I'm starting to wonder why anyone would want to win the presidency in '08 (I know, rhetorical question). Who would like to inherit the wreckage of the shrub debacle?
The economy is in shambles, the deficit is huge, and the American infrastructure is falling apart after years of neglect. The latest example being the cleanup of the S.F. Bay oil spill, where the response was slower and weaker than a cleanup roughly 20 years ago. What does this portend for a federal response in the event of a major earthquake?
Global warming continues to get worse, but the efforts to address it are pitiful. Energy demand and prices will continue to increase, but the development of alternatives are so weak as to be useless. The technology is there but the development isn't.
The next president will inherit the Iraq quagmire, where "things are getting better" means that the violence is down to the level of 2005, like that was a rosy time. And shrub still has over a year to fuck up the rest of the region (which one will be the next disaster? Place your bets now).
I wish that I thought that one of the candidates looked to be the potential "great president" who could repair the damage and inspire a bright new future. I don't see one.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I am constantly reminded of the 30 years of weak and ineffectual presidents that led up to the Civil War.
I don't think the next cycle is going to bring us our Abe Lincoln. We're still stuck in it.
Of course, all those bad years destroyed the Whigs and brought us the Republicans.
Makes new parties seem like the answer, eh?
Post a Comment