Obama V: For Vendetta

[SPIN CONTROL]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

You would have thought that the O-man would be a better QB,

Why would anyone think he woud have been a better QB when politically speaking his experience prior to the Presidency was akin to being the waterboy for the practice squad?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

What does that say about us??

It says we live in the world as it has always been, not the technicolor rough individualist past that only exists in selective memory.

There's a reasonable place for collective investment in a collective good, where individual user fees don't make any sense. Public sidewalks aren't soul-crippling, they're sensible.

Somalia beckons for anyone who wants to play Farnham's Freehold.

 

[joecct]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

It says we live in the world as it has always been, not the technicolor rough individualist past that only exists in selective memory.

There's a reasonable place for collective investment in a collective good, where individual user fees don't make any sense. Public sidewalks aren't soul-crippling, they're sensible.

Somalia beckons for anyone who wants to play Farnham's Freehold.

Who said sidewalks were bad or good roads, or good schools? The government should establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and see to it that these benefits, along with liberty, are passed on to our decendents. No more, no less. Granted there are those who would want to drive a truck through that, but in general if the government did the basics of the above we would all be better off.

But now, have we ceded too much back to the government??

I am too young to remember, but what happend before Medicare/Medicaid? I do remember house calls by the family doctor (and TV repairman).

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

I am too young to remember, but what happend before Medicare/Medicaid? I do remember house calls by the family doctor (and TV repairman).

What happened was if you had money you went to a doctor, if you had a strong social network somebody nursed you, and if you had neither you died.

The same was pretty much true for your TV.

Small, close-knit communities where people know each other have self-organized charity -- Mr. Jones hasn't been at church, I'll look him up and see if he needs any help. There's a reason why the guys I work with all think social welfare programs are theft or rewards for the lazy or weak or shiftless minorities or whatever. It's because they live in villages of a few hundred where they know everybody and their parents and kids all live within a few miles -- if something goes wrong, there's somebody around who cares enough to help you.

That doesn't work in big cities or car-stretched suburbs or transient areas where people are forever moving in and out and have no immediate family. The impersonality of government programs reflects the impersonality of a "free," mobile, nuclear-family centered philosophy. If you want to roll back government, you can't just remove the safety net it provides, you need to address the root causes. The main cause is that the wealth and personal freedom of one half of our culture undermines the traditionalism and down-home values of the other half. The left wants to glory in the former while ignoring the latter; the right wants to do the exact opposite. Neither side has figured out that they're living a contradiction.

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

A few points on all this:

1) Obama is going through somewhat of the same things Clinton did. He's taking a bit of time to get settled and govern with the overwhelming majority that he has. That's not too surprising, and when he got it together, Clinton's presidency was the best in a generation (unfortunately for him he'd lost Congress before he got on track). Obama's unlike a guy like Bush II who had a lot more exposure to the WH in that his father had been there as Prez or VP for 12 years. My read on the man is that he sees the same things everybody else does (unlike GWB for example) so I'd expect him to adapt.

2) I do reject the notion that they haven't done anything though. There's too much of a "what have you done for me lately" attitude. The admin, along with the previous one, did a tremendous job stabilizing the financial industry. Had either one of them followed conservative dogma, unemployement would be at 20% and there's be no big financial houses left. Furthermore, they saved the car industry and the hundreds of thousands of jobs that go with it despite public misgivings about the plan. They're also proceeding with the pull out of Iraq, which you can't do overnight as some seem to want, but which is on schedule if not a little ahead of schedule. Same with emptying Gitmo.

3) I'm very amused by all of these projections over an election over 14 months away. Its fun for us to speculate, but if you're actually changing your stance on issues over a bogus poll or a hypothetical matchup that far in the future what good are you? For a little history lesson, 2 months before the 06 elections few people saw the House flipping. Two hours before the election even less thought the Senate would go. Until October of 2010 rolls around, there will be little clarity in all of this (BTW - since when is a 50% to 40% approval rating a bad thing? ).


Having said all that, clearly the administration has hit a rough spot. Winning this generational battle for universal health care - really liberalisms final unfulfilled agenda item, and I suspect he'll be back on track.

