Is this a trend?

[Maxgoof]

#2: Colin Millfolk's Night Terrors. What was believed to be nothing more then a child's mental problems, turn out to be caused by an old, dark threat lurking underneath the very city itself.

Not entirely true.

Colin's problem was, indeed, night terrors. His attempts to dispell them, however, were being pushed underground out of shame, because he as being told that he was big enough to not be afraid. But he was afraid.

The pushing of the lux into the ground, however, attracted the rat wights, which had begun to spawn because a collapsing lab broke a tank holding a rat king. That rat king crawled over to where a lux jewel in the lab was, and drew on the power (causing the brownouts). From this it produced the rat wights, which it sent out to find food.

In the process, they found Colin's lux, and followed it to its source. The arrival of the rat wights compounded Colin's problem, but did not cause it.

[Jwrebholz]

Heh. The Democrats have the first part down pat, except for the 'occasionally' part. The taking responsibility bit they need to work on just a tad.

As opposed to the Republican tendency to ascribe absolutely everything that goes wrong to the long-term fallout from the most recent Democrat administration?

Politicians in general have difficulty with the concept of responsibility - nobody really has a monopoly on ducking the blame.

A politician's favorite four words. "It isn't MY fault!" His second-favorite. "It was THEIR fault!"

[Sun tzu]

Heh. The Democrats have the first part down pat, except for the 'occasionally' part. The taking responsibility bit they need to work on just a tad.

As opposed to the Republican tendency to ascribe absolutely everything that goes wrong to the long-term fallout from the most recent Democrat administration?

Politicians in general have difficulty with the concept of responsibility - nobody really has a monopoly on ducking the blame.

Substitute "people" for "politicians", perhaps?

[Doink]

Well, sometimes politician do take blame. Kennedy took the fall for the Bay of Pigs mission, even though it was the CIA who dropped the ball on that one.

[SirBob]

Substitute "people" for "politicians", perhaps?

I think you can reasonably claim that the tendency is greatly exaggerated among those in power. People want their leaders to be "perfect"; admitting to any failing, no matter how inconsequential, is usually political suicide. Add to that the fact that in politics, there's real, immediate, and best of all, empirically measurable benefit to slapping the blame on someone else (what did you think all those polls were for?), and we have a rather unique situation on our hands.

[MikeVanPelt]

Well, sometimes politician do take blame. Kennedy took the fall for the Bay of Pigs mission, even though it was the CIA who dropped the ball on that one.

Well, I'm pretty sure it was Kennedy's decision not to give the Cuban exiles the air support they had been promised as a part of the plan to overthrow Castro. I don't think the CIA makes decisions at that level.

[Doink]

Well, I'm pretty sure it was Kennedy's decision not to give the Cuban exiles the air support they had been promised as a part of the plan to overthrow Castro. I don't think the CIA makes decisions at that level.

The way I heard it, the CIA greatly underestimated Cuban forces. The air strike was attempted, but failed, and the CIA reported that it had succeeded.

[UncleMonty]

Heh. The Democrats have the first part down pat, except for the 'occasionally' part. The taking responsibility bit they need to work on just a tad.

As opposed to the Republican tendency to ascribe absolutely everything that goes wrong to the long-term fallout from the most recent Democrat administration?

Politicians in general have difficulty with the concept of responsibility - nobody really has a monopoly on ducking the blame.

The most RECENT Democratic administration? While admittedly, that administration was the worst example of corruption and abuse-of-power our nation has seen, we can't stop there.The Democrats held majority control of the government of the United States for a half-century before our current administration was elected. Yes, even while Reagan was president, the Democrats controlled two thirds of our government. Who else CAN anyone blame for long-standing, chronic social and economic problems? The Keebler Elves?

[SirBob]

The most RECENT Democratic administration? While admittedly, that administration was the worst example of corruption and abuse-of-power our nation has seen, we can't stop there.The Democrats held majority control of the government of the United States for a half-century before our current administration was elected. Yes, even while Reagan was president, the Democrats controlled two thirds of our government. Who else CAN anyone blame for long-standing, chronic social and economic problems? The Keebler Elves?

Everybody who was involved, rather than picking out a particular subset?

(Besides, you say that as if routine corruption and abuse of power haven't continued regardless of the recent administrative shakeup. )

[RHJunior]

SirBob, give it up already.

