warchest the GOP is putting together is not as big a deal as they planned. (PLEASE GEORGE, DON'T GET ON A PLANE UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION!!!)

That is the way of politics. There are people akin to DU's who weep and moan that a mad-dog capitalist might be the savior of us all. Me, I'll welcome a rescue no matter where it comes from.

I thought Clark's advent was a bolt from the blue, and now Soros?

I think the gods have turned their backs on Dubya.

[TacticalPeek]

26. These people think in terms of ownership and power.

And they know who owns the media, and the power it has in elections.

[adriennel]

58. misunderstanding, calm down

I wasn't referring to what you heard as propaganda. I don't doubt the accuracy of your story. I didn't hear it. I DO know, having been raised by a life-long Republican (who happens works in finance, I digress)that forcefully repeating statements is a tried and true Republican tactic. It is intended to humiliate and silence others. This tactic pervades the media right down to personal political debate and we all need to speak against it.

after the 2000 election, I heard:
-don't be stupid. Bush won't touch abortion rights.
no comment necessary on this one

questioning the sense of going to war in Iraq
-the world is a better place without Saddam.
umm, ok, this one's up for debate

this one's my favorite, spoken at the start of the war:
-we'll pay off this war in the first week.
hahaha

Now, I haven't screamed a big "told-you-so" in answer to these claims....but man, I sure want to.

Finally, I am undecided, but your omnipotent sarcasm ("rally behind a Democrat who won't be Bush") doesn't really appeal to me. If you're trying to get a message across and gain more people on your side, you're going to need a new tactic.

[Faygo Kid]

15. It's called "Starve the Beast"

Run up such an incredible deficit, and transfer money to the military, so there is nothing for social programs - then gut them. Not just Medicare, but New Deal programs. One of Bush's three goals (along with permanent transfer of wealth to an elite 1% and Pax Halliburton around the world).

[LiviaOlivia]

23. Big Money at stake

I am trying to find a link for a CNBC report Yesterday(11-12-03)
about a big conference taking place in Silicon Valley. In attendance
were/are Tech CEO's. The reporter stated that a conference speaker
made the statement that offshore 'out-sourcing' will
be the biggest option U.S. companies have for 2004 profitability.
Private sector jobs gone. Government jobs to follow if Bushco
re-elected. This is life and death.

[juajen]

51. We are getting some help

Just in case nobody has noticed, Lou Dobbs is coming down hard, basically in our favor. Non-stop, loss of jobs, outsourcing, the deficit, the greedy corporations, etc. Yes, he is a republican, but, IMO, one of the good ones. Of course, he's not 100%; however he was very nice to Kucinich, unlike the pretend dem, Tweetybird. All in all, he can certainly claim, honestly, to be fair and balanced. I know a lot of you will disagree, but, honestly, have you been listening to him?

[LiviaOlivia]

73. Hi juajen

Yes, I have seen some of Lou Dobbs reporting on this and other topics. I don't always agree with him on things but I have
been pleasantly surprised and pleased with his reporting on jobs. I lost a good job in Dec. 2002 and the loss of jobs to overseas contractors has directly affected me.

[The Backlash Cometh]

28. Wall Street helped get us into this mess.

I think it's time someone take the reigns out of their hands because they're leading us over a very high and nasty cliff.

[AP]

30. Wall St is getting exactly what it wants: concentrated wealth and...

...political power. They're socializing the risks and privatizing the gains. They're making money hand over fist and they're looking after themselves first.

[grasswire]

32. then why...

....does he need to raise $250 million?

Eh?

[TacticalPeek]

33. Probably already part of their factoring.

And that crowd loves the money bath, anyway. Campaign cash is a down payment on the looting spree they anticipate.

[yella_dawg]

42. Massive funds to explain how Chimpy pulled off a miracle

to get reselected. Even the dumbest freeper needs some reason to explain why Bush beats the odds to get another term.

[Donna Zen]

69. Why the $250 million?

Good question, and I have been thinking about it.