 

[rufus]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

In other words, do exactly what the Dems did in 2006 and 2008. Hey, it worked.

The Dems are getting caught in a vise between a lack of courage of convictions and the GOP pretending it's still in power. If the first 8 months taught the Dems anything it's that there is no possibility for bipartisanship (the GOP feels they would be foolish to grant the Dems any legitimacy at all when their rhetoric to their base is This is the End Times!). The next 8 months ought to be about laying the groundwork for the midterms by forcing every vote to the floor and getting all the Republicans and the handful of Blue Dogs on record for all their nay votes. 2010 will then be about who "did nothing." If the country sees where the Dems are trying to go as worse than going nowhere, then the Dems will lose strength. If the country sees the GOP and the Blue Dogs as sabotaging the 2008 election results by stonewalling, then they'll be punished.

The most serious mistake the Dems can make is continuing to parlay and allowing their opponents to have it both ways. Make them defend the status quo by voting to continue it -- force them on record. Then we'll have a real contrast rather than a game of Beltway BS. My guess is if the Dems put it in stark terms, the GOP will overplay their hand wildly by continuing to encourage the screamers, the deathers, the birthers, etc, and Obama will come off looking like Mr. Smith trying to reform Washington but being plowed under by the Machine.

Shorter Kepler: the Dems need to grow some balls.

 

[rufus]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

Good in theory, but everyone knows the Dems are way too spineless to do anything like that. They can't get out of their own way long enough to become that organized. They were handed the government including 60 votes in the senate which basically mutes the GOP and the Dems STILL bow to the pressure. They have no cohesion, no leadership and no friggin balls. They have been whining for years about all these grand ideas they have and how the country will be better off with them, now they literally can pass them all, they can push through an entire agenda and they can't fall over themselves fast enough to screw the whole thing up.

They are shooting themselves in the foot because everything they ran on they are backing out of now that they can push it through. The gays are ticked at Obama because he hasnt repealed Dont Ask, Dont Tell despite promising too. The Dems are losing the Health Care debate despite that being a tentpole of the past election and part of why they got into office and have all the power. They havent gotten us out of Iraq or taken steps to do so, Gitmo is still open last I checked despite Obamas decree...its like the Dems don't know what to do when they aren't yelling about other people in power. They are the dog chasing the car they dont know what to do if they ever actually caught it.

Which in large part you can account for Obama's drop in the polls. I think the largest drops are among independents. You run on a platform,get elected because of it, you have the votes in the Congress to enact that program, and then you twiddle your thumbs and prevaricate and don't pass any of it, what do you expect people to think about you?

Like I said before, grow some balls and ram your legislation through, and don't give an eff what other people, especially the opposition party, say or think. That's what Bush did for eight years.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

The Dems always want people to love them and thank them for the scales dropping from their eyes. The GOP just swings an axe yelling "elections have consequences"! If there really were no difference, it would be so much more satisfying to be the latter.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

Which in large part you can account for Obama's drop in the polls. I think the largest drops are among independents. You run on a platform,get elected because of it, you have the votes in the Congress to enact that program, and then you twiddle your thumbs and prevaricate and don't pass any of it, what do you expect people to think about you?

Like I said before, grow some balls and ram your legislation through, and don't give an eff what other people, especially the opposition party, say or think. That's what Bush did for eight years.

****ed right, and he got reelected for doing it. The people want someone who acts, not someone who sits by and governs by the polls which is exactly what the Dems are known for.

Dont tell Rover though he thinks everything is AOK and the Dems are leading us to the new utopia...funny how no one but the biased seem to think so

Maybe Obama and the Dems need to watch the American President so he can see what saying nothing and doing even less when the opposition is mounting an offensive and politicking their way up the charts does to you in the polls.

 

[French Rage]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

Maybe Obama and the Dems need to watch the American President so he can see what saying nothing and doing even less when the opposition is mounting an offensive and politicking their way up the charts does to you in the polls.

I just think Obama needs to start doing Annette Benning. Those would be some fine looking kids. And Warren would probably be cool with it.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

I just think Obama needs to start doing Annette