An end-of-year list

Yeah, they’re already pouring in: everyone has a list of the best or worst of 2007. Most I couldn’t care less about, but the Beast’s 50 most loathsome people in America is at least primo grade-A disgust.

The winners in this year’s list weren’t just predictable, they were inevitable.


  1. #1 Ichthyic
    December 27, 2007

    the end made you laugh?

    made me get all angry-like.

    they’re absolutely right about this being the worst pres in history, and how fucking ineffective the dems, who we gave back the house AND senate, have been in shutting this idiot down.

    frankly, I was having a decent night until i read that.

    3000% profit cheney made on his halliburton stocks this year.


  2. #2 Ichthyic
    December 27, 2007

    Also, for Dick Cheney it says, “Charges: Worst president ever…”

    that was intentional.

    think about it.

  3. #3 Ichthyic
    December 27, 2007

    The new Dems who won seats in 2006 have an excellent voting record — what more can you ask of them?

    a LOT, actually. have you actually looked at the voting record since they have gained majorities? You think it’s excellent?

    do you really think it’s all come down to issues that would require bypassing fillibusters?


    I failed to be impressed when they were in the minority, and I see very little has changed.

    I understand where you are coming from, in that MAJOR changes probably would not survive direct votes (not large enough majorities), but I’ve still seen them rubberstamp way too much of the current administration’s BS. Nor have they even tried to push through serious changes or challenges regardless of whether they could overcome a fillibuster or not. all we have seen are half-measures and minor (proposed!) ammendments to other bills.

    just take the war financing issues for a starter.

    they easily could have stopped the war by stopping the funding, it doesn’t take a majority to do that. That’s what the majority dem opinion during re-election was: end the war, get our troops out, etc. you heard them say it over and over again.

    hell, they could have stopped it even when they were in the minority, purely from a financial standpoint.

    the rethugs essentially brought Clinton to a grinding halt in his second term, with not much effort, really. Yet the current moron-in-chief continues on his merry way, and his minions just flip the bird to critics and essentially walk away.

    so yeah, it seems like more could be done, eh?


  4. #4 Alison
    December 27, 2007

    I couldn’t laugh. Too much of it is spot-on for it to be funny. I mean, no question that The Founding Fathers, The Troops, Mormon Jesus, for example, were meant to inject a little levity, but it was like telling a joke at a funeral.

    Ichthyic, I tend to agree with you about the Dems, too. The spending bill for Iraq, filled with all kinds of pork but not much room for body armor or other protections for the troops, followed by the support for more ethanol production (the news stories topped by pictures of the smiling Democrats who pushed it through), and I’m convinced that my votes for change have turned into votes for more of the same.

  5. #5 Ichthyic
    December 27, 2007

    I referred to the “The new Dems who won seats in 2006″

    I knew you’d pick that up in your response.

    it was an irrelevant point of yours to begin with, that’s why I chose to ignore it in favor of talking about the dems as a body, which is the only thing that matters when we are talking about the major issues, and how they have performed as a body in the past.

    You’re point was as relevant as saying that the “new republicans” that were voted in during the “republican revolution” were representative of the GoP as a whole. yeah, they were just so damn effective, weren’t they?

    Every bill requires overcoming a filibuster.

    I can only assume you mean that rhetorically, otherwise, that’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard you say in the last 2 weeks.

    as to voting records; I live in CA, have for my whole life, don’t tell me I don’t know the voting records of my own representatives. In fact, I used to have to work with Feinstein’s office when I was running the West Coast office of an NGO trying to form a federally funded institute for environmental research. I’m very well aware of how she works.

    and, just for the record, I most certainly have NOT approved of the performance of Feinstein and Pelosi over the last 10 years, and I rather thought the choice of Pelosi was not terribly well thought out. but then, choices for seat positons in congress, whether we are talking about speaker or simply heads of committees, are rarely decided on who has the best qualifications for the job. That’s politics, and I understand it, but I don’t have to like it.

    I also don’t think that just being a dem defacto makes one any smarter than a rethuglican, but at least they could try to placate their base ONCE in a while.

    now then, no more assumptions about what I know about my own representatives, ‘K?

    at least we agree on the funding issue, so let’s leave it at that.

New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.