Why Can't Our Politicians Be Like This?
 

YouTube Video

Garry Kasparov was on Real Time last night and said more in 5 minutes than all the candidates for the US presidency have said combined. What Chris Matthews says at the end is spot-on.

I don't feel like any of our candidates are as smart as Kasparov, or maybe they are and they just aren't allowed to show it thanks to the fact that some dumbass hick won two elections in a row. I don't know.

I do know that it's pretty goddamn unfair that we can't have any major candidates who are this forthcoming.

Odd, I thought he sounded like a blithering imbecile who spouts the same soundbite nonsense that is made to sound like some enlightening statement. Comparing the Bush Administration to Putin's Russia, what a moron. I'm not sure what was more disturbing, the fact that he said it, or that he may actually believe that. But hey, this totalitarian state is good enough for him to seek refuge, eh?

The guy is a glorified hack, IMO.

And Chris Matthews, please. I wouldn't waste valuable time listening to that stupid chimp.

I wish our politicians were more like Michael Eric Dyson.

I'm pretty sure he was actually pointing out how the Bush administration isn't like Putin's Russia, or did the approval rating comment fly right over your head?

Michael Dyson, Chris Matthews, Bill Maher, wow, we've got quite an idiot parade going on today.

I'm also pretty sure they are not Objectivists, I dunno though.

No, really, do you actually have anything to contribute to this thread, or are you just going to be contrarian?

You're not helping.

If you must have it, have it then.

I have a threshold as to what I can consider reasonable to even debate. A man who seeks refuge for his family in the U.S. who then compares its leaders to Putin's defacto-dictatorship, you see where I might have difficulty taking this man seriously?

And Bill Maher, who's rightfully still embittered from Politically Incorrect getting axed, wastes his talent on lowbrow, glorified shock-jock commentary while making lucid points every so often.

"I think that with the same tight control of media, and with the same pervasive security force, that Bush and Cheney could enjoy the same kind of approval rating."

You are a fucking idiot. He explicitly stated that the Bush administration is not a police state.

Bill Maher is doing pretty much the same thing he did on Politically Incorrect, and while I can't say I'm a fan, it's not like he has any real bearing on this topic (Kasparov good politician Americans bad politicians).

Chris Mathews being spot-on has nothing to do with whether Chris Mathews is generally a moron, he is saying that Kasparov isn't talking down to people like our own politicians do, and he's right! Have you heard any American politician talk about the dynamics of world oil prices in real terms?

You're trolling this thread with absolutely irrelevant garbage. Stop being an ass.

We should all really hate people who protect their family when reporters who oppose said government have been shot to death.

And what Brady said. You haven't refuted a single thing in this thread yet. What did you say in your first post..."soundbite nonsense"? Do you have anything more for us?


Hackers Take Down the Most Wired Country in Europe

The comment at that point could have been taken either way, IMO. But I will say that he was spot on with the way Putin is pretty much having his way with Bush, it's becoming painfully obvious and has been for quite sometime.

Overall he appears somewhat western friendly, but who knows. His rhetoric could just all be mere public consumption.

Your opinion is full of crap.

"Are you relying on the polling results in a police state?"

It's pretty obvious what he is insinuating. Maybe you could've followed the interview if you weren't so busy working up your meaningless talking points.

I wonder if a lot of the reason our politicians nowadays talk down to us so much is because they have to go through ten people before they say a word and they have the continual pressure of the media and whatnot on their shoulders to be sure they don't misspeak at all. Because of that they have to speak in bullshit generalities and never actually say anything for fear of scaring off all of their voters.

Damn do we need someone to run that's completely willing to speak their mind instead of what all the pundits want them to say.

A++ video, though.

It is a shame that these someone are both Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul.

The only people that are willing to speak their minds are unelectable ideologues.

This, by the way, is why Kasparov can say all that he says here; he comes into this having no chance of winning the Russian presidency, so it doesn't matter what he says.

I am totally unclear as to why we allow people to talk when they are so clearly in love with John Galt as to be embarrassing. The moment you select the crazy bitch who wrote a "rape by invitation" into her books as a person worth quoting, your credibility flies right out the window.

(it makes this fweeeeeeeeeee sound when it does so, it is comedy)

Yea, I watch Bill Maher regularly, and seeing Gerry Kasparov talk was inspiring to say the least. I personally liked what he had to say on the show, however I dont know his political stance or views yet.


Anyway, I think most politicians can't say what they really want to say because they want the votes from everyone, and can't risk saying something that might turn off anyone. And if and when they do say something, it's either dodged or vauged out so you can't exactly understand his/her pure stance. I just wish they could be more real and true towards the american public.

If democracy is the voice of the people, why is it that "unelectable ideologues" are, well, unelectable? It seems that the system isn't working very well if the only people who can retain power are the ones that are neutral in every regard, is it not?

It is so because any non-neutral stance leads to debate, and debate in turn leads to the chance that their opinion might be unpopular. No way around it except revolution. Also, since our "elected" officials (even though I am canadian, it still applies) only represent a certain minority of multi-national CEOs/investors, and feed their bullcrap rethoric to a great majority of the population which is less educated, this type of thing tends to happen often without there being much commotion or questionning of the actual benift to society of such phenomena.