The Christmas Grinch List

[RS Davis]

The Christmas Grinch List

Immediately following what rabid Rightists dubbed "The most important election in the history of civilization" (i.e., the 2004 presidential vote-fest) came much teeth-grinding, fist-shaking and hair-yanking from losing Lefties about the "Stolen Election." Apparently, after generations of Democrats reportedly stealing elections from Republicans, the liberal set was shocked, shocked that the neocons just might have learned how to steal one from them.

Hollywood vainbrains vowed to flee the country while enraged Bush-bashers bogged down the email maze and webways with Appalling Predictions rivaling the Biblical End Times. One such digital diatribe contained the following foreboding forecast based on the Bush ballot win:

"… just wait until Christmas when gas prices are $3.25 a gallon, the stock market is floundering around 9,000, unemployment hits a 14-year high, Congress issues itself another pay raise, the military announces a "new forced retention" program, and the death toll in Iraq has topped 2,000 (yes, I'm making a prediction)."

Not being a biased Bush-basher myself (I'm an equal opportunity basher) I decided it would be fun to save this particular harangue and see what actually occurred between the email date (11/4/04) and Christmas Day, 2004.

Gas prices are $3.25 a gallon
The venerable American Auto Assn maintains a "Daily Fuel Gauge Report" on its site. Christmas day brought us a national average for regular unleaded go-juice of $1.797 per gallon. The price on November 4, the day of our sky-faller's prediction, was $2.01 per big gulp.

Stock market floundering around 9,000
From an AP article: "Investors filled with holiday cheer sent Wall Street's major indexes to new multi-year highs …" Result: the Dow floundered around 10,827 at Christmas break.

Unemployment hits 14-year high
The obvious place to go for this info is the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics web site. I hate doing this because a) there's this infamous aphorism about "lies, damned lies and statistics," variously attributed to Mark Twain, Benjamin Disraeli or any civil serpent serving in the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and b) I'm convinced (realistically? Paranoidally?) that whenever I visit a government web site they inject spyware into my computer. These days, any citizen interested in one's own government represents a potential threat. Anyway, their stats are reported monthly. December numbers not being available at this posting, the November 2004 unemployment rate was 5.4%. The predicted fourteen-year high actually occurred in June 1992 at 7.8%.

Congress issues itself another pay raise
Duh! Everyone can predict this – it's automatic unless the wastrels vote against it. Whadaya think? Next year they'll pluck us for over $160,000 per wastrel.

Military announces "new forced retention" program
This is a tough one. Forced retention programs have been ongoing. I've been watching news headlines from my favorite sources (ISIL-Freedom News Daily, Rational Review News Digest, Plug Nickel Times) but haven't noticed reports of any "new" programs. But, since our governmental war-mongrels don't need to obey the same laws we do, why would they "announce" that they're extending enlistments whenever they wish, for as long as they wish?

Death toll in Iraq topped 2,000
In late October, Libertarian Today posted an AP article headlined, "Report: Up to 100,000 Iraqis killed since start of invasion, mostly women and children." Iraqbodycount.net features a cadaver counter, which tallies an estimated 14,880 to 17,076 Iraqi deaths from war's beginning through December 25. But let's assume that our wolf-crier was only concerned with total US military deaths, not total war deaths. Antiwar.com reported 1,324 total American military deaths (1,041 in combat) as of Yuletide, 2004.

Our poor Chicken Little (whom I mercifully opted to keep anonymous) apparently couldn't fathom what libertarians already understand: that one particular powercrat winning the President's perch has no effect on these kinds of predictions. What congresscrat cares who's president when automatic pay-raise time rolls around? "Gee, Kerry is Prez so now we'll vote against more public pelf!" Iraqi death tolls and "forced retentions?" While politicians' promises aren't worth the lungful of air it takes to mouth them, I don't recall Kerry promising to immediately pull us out of the Middle East. And what exactly did our master forecaster think President Kerry was going to do about the price of gas, the rate of unemployment or stock prices that Bush couldn't or wouldn't have done?

But, hey, in a free society anyone can make predictions. So here's mine, a safe one: government will get bigger, more intrusive, more abusive and more expensive, no matter who is president.

Happy New Year.
- Garry Reed

[Garry Reed]

Just for the record, here's the entire email (still minus the author's name) that I based my article upon. I've invited the author to respond to this forum.

Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 11:52 PM
Subject: Little Lord Fauntretard sure didn't waste any time
Apparently, Halliburton just isn't making profit fast enough.
This is just day one. Just think of the carnage the imbecile-in-chief is going to wreak over the next four years since he no longer has to concern himself with re-election. If you voted for Little Lord Fauntretard, you've surrendered the right to bitch about how he's going to rape us between now and 2008. And just wait until Christmas when gas prices are $3.25 a gallon, the stock market is floundering around 9,000, unemployment hits a 14-year high, Congress issues itself another pay raise, the military announces a "new forced retention" program, and the death toll in Iraq has topped 2,000 (yes, I'm making a prediction).
Just four days ago, the imbecile-in-chief promised he would not raise taxes. Can't wait to see the "magic beans" accounting that's going to pay for an EIGHT TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT.

[RS Davis]

People like the author of this email bother me, So willing to drop bombs and make wild hallucinatory accusations, but completely devoid of reason and logic. There are so many valid reasons to criticize Bush, why make things up and invent baseless conspiracy theories? It just serves to make others who have come to intelligent opposition to Bush look like instable whackadoos, too.

