The economy, The Media, the Election.
Mallard has a point. The Presidency may be many things, but all-powerful it is not, and President Bush cannot be singled out for blame, especially when it comes to the Economy.
Pretty much the entire Republican Party and Conservative Movement are to blame as well.
That said, he is missing the main culprit: the Economy itself. The Economy, which has a well-known liberal bias, was totally in the tank for Obama.
Unfortunately for Mallard, American voters gave in to their fears about the Economy and did not follow his simple, by irrefutable logic:
- Things suck.
- President Bush and Republicans have been in control for most of the last 8 years.
- Ergo, maintain the status quo!
15 comments:
I think Mallard got mixed up.
The last gasps of fear were about socialism and terrorism. Brought to you by your friendly patriotic conservatives.
Why are you trying to engage Mallard rationally? "Teh media is teh librul!" That is the ONLY 'message' behind this. Bringing up 'the economy' is entirely incidental to this point.
but you can still bring up Clinton blowjob jokes, right mallard?
please say yes
Hannity and Limbaugh have been calling this the "Obama Recession."
I guess Tins doesn't consider Fox to be Media.
This simply a rehash of a comic Mallard used during the same hurricane season that spawned Katrina. I cannot find any online versions of it, but the joke was basically the same: a newscaster blames various kinds of bad weather, especially hurricanes, on the Bush administration.
Meanwhile, Tinsley still doesn't know who won the election, so he's acting as if it matters that things are being blamed on Bush.
And if they can blame the recession on Obama, we can certainly blame the flu season on Bush.
A brief, effort free response (i.e. to match Tinsley's effort-free strip generation):
"Standard wingnut topic-shift: Equate legitimate criticism with some silly caricature."
(Previous obvious example: Pretend that legitimate criticism of inept handling of Katrina disaster is the same as blaming Bush for not being able to control the weather.)
The verification was "duche" for this--somehow, that seems appropriate.
nick:
"I guess Tins doesn't consider Fox to be Media."
Well, you see, that's different because
"...Tins doesn't consider Fox to be Media..."
"In Vino Veritas" heh!
The Democrats have NOT been in control of both houses of congress for the past 2 years. The Democrats proposed many pieces of legislation designed to cure the economic problems but they were all vetoed by Bush. Obama did not support the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street tycoons. That's why big business didn't shower him with contributions.
This message sponsored by Democrats Against Reality.
Either that reporter's face is melting from looking at the Holy Grail, or I'm on acid.
I think every left-leaning (and principled right-leaning) American would agree with you, anonymous: Democrats haven't stood up to the failed ideology of neoconservatism like they should have. Hopefully next year they'll grow a pair of balls, stop being afraid of criticizing Republicans (they're still scared from the neo-McCarthyism during the War on Terror), and wean themselves from the teat of big business. Since Obama is a solidly pro-corporate centrist*, I'm not too optimistic.
Also, DaveyK is right. America doesn't have a monarchy, so I have a problem with blaming presidents for economies. I would blame, in order: Greenspan, Phil Gramm, congressional representatives from both parties, and Bush.
* oops, I meant a Marxist!
Oh, Anonymoose, didn't you hear? According to Sarah Palin, the Vice President is the undisputed ruler of the Senate. So technically Cheney (R-Undisclosed Location) has been in control of that house of Congress, correct?
So on Wednesday, we get to see the first comic written post-election. With how absurd they've been over the past week, I'm not looking forward to that.
anonymous coward: google "most filibusters ever!"
Post a Comment