September 3, 2000

8:22 AM

Too stupid to be president.The Ethical Spectacle writes a condemnation of George Bush which is really a condemnation of the Republican Party which is really a condemnation of the American politcal system. What I wonder is, would the Democrats fare any better under the same magnifying glass?
posted by mrmorgan (3 comments total)

Although I agree with the main points and generally appreciate the arguments, if Jonathan Wallace's writing is in indication, then he's no better than George W. Bush. The essay reads like a melange of two different pieces, one an editorial calling George W. Bush a dolt, the other pretending to be familiar with the concept of Athenian democracy and the Federalist papers. I consider loose editing, misplaced commas, misspellings and awkward phrasing to be red flags for careless writing. That, plus the gratuitous mention of Thoreau, the incompatible use of the word "fuck," the misapplication of a simple engineering principle and an over-simplification of the 1987 Tax Reform Act, render the essay, in my opinion, unworthy of serious consideration.
posted by Mo Nickels at 8:49 AM on September 3, 2000

It's a bit of a first-year college essay, isn't it? Based on barely-digested political textbookery and misinterpreted history.
posted by holgate at 11:43 PM on September 3, 2000

I doubt that Dems would fare any better, they're just the lesser of two evils. A mediocre electorate = mediocre leaders. 'Nuff said!
posted by Mr. skullhead at 4:58 PM on September 5, 2000