For close on to 40 years, the Democrats had the lion's share of governmental power. THEY are to be held accountable for the calamities that befell America on their watch.

I am so damnably sick of this. Every time the perfidy of the Democrats is brought up--- with long, detailed, and dated lists of their misdoings--- invariably, INVARIABLY, I am immediately subjected to the pompous assertion by some left-leaning suck-a-prune that "Well the REPUBLICANS are just as bad, pout, pout, sulk, sulk." Never, you will note, are any EXAMPLES given--- just this obnoxious blanket assertion.

As if by accusing the conservative party of unnamed misdeeds excuses the leftists FOR EVEN ONE DAMN SECOND of guilt for their own actions.

Not to say that Republicans don't commit atrocious misdeeds.

It's just that, for them, it requires <I>acting like democrats.</i>

Republicans are miserable failures as leaders when they act and think and vote like Democrats.

Democrats are miserable failures as leaders when they act and think and vote--- like themselves.

[SirBob]

SirBob, give it up already.

For close on to 40 years, the Democrats had the lion's share of governmental power. THEY are to be held accountable for the calamities that befell America on their watch.

And I suppose they took power by force? Against the will of the people, as in?

Of course not. Folks voted for them. It's a democratic system. Now, there's two ways you can interpret that: either a) the American public is retarded, or b) the Republicans consistently failed to provide a better alternative.

What do you think is more likely the case?

Never, you will note, are any EXAMPLES given--- just this obnoxious blanket assertion.

As if by accusing the conservative party of unnamed misdeeds excuses the leftists FOR EVEN ONE DAMN SECOND of guilt for their own actions.

Again, you misconstrue me, perhaps deliberately. Pointing out that one side is as bad as the other excuses nothing; however, it does suggest that the problem is much deeper than simply "A is better than B" if both A and B are guilty of the same crimes.

Incidentally, part of the reason that you rarely encounter any valid examples of the abuses in question is that each side has different ideas of what constitutes abuse. Take, for example, excessively broad application of obscenity statues; typically, a Democrat would decry this type of action as unconstitutional censorship, while a Republican would laud the same initiatives as safeguarding public morality. Similarly, look at gun control; this time, it's the Republicans crying constitutional foul, while the Democrats claim it's a public safety measure.

In either case, you're not likely to achieve agreement on whether the abuse in question even exists, much less who's responsible for it.

Not to say that Republicans don't commit atrocious misdeeds.

It's just that, for them, it requires <I>acting like democrats.</i>

Are you seriously proposing that the Republican philosophy, when applied consistently, leads to personal infallibility? Watch it there - that has theological implications, not just political ones.

To put it another way, I think you're engaging in some rather Humpty Dumpty-like reasoning here. Anything you don't like is by definition characteristic of Democrats, and anything of which you approve is by definition characteristic of Republicans, even if making this determination requires retroactive knowledge. Whether a given policy is classified as "leftist" or "rightist" depends on the outcome - a negative outcome yields the former, and a positive one, the latter.

Is this a particularly meaningful system of classification?

[Gengar003]

Of course not. Folks voted for them. It's a democratic system. Now, there's two ways you can interpret that: either a) the American public is retarded, or b) the Republicans consistently failed to provide a better alternative.

What do you think is more likely the case?

Is there a c.) All of the above?

[StrangeWulf13]

How about d.) the liberal media made the people think b.) was true?

Hey, before talk radio and the internet, we couldn't catch those guys when they lied. No doubt a lot of conservatives felt their view was in the minority because by golly the news people told us so!

And as for the standard, let's use what works. Gun control doesn't. Welfare doesn't. Current immigration laws (and enforcement of such) don't. And neither does raising taxes to get more money.

None of the Democrats ideas work. You lost.

Deal with it.

[SirBob]

How about d.) the liberal media made the people think b.) was true?

Sure, there's liberal bias in the media. There's conservative bias, too. It's just that liberals don't notice the liberal bias, and conservatives don't notice the conservative bias, 'cause they're just hearing what they want to believe anyway from those sources.

Not that this is strictly relevant, as your proposition requires us to accept the existance of a globe-spanning media conspiracy. Some of us are not that paranoid, I'm afraid. Besides, "the American public are mindless media drones" is just a slight variation on "the American public are retarded", which puts us right back at a).