Garry sent me an email about this guy, who is unwilling to take us on over here (as if we're a bunch of pro-war Republicans or something):

Hi Rick,
Looks like our third party doesn't want to come out and play nicely on the Loose Cannon discussion board. He responded to me in an email but so far hasn't participated in the forum. His response to me was predictably full of anger, with plenty of ad hominem attacks, and rambling far afield from his original email and my article. For example, while he (justifiably) calls Bush a serial liar regarding reasons for attacking Iraq, he never explains what that has to do with the price of gasoline on Christmas Day in the US. And while he calls the Irag war "blatant oil baron profiteering" he doesn't explain how electing Kerry in 2004 (the only realistic alternative) would have made anything any different (as though he believes the old cliché that only Republicans would fight a war for oil). Anyway, you can add this email to the forum if you wish. Millions of people hate Bush so much that they can't think straight, so I think this would make for interesting discussion.
Garry

Any thoughts on this, Freedomphiles?

- Rick

[RS Davis]

I've been having an email discussion with Mr Reed about the author of the original email (who still refuses to defend his position), and Garry told me I should reprint what I wrote in response to him. He said, "And I also want you to post your own comments below!! It's the best summation of the One Party Uber alles I think I've ever read (unless, he said humbly, you don't count the op-ed I wrote for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, which they titled "Let's call the whole thing off[/url]" (which was not what my article was saying) by clicking on the highlight...."

So here it is:
-------------------------------
In a message dated 1/4/05 11:28:18 AM Central Standard Time, [e-mail] writes:

That’s pretty much what I would have expected after that original email. He probably thinks you’re a Republican. People can really put the blinders on sometimes. To tell the truth, this last election annoyed the hell out of me. I think the two party system ought to come right out and say it – the Republicans and Democrats are the crips and the bloods. They act like there is a difference – they have grand battles over these differences – but at the end of the day, they are still a bunch of thieves and murderers. They get everyone worked up over these minor differences (like, I’m a Republican and I disagree with you, Mr Daschle, about the best way to rob the American people of their freedom!) and blind them to the fact that the only real truth is that both parties are fighting for the same thing – power. It’s a turf war, not a battle of ideology. Crips and Bloods. It was enough to make me want to run around and throw rhetorical Molotov cocktails.

- Rick

[outgirl]

OK...First let me be clear. You know how incensed I get when the libertarians constantly argue that there is no difference between the two major parties. As a gay american the differences are felt very personally. That said, I will leave the issue of equality out of this discussion and for the purpose of this discusion only, allow that presumption to stand without debate.

I agree that many people exagerated certain things to make a case against Bush. You all know how I feel about Michael Moore and he is a good case in point. I was a reluctant Kerry supporter. I really felt the options were so poor in this last election that I wanted to move to Canada just to avoid it...and hey maybe meet a nice girl and get married as a bonus. (OK, I guess I can't leave equality out of discussion...sorry) But there were enough legitimate reasons to oppose another 4 yrs of this administration without the need to create false ones. I am also guilty of believing that a Bush win would be disasterous though my predictions were not so easily measurable in the short term. My concerns for more war look more justified daily as we now are talking about Iran's nuclear capabilities and the 11 discriminatory constitutional ammendments that were passed have also increased my concerns about what a Bush win will mean for gays. He has vowed to continue to try to pass a federal ammendment banning equality. Now we must wait and see if his commitment to the religious right was real or just pandering for votes. While I hope the latter is true, either makes him a poor choice for me. My greatest fear is and always has been judicial appointments to the higher courts. But you are right. The sky has not fallen...yet. I actually have a renewed hope in america as far as gay rights though evidence is a little mixed based on those 11 ammendments whether I'm just going nuts or there really is reason to be hopeful. I never believed a Kerry win would have made a huge difference in the war or the economy at this point. Now a Gore win in 2000 may have changed things but that's just speculation. So we will have to wait and see what 4 more yrs brings us. Were the predictions of the world's end under Bush a little exagerated? Well, probably. But then again, a lot can happen in 4 yrs. More war? Probably. Will we extend ourselves too thin around the globe? I don't know. I have stopped discussing the war on these forums because I've accepted that I am insignificant in these decisions. My government does not represent me. Will Bush continue to support anti gay legislation? My hope is that it won't be a priority since his election.

As far as the above email is concerned, I'm not sure what I am to say here. Was he a little over zealous and reactionary in his predictions...sure.
But if you want me to say that it's all going to be ok under another 4 yrs of Bush, well it's a little too early for that rosey prediction as well. The avid Bush supporters seem just as unrealistic as the avid Bush haters. I voted. I did my best. The majority have spoken and like most other elections before and after the Clinton yrs, I find my self on the losing end. I have come to accept that I will probalbly always be on the losing end but what else can I do?

[RS Davis]

Well, I agree that Kerry was better on gay issues. Had he been neutral on gay issues, that would have still been better.

That being said, my point isn't that they are the same as much as they are not that different. What I mean is, they may both have different views on how to take away freedom (except for PATRIOT, which was a fine example of the horror bipartisanship brings) and which freedoms to take away, but at the end of the day, you are still less free.

My point is really that their concern for you and me begins and ends with how we can help them accrue more power. That's why groups like blacks, gays, seniors, Christians, etc are all pretty much ignored until election time, when they might be persuaded to shore up the power base of the candidates that can best exploit them.

Good post!

- Rick