Comments on: PDS - President Derangement Syndrome

by: Polimom Says » McCain, he says?

Mon, 21 Jan 2008 01:45:08 +0000

[…] But while I don’t suffer from BDS (or CDS, or any other PDS variety), I am supremely unhappy with the Republicans. From where I sit, in fact, that’s the biggest minus in McCain’s column at the moment. The fact that he has to fight against his party on such issues tells us a lot about the GOP today. […]

by: etee's Blog

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:46:08 +0000

WMDs discovered on local blog; Pentagon prepares to attack…

This morning, intelligence sources made a startling discovery: the virus that causes Presidential Derangement Syndrome (PDS) has mutated, and is infecting mass numbers of people with a new strain called Widely Manifested Derangement syndrome (WMDs).
…

by: Polimom Says » Watch out for the wives

Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:07:34 +0000

[…] But the need to point to Clinton (a common symptom of one form of PDS) has apparently overtaken rationality, as evidenced by the Wall Street Journal’s editorialists (Opinion Journal): As it happens, Mrs. Clinton is just the Senator to walk point on this issue of dismissing U.S. attorneys because she has direct personal experience. In any Congressional probe of the matter, we’d suggest she call herself as the first witness–and bring along Webster Hubbell as her chief counsel. […]

by: Polimom Says » PDS — still the State of our Union

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:58:05 +0000

[…] We’re just seeing the ongoing symptoms of PDS (President Derangement Syndrome). […]

by: The Moderate Voice

Fri, 08 Sep 2006 16:00:37 +0000

Is There A Political Affliction Named “PDS?”…

Decide after you read this….

by: Polimom

Fri, 08 Sep 2006 12:51:30 +0000

At least one of the folks I know who are “done in” by our politically poisonous atmosphere is making campaign contributions to candidates in districts other than his. Specifically — although he’s a Republican, he’s actively supporting a Libertarian in another part of Texas… and he would have supported a Democrat, but they didn’t put up a candidate.

In my case, I guess that might translate to long distance support for a moderate elsewhere, even though it won’t help me personally.

by: Glide

Fri, 08 Sep 2006 12:13:16 +0000

Well…….that’s an interesting idea, but what “opposition”? So far all I’ve seen emerge is Kinky Friedman on the State Level and the “Libertarians” on a National level, but they seem doomed to putting forth a raft of candidates that more resemble walleyed crackpots at a Trekie convention. Without some total overhaul of the entire system, probably meaning Constitutional reform and amendment, I see us stuck forever with the “least of two evils” type situation we’ve been in for as long as I can remember and to my mind that’s just awful and it gets worse with each passing election season because the system doesn’t reward and promote “leaders”, it rewards and promotes pitchmen/women, artful in the decietful practices of spin and misinforming the electorate. At the rate we’re going, in twenty years we’ll be seeing an election where Paris Hilton and a David Duke clone are vying for the Presidency.

by: Polimom

Thu, 07 Sep 2006 23:12:46 +0000

“The only way to get this fixed is to withold financial support from either of the two partys and to insure the “winners” do so without a mandate.”

Glide — I know a number of people who are not only witholding support, they’re actively contributing to the opposition at this point.

by: Glide

Thu, 07 Sep 2006 17:06:19 +0000

I seriously doubt we’ll ever look like a “unified” country again; after giving your post much thought I’d have to say that I’m struck by your line, “Polimom’s vote will go to candidates that can speak without spraying spittle across the microphone.” I’m frankly stumped to understand how any intelligent human can vote for a candidate of either of the two parties. Neither Party acts like one; neither adhere’s to it’s advertized agenda; in the National elections, the candidates and the elected are more beholden to the Lobies and special interest groups that funded their campaigns and line their pockets while in office. In ‘08 some slimy piece of dirt will win the White House on the lies it’s told to the gullible who once again will believe the lies. In the wake of the debacle of Katrina, which showed how impotent this gov’t is; in the wake of the open borders program which shows how corrupted this gov’t is on the one hand and impotent to protect national borders it is on the other, I’d like to know how anyone can continue to support this gov’t with a “vote”? I’ll not again so support this gov’t unless and until such time as it’s been drastically overhauled. The present system is an insult to intelligence, a pointless economic ripoff and lethal when allowed to act on the world stage. The horror of this situation is that we certainly can’t trust the twisted miscreants in the gov’t to overhaul the system; so nothing will change. But perhaps the day will come when a slimy dirtbag is elected to the White House only to realize that only 30% of the eligible electorate put him/her there; realizing he/she has no mandate or real authority to do anything. The only way to get this fixed is to withold financial support from either of the two partys and to insure the “winners” do so without a mandate.

by: john cobarruvias

Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:21:30 +0000

yea.
Like DUH!

:-)