(no subject)

[wrog]

2006 is only two years away; it took less time to get rid of Nixon and he actually won by a landslide in '72.

It amazes me that I wrote this line a year ago. I figured then that it was just pissing in the wind at best, but if Fitz really does have Cheney in the gunsights, ... well, hell...

Comments

[firni.livejournal.com]

Bush won by a landslide of 1%! He has a MANDATE!

[greyaenigma.livejournal.com]

It's amazing someone can declare a mandate after losing an election.

What's this about Fitz having Cheney in his sights? He already seems to have blinked on Rove, so it's hard to muster up much hope for taking down bigger targets.

[wrog]

I'm not sure he's blinked on Rove at all, he's just taking his time. Or Rove's now cooperating. The real point of this is to get Libby to flip -- the guy's looking at 30 years of bone-me-in-the-ass time and disbarment when he gets out, which is just Not Good by any reasonable measure.

Of course, this is what I get for reading firedoglake.

[greyaenigma.livejournal.com]

OK, maybe he'll get 2-3 years of time before Bush pardons him, on the off chance that Bush will wait until he leaves office. And given the level these guys have stood by each other, I wouldn't be surprised if he thought that was acceptable danger.

[solarbird]

Economy's still skipping along, tho'. Shame the holiday season is going to suck, but 2006 is going to have all the storm-damage-repair stimulus to keep it from getting as far into the hole as it would have otherwise. So, um... yeah. I don't get it either.

[wrog]

there's a lot of grain that was just harvested in the midwest that simply cannot reach its usual markets.

nor is there a strategic natural gas reserve; that network is still spaghetti...

so, this may seem simplistic and naive of me, but I see a whole world of hurt in just the next few months.

[solarbird]

there's a lot of grain that was just harvested in the midwest that simply cannot reach its usual markets.
Absolutely true. And very bad for farmers.

nor is there a strategic natural gas reserve; that network is still spaghetti...
Here's hoping for a warm winter!

so, this may seem simplistic and naive of me, but I see a whole world of hurt in just the next few months.
I know. There are about a zillion red lights on this board, but they've mostly been on for quite a while now, and yet... chug chug chug. More consumer debt more consumer debt more consumer debt, negative savings rates, sustained negative wage growth, massive surges in energy costs, and yet nobody really seems to mind or think this is going to turn into an inflation shock, and somehow, the cost of import goods from China have actually been flat or falling. It makes me very very fucking nervous, but apparently, doesn't bother most of the people, and as long as people keep spending, well...

I don't get it. It's like this entire expansion is made out of smoke, and yet it's still moving.

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

Our economy is on borrowed time. We're due for a recession, and the longer we don't get one, the worse it's likely to be.

It kind of reminds me of the tech bubble, which was based on nothing and kept going anyway, and then burst dramatically. Instead of stock speculation we've got consumer spending based on debt, but it's got to stop sometime. It's just a matter of when and how.

[twistjusty.livejournal.com]

Apparently, with what's bollixed now and what's about to be bollixed, the current President's nadir of populace affection is higher than the nadirs of the last eight predecessors of his office. Political ingenue that I am, I'm wondering why this is. I'm also wondering if the more socially and fiscally more liberal Mr. Nixon's popularity suffered because he didn't do enough to reach out to the fundamentalist/evangelical sort, or because they weren't organized enough at that point.

I'm pessimistic: I don't think indictments are going to impact the current President's popularity -- Iraq, CIA leak, flimsy claims of WMD evidence, sluggish federal emergency aid action just don't seem enough to disturb the TRUE BELIEVERS that seem to represent >40% of people polled. Having a base that doesn't waver apparently does a lot to ensure stability against events that chip away at one's approval rating. If voters were, on a whole, as rational and as conscious as this post's commenters (myself excepted, of course) appear to be, then I'd see some hope.