And as for the standard, let's use what works. Gun control doesn't.

I notice you skipped my example of abusive Republican shenanigans entirely and went straight to my example of abusive Democrat shenanigans. Do you feel you're not able to address the former?

None of the Democrats ideas work. You lost.

"I" lost? When have I ever expressed support for the Democrats? They're despicable scumbags, too. My point is simply that many of the failings and villainies that are popularly attributed to the Democrats are, in fact, common to the American political establishment as a whole. We're so busy trying to blame the other guy, we don't notice that our own team is perpetrating exactly the same abuses behind our backs - and then we wonder how things went so wrong.

[Lee M]

Pointing out that one side is as bad as the other excuses nothing; however, it does suggest that the problem is much deeper than simply "A is better than B" if both A and B are guilty of the same crimes.

I would never be so crass as to claim that one side is as bad as the other. Trouble is, it often looks as if each side is worse than the other.

[The JAM]

You should see the politicians down here, ?...

[StrangeWulf13]

Oy, let's not drag Mexico into this...

[UncleMonty]

SirBob, it went like this:
The Democratic National Committee of the US of A invented a system by which they could stay in power.
If you steal from those who earn wealth, keep most of it for yourself, and dole out a small fraction of it to those who would rather sit on their butts and complain... in exchange for their votes, and maybe a little marching and sign-carrying... you can buy a thousand votes for every businessman you ruin. You can raise generations of voters.
Those urban slum areas that vote solidly Democrat? Farms.
Voter farms.
People who've been taught they have no say in their own life. Who know they have to vote for the guy who will give them money, because they can't earn it, can they?
Well, they can. Of course. But they don't know that any more. They can't believe that any more. They've been conditioned to believe otherwise... Some of them.

That's why Democrats got elected. Until even the poor began to realize they had been bought and sold. People don't like that. Sure, in time they'll get over it and we'll all slide back into the same old routine. But for now, they've decided to act like free people instead of property.
It's a refreshing change of pace. One that I've awaited for a very long time.
I'm just over 50 years old, you see.
I'm glad I got to see the vote-slaves throw off their chains - just this once.

[Madmoonie]

It irritates me when I hear Democrats and extreme liberals say they are fighting for the black man in the "hood" or some other minority, putting in affirmitive action and such, but when these minorities say "excuse me? I am more than just a black man." When these minorities want to become than what they are sterotyped to be...they are pressed back into their race roles, rather than a black man making into college based on merit, his intellict and hard work, and based it soley on his skin color. Minorities are more than just a skin color and deserve the right to become more than they are expected to be by the Democrats.

[Tbolt]

Without necessarily pointing fingers, I recall a person on the radio discussing the difference between problem solution and problem managment. I never really connected it with the welfare system until an issue came up here in Pa that highlighted the concept:

Problem: Medical malpractice insurance rates in Pa are skyrocketing. Many doctors are considering leaving the state because of the costs of operation. Our family doctor paid $75,000 per year in malpractice premiums alone. (And some people wonder why the cost of health care is so high)

Problem managment:

The governor proposed that $40,000 / year be given to practicing doctors to alleviate the price of their insurance premiums. That helps the doctors immediately and keeps them in the state. It's a simple "solution" that doesn't really solve the problem. It manages it, now the doctors are indebted to the political machine that gives them $40K / year. If they don't want to see that cash taken away, they need to keep people of the same ideology in power. This will continue forever.

Actual Solution?

This is a lot harder as it asks the question, Why are insurance rates so high?

Could it be:

A. Incompetent doctors are constantly getting sued for making foolish mistakes. But are still allowed to continue their practices

B. Competent practicioners are being litigated for the sole purpose that lawyers know you have to sue people with money in order to get money.


If A is true, then these people don't need to be practicing medecine. If B is the case then the legislation needs to be altered to curb frivolous lawsuits, while still protecting the public from malpracticioners.

The actual answer probably involves a little of both A & B as those are extreme cases. The solution isn't simple and will not immediately take effect. Nor will it guaranty that the person who proposes it will win the next election for their party. (it could potentially alienate both lawyers and doctors) But the ultimate winner might be the people who reap the benefit of improved health care at a lower cost as the doctors don't have to pay exhorbidant insurance premiums and incompetents are eliminated from the practice.