1) Because he can. That much money actually pleases the base by making them feel superior. "Look," they say, "people of superior intelligence--the rich--love us."

2) Those fundraising junkets seal the base. By making those pledges in the form of money, heads are counted and thus, kept on their reservation. Putting that money into repub coffers, keeps it out of the sneaky Democratic bank accounts. Democrats would also make big-fat promises, if only they could get their hands on the money.

3) Some of those funds will be used to pay off their biggest cheerleaders, the media giants. Expect plenty of over-priced ads. Further more, NPR and CNN have reported that the repubs are building huge internet ops even as we argue.

4) They probably got wind of some large monied people who would like to bring junior down. Soros is not alone according to my info. Being prepared is always important.

5) Part of the money will be used to further cement the Congress as an extention of AEI. Play ball or else. The open Southern seats are meant to be theirs, and in world of divine-right, they will spend whatever it takes.

[TacticalPeek]

80. You right.

"If we need the money we can get the money. We can
get it in cash. I know where it could be
gotten..." Tricky Dick

"HALDEMAN: (Unintelligible) "is involved and Ehrlichman
is, I am, and Mitchell is, That's
obstruction of justice. And you said, "How
is Haldeman involved?" He said, "We ran out
of money and borrowed that three fifty in
the safe for polling and so they came here
and I went to Haldeman and Haldeman said,
“What's it for?” And I told him, and uh,
we-as you know we had decided that there is
no price too high to pay and blow it before
the election. Now see, I told him none of
that money was taken out until after the
election. So that's a…
PRESIDENT: Right."


Right.

[shance]

35. Just keep giving them the power folks. Power-mongers and bullies

are only as strong as individuals allow them to be.

And make no mistake, we contribute in creating them because of our own weaknesses and cowardise and unwillingness to fight.

We allow power-mongers/narcissists to do this without working together to stop it. We can stop the robbing of our nation, but only if we want it bad enough.

Those of you who are throwing your hands up, as tempting as it is at times, and I know I have done it as well, only solidifies their power by giving up.

Either some of you are Freepers or just pretty negative Dems. The easy road is negativity, the path of a great person is to continue fighting and work towards what is right and look for the solutions. And to STOP BACKING DOWN. This whole mess has been created by people backing down instead of saying absolutely NOT to those abusing power and privelege.

This serves no one to give in, but those who are being allowed to essentially loot our country.

Im not saying that its not vital to look at the reality of the situation, of COURSE it is, however, you cant stop there. We do have power and we do have a strong voice and we do have many concerned Americans with money and resources that dont like the direction this nation is headed. And dont kid yourself, our numbers are our greatest strength.

The key is to ban together, honor our Dem/progressive brothers and sisters, and not allow them to divide us any further. We have no other choice when you think about it.

[TacticalPeek]

40. More like:

"Pessimism of the Mind, Optimism of the Will"

:)

[Plaid Adder]

36. I'm sure they're planning on victory in Iraq, too

but it ain't gonna happen.

Never forget, folks: if you can't get outside your ideology, you get blindsided by history. That's what's happened to Dubya in Iraq, and it's what's gonna happen to his corporate backers too. Their crystal ball is not any better than ours.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[mmonk]

38. Iraq won't be an issue

unless someone voters think is credible makes it an issue (whoever you think that might be). It won't matter if around 60% still think it was a good idea to do it despite the losses. And AP is correct, all investment houses and multi-nationals are banking on this outcome right now. We can address it, or die by it.

[AP]

45. I'm sure they're getting exactly what they planned in Iraq.

They're giving Democrats a trap door to stand on, which is going to open under their feet next fall after the Democrats have nominated an anti-war Democrat.

