Obama 7 - now what?

[Plante26]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

That would be great, but William F. Buckley conservatives are scarcer than hen's teeth and are not likely to survive a nomination battle against a "Populist" right winger. When a party purges non-purist members it also purges non-purist voters, who become independents and no longer participate in the party nomination process. Radicalization of the party rump naturally follows.

See, I don't believe that the birthers and death panelers are the core of the the Republican Party....yet. Which is why I'm hoping that the party will start nominating solid conservatives with enough backbone to stop the hysteria of the birthers and death panelers. However, the Tea Partiers seem to have enveloped a very broad range of constituents.....even some local Dems up here have come out against the spending of the Obama Admin. Now again, there are some fringe characters that make the entire "movement" (for lack of a better word) look like lunatics. We've already conceded that both sides have their fringe elements, and that cannot be controlled. I'm very much for the central message of the tea partiers: Stopping the continued frivolous spending. I only wish that these groups could have voiced their opposition during the Bush Administration--which would have given much more credibility to their message.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Disagree about pinning this on Obama. Most of the rhetoric has come from the right. Now if you want to say its just a reversal of the rhetoric on the left from the Bush years, sure, but I don't blame the Prez. Bipartisanship is a two way street, and if the other side has no interest in reciprocating, then there's no point in delaying your agenda to keep trying to reach out to them. A big problem which I think a lot of right leaning posters might even agree with is that there's few moderates left in the GOP, so all you're dealing with is absolutists in the minority leadership who have no inclination to compromise. Guys like Bob Dole or Warren Rudman or John Warner might be more inclined to strike deals as that was their nature to do so and they were in a leadership position. Inhofe, DeMint, Vitter, etc - I just don't see it. The one guy who could, McCain, has adopted a really low profile which is disappointing as he alone has the credibility to reach across the aisle.

I don't disagree. I'm not pinning the "Washington culture" on Obama.

My point is that the campaign promise to change that culture was always disingenuous. It was a weapon that team Obama could use to club Clinton. It played up how divisive she was/is. It's also a fantastic strategy for any frontrunner. If you had a Super Tuesday like Obama's in 2008, you'd be decrying negative campaigning too! It kills 2 birds with one stone. It prevents negative campaigning from tarnishing you or from depressing turnout (something that was key to Obama's wins in the primary and general elections).

All of that is top-notch strategery. It had a purpose, and that purpose wasn't to change Washington. It was to win. And it did.

[Rover]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

amherst,

My take is that he thought he could change the culture of Washington and in some ways blamed the Clintons for the atmosphere of the 90's. I agree that he's realizing that's not the case now that he's actually in office, but like a lot of Presidents he probably thought he could have some effect on that.

Plante,

The problem with the GOP far right, which is different than the Dem far left, is that the right has money to wage campaigns both in the primaries and as independents. The Club for Growth seems to have the ability to pick and chose 10 races a year to make a big impact in. Little Ralphie Nader has trouble getting his candidate for dog catcher in his CT hometown across the finish line due to lack of funds, especially after the 2000 elections.

Both parties have narrow minded individuals residing in them. It seems though that only one has to deal a funding aparatus on par with the national party in some cases (meaning, there's a limit to how much money the RCCC will throw into an individual race with 200 to focus on, while one group focusing on a dozen can outspend then in some individual races). Combine a candidate who plays to the issues that drive out the hard core base (no abortion in any case, banning homosexuality, zero taxes, etc) with solid funding and I'd expect too far right candidates to be a problem in the near term. Also a very good point on the credibility issue regarding deficits. I can see any Dem candidate asking the question "will you support Cong. Boehner for Speaker, a guy who suppored (I believe) the unfunded perscription drug benefit".

[Kepler]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

I'm very much for the central message of the tea partiers: Stopping the continued frivolous spending. I only wish that these groups could have voiced their opposition during the Bush Administration--which would have given much more credibility to their message.

The tea parties have several core messages:

+ I don't trust the government (now that it's the Democrats)
+ Don't touch my guns
+ Abortion is murder
+ Copyright (c) 2009 News Corp.
+ I hate Barack Obama personally

There are a lot of strange fellows in that bed. You can't skim off the reasonable cream and call it the whole bottle. To mix a really awkward metaphor.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

I'm very much for the central message of the tea partiers: Stopping the continued frivolous spending. I only wish that these groups could have voiced their opposition during the Bush Administration--which would have given much more credibility to their message.

That isn't the core message. That's the sheep's clothing around the real messages.

[Bill]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

More government lying to make things sound better than they are:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...DmAgAD9BOJH300

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

More government lying to make things sound better than they are:

But officials defended the practice of counting raises as saved jobs.
"If I give you a raise, it is going to save a portion of your job," HHS spokesman Luis Rosero said.

That's a good one.

Still, something about it seems right. Bush lied to make things sound worse than they were. I guess we've got both bases covered now.

[DisplacedCornellian]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

That's a good one.

Still, something about it seems right. Bush lied to make things sound worse than they were. I guess we've got both bases covered now.

All politicians are liars, it's just a matter of whose perspective you like more. Whether it's doom and gloom or rainbows and unicorns, it's all a bunch of bs

[LynahFan]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

More government lying to make things sound better than they are:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...DmAgAD9BOJH300

I like this one:

At Southwest Georgia Community Action Council in Moultrie, Ga., director Myrtis Mulkey-Ndawula said she followed the guidelines the Obama administration provided. She said she multiplied the 508 employees by 1.84 — the percentage pay raise they received — and came up with 935 jobs saved.

Um, genius - if your staff's pay went up by 1.84%, then that should be .0184 x 508 = 9.35 jobs, not 935...

4th grade math FTW!

[DisplacedCornellian]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

I like this one:


Um, genius - if your staff's pay went up by 1.84%, then that should be .0184 x 508 = 9.35 jobs, not 935...

4th grade math FTW!

Either that or they got one HECK of a pay raise!

[Plante26]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Um, genius - if your staff's pay went up by 1.84%, then that should be .0184 x 508 = 9.35 jobs, not 935...

4th grade math FTW!

This is what happens when you let liberals near numbers......

They might want to go back and recheck the "numbers" in the health care bill.


"I must've put a decimal point in the wrong place or something. Sh*t, I always do that. I always mess up some mundane detail."

"Oh! Well, this is not a mundane detail, Michael!"

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Either that or they got one HECK of a pay raise!

Eh, if you're going to make s--- up anyway, what's an order of magnitude or two?