<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A distinct lack of caring</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/</link>
	<description>Radioactive Toy</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:05:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark T</title>
		<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/#comment-452049</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2008 00:00:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/#comment-452049</guid>
		<description>Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy (reached age of reason), Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush.  Of all the presidents I have experienced, I have to say that Bush is the worst.  He's simply not qualified. He lacks natural curiosity and is rote conservative, never paying heed to another point of view. 

From a policy standpoint, Reagan and Clinton got away with murder. Clinton is now officially a liberal, but he was no such thing in office - he triangulated on liberals. Reagan is officially the great tax cutter, but he stuck it to the middle class and retirees. Reagan supposedly brought down the Soviet Union, but in reality, it was little Saudi Arabia that did that. But from a public perception standpoint, they rocked. 

Jimmy Carter had a good head on his shoulders, but came off as preachy and didn't get much done. But it is interesting that the great "Reagan" defense buildup started under Carter, and the first of the massive "Reagan" tax cuts came under Carter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy (reached age of reason), Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush.  Of all the presidents I have experienced, I have to say that Bush is the worst.  He&#8217;s simply not qualified. He lacks natural curiosity and is rote conservative, never paying heed to another point of view. </p>
<p>From a policy standpoint, Reagan and Clinton got away with murder. Clinton is now officially a liberal, but he was no such thing in office - he triangulated on liberals. Reagan is officially the great tax cutter, but he stuck it to the middle class and retirees. Reagan supposedly brought down the Soviet Union, but in reality, it was little Saudi Arabia that did that. But from a public perception standpoint, they rocked. </p>
<p>Jimmy Carter had a good head on his shoulders, but came off as preachy and didn&#8217;t get much done. But it is interesting that the great &#8220;Reagan&#8221; defense buildup started under Carter, and the first of the massive &#8220;Reagan&#8221; tax cuts came under Carter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay Stevens</title>
		<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/#comment-451956</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay Stevens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:46:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/#comment-451956</guid>
		<description>I should add that a Democratic may, indeed, make you a cranky Libertarian, tho. I think it's typical that we're always disappointed with the actual politician after hearing all the pretty rhetoric of an election. Still, I suspect we'll be arguing over things like tax rates and the types of universal health care we'll receive, which are pretty good things to get mad about, instead of wondering if we're slipping into totalitarianism or something...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I should add that a Democratic may, indeed, make you a cranky Libertarian, tho. I think it&#8217;s typical that we&#8217;re always disappointed with the actual politician after hearing all the pretty rhetoric of an election. Still, I suspect we&#8217;ll be arguing over things like tax rates and the types of universal health care we&#8217;ll receive, which are pretty good things to get mad about, instead of wondering if we&#8217;re slipping into totalitarianism or something&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay Stevens</title>
		<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/#comment-451954</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay Stevens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedkill.org/2008/01/28/1925/#comment-451954</guid>
		<description>Yeah, he's that bad.

Geez, Iraq alone may be the country's single worst foreign policy decision in our history. And I don't think any other president had ever lost a major metropolitan area out of sheer incompetence before. And the Abramoff scandal and K Street project indicated a level of governmental corruption not seen since the Grant administration. And the Bush administration's theory of the unitary executive -- giving him the "right" to violate any law or aspect of the Constitution at his discretion -- makes Nixon look like a wallflower. And then there's torture...rendition...warrantless wiretapping...suspension of habeas corpus...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, he&#8217;s that bad.</p>
<p>Geez, Iraq alone may be the country&#8217;s single worst foreign policy decision in our history. And I don&#8217;t think any other president had ever lost a major metropolitan area out of sheer incompetence before. And the Abramoff scandal and K Street project indicated a level of governmental corruption not seen since the Grant administration. And the Bush administration&#8217;s theory of the unitary executive &#8212; giving him the &#8220;right&#8221; to violate any law or aspect of the Constitution at his discretion &#8212; makes Nixon look like a wallflower. And then there&#8217;s torture&#8230;rendition&#8230;warrantless wiretapping&#8230;suspension of habeas corpus&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