[ikojo]

41. It's the starve the beast strategy...

Please read the following from the word spy...http://www.wordspy.com/words/starvethebeast.asp

Americans will not care what the government does as long as they are well fed and well entertained. Too many people are still convinced that if they work hard enough they, too, can be rich.

starve the beast

v. To cut taxes with the intent of using the reduced revenue as an excuse to drastically reduce the size and number of services offered by a government.
Here's how the argument runs: to starve the beast, you must not only deny funds to the government; you must make voters hate the government. There's a danger that working-class families might see government as their friend: because their incomes are low, they don't pay much in taxes, while they benefit from public spending. So in starving the beast, you must take care not to cut taxes on these "lucky duckies." (Yes, that's what The Wall Street Journal called them in a famous editorial.) In fact, if possible, you must raise taxes on working-class Americans in order, as The Journal said, to get their "blood boiling with tax rage."
—Paul Krugman, "The Tax-Cut Con," The New York Times, September 14, 2003

[David Zephyr]

46. Bush's 2nd Term: Massive Social Cuts & Reinstitution of the Draft

Count on it.

[AP]

49. They won't need to reinsitute the draft one we have poverty & social cuts

Enlistment will be the only option for many people.

[dkamin]

50. settle down

you guys are all getting ahead of yourselves
1) the chief economist at any bank is usually running on reports from their political analysts, and these reports are usually somewhat dated. I.e. 3 months ago, Bush appeared much more invulnerable than today.
2) from a bank's perspective the most likely scenario is Bush being reelected. incumbents tend to win historically.
3) the question you describe assumes a 2nd term, because every Democrat has pretty much already stated that they would undo part or all of the tax cuts Bush passed. thus, a question about deficits Bush is running (which Dems would presumably undo) would seem to merit an answer that projects what Bush would do in a 2nd term.
4) i received a presidential projection prepared by one of the top 3 investment banks where a good friend of mine works, and it pretty much says, yeah, incumbents tend to win, especially in wartime, but Bush is vulnerable nonetheless, because of a sagging economy. off the top of my head, i believe it also mentioned that if the war on terror (including Iraq) began to sour, it was possible Bush could be even more vulnerable.

in a nutshell, i'm a partisan and i recognize that. however, i do think bush is vulnerable. he has on his side an economy that appears to be improving, the terrorism issue, and $200 million with which to lie and distort, not to mention a right wing media machine. he has against him an economy which, structurally, is making most people work harder for less money and security, an emerging debacle in Iraq, and a very enraged and motivated Democratic base which will definitely come out in force in 2004. in the next year a lot of things could happen, but right now i think it's pretty clear he's vulnerable.

[AP]

52. Thanks for the laugh.

The chief economist at a bank that just had record profits in a down market relies on 3 month old data? Right.

Bush is vulnerable. But the Repulbicans are turning his weakness into a strength. It's like '68 and '72 and the insiders think '04 is in the bag.

[dkamin]

53. i didn't say that

i'm pointing out that 3 month old data would give that. but i never said a chief economist would have old data. don't be a jerk.

i'm merely pointing out a couple of things. 1) politics is not essential to a bank's business in a non-election year. 2) there's a chain of information flow in most banks, in that chief economists don't follow politics directly, they get their projections and scenarios from down below. 3) political analysts at banks, at least as far as i've seen, while incorporating polls, look at more historical data.

nobody's predicting this thing as over yet, and most bankers i know (and i went to wharton undergrad so i know quite a few) are only now beginning to think that bush is vulnerable, from a position a year ago where none of them thought he was vulnerable.

thanks for not being civil, jerk.

[AP]

55. settle down.

Citibank's chief economist is not going to get up in front of room of his peers and say with confidence something that he's not confident is true.

Politics is always essential to Citibank.

(And if my previous post was uncivil, this one's gonna come accross as downright pornographic.)

[ursacorwin]

56. AP

i'm with you that some folks are in the know about some plans, but i have to agree with the above poster that i have a real problem according these folks too much information. at this point, there's only one way they could be really *sure* that shrub will win; that's BBV and that's what we have find out and stop if true. but they literally can't know the future, and no matter how good they think they may be voting people still have the ability to make up their own minds. look at all of us. bush is vulnerable, no matter how arrogantly the titans may think he's not.

[AP]

57. I agree.

I totally admit that this single piece of evidence proves nothing. However I think it builds up a cirucmstantial, yet highly persuasive case that things are going Republican's way in the minds of Republicans, and will continue to do so unless Democrats wise up.

[tom_paine]

59. This is not surprising...if we can see the infrastructure of democracy

crumbing, so can they.

Of course, for Corporate Oligarchs, what we view with fear and disgust they view with the same feelings Bunnypants* must feel when he sees a bottle of Jack and a Tony Montana-sized pile of cocaine sitting on his desk...

Between the Corporate TV Pravda and the thing which leads it around by the nose, the Party-Loyal Right-Wing Sub-Media. Between the Diebold voting machines and the "manual disenfranchisement strategies" (including the illegal solicittaion of absentee ballots and the stacking of Democratic regions with faulty machines) that the Busheviks seemed to perfect in 2000 and 2002.

With the Orwellian double-standard in force and even language itself being twisted into the service of the Busheviks...

...it doesn't surprise me that the Corporate Aristcracy considers it a done deal. So, apparently do the Busheviks themselves, and it shows in how they talk and what they do.

What do they know that we don't?

Plenty.

[CDK_NWIH]

60. I hope the economy tanks

So we can win in'04. Between that and the body bags, * wouldn't stand a chance.

[AP]

61. The thing is, these big banks have a plan to get even richer and

more powerful if the economy tanks.

The Great Depression was great for a lot of people who were able to consolidate power during that time.

I don't want the economy to tank. I just want people to wake up to this torture of 1000 little cuts. The Repubicans are bleeding the middle class dry by taking a little money from you in a 1000 different ways now and for the next 50 years.

People just have to wakie up.

[arcane1]

62. you hope there are more body bags, too?

:eyes:

attitudes like that aren't helping anybody

[snippy]

63. Very unwise and shortsighted.

[CDK_NWIH]

64. If the economy recovers

Democrats will lose. People vote their pocketbooks... period.

Not to be cynical, but...

[arcane1]

66. that kind of BS doesn't play here

what makes you so sure Dems will lose anyway?

sorry, anyone hoping the economy tanks is on the wrong side.

[CDK_NWIH]

70. Think about it...

if the economy gets stronger and jobs are created

AND

We start to make prgress in Iraq...

why in the world would people want change???

[arcane1]

71. why would people want poverty and death?

which seems to be what you are advocating

the win-no-matter-what attitude, combined with the apparent desire to see others suffer for your own partisan gain... That's not what the left is all about. That's the attitude we are dealing with in the WH right now

sorry, not only is your reasoning flawed, but your attitude is disgusting. Are you sure this is the place for you? You won't find many on this board who want more lost jobs and more dead people

:eyes:

[snippy]

68. You are not being cynical. You are hoping others suffer

for your benefit. That is something other than cynicism.

[West Coast Democrat]

77. That's if the country isn't in the middle of a bloody war

created by the incumbent administration. BushCo never counted on Iraq going so badly for them...and Defense was supposed to be their strongest issue.

The economy is only one issue this time around.

[AP]

72. Hitler used a tanking economy to entrench his power.

When people are anxious about the economy, it makes them more likely to embrace fascism, by the way.

It took all the talents FDR had to appeal to people's better instincts.

[TacticalPeek]

74. Why wish for hell,

when the truth is plenty enough to do them in?

:shrug:


It's a question of character.

[roguevalley]

76. I'm more worried about a knee jerk reaction if al Qaeda makes their

kill 1000,000 people during Ramadan threat come off.
After all, they did out Valerie Plame, didn't they?
Her assignment? Block WMD from entering America.

Bush will strap on his toy six shooters and push the
red button on some country if that happens. I worry
about that more.

[TacticalPeek]

78. The Plame flame is one of the zippos at their hootch.

Truth, baby; they can't take it.

:)

[lyonn]

75. simple economics

I think the logic of the Republicans starting in the Gingrich era was that deficts was a good way to do away with social programs that is getting in the way of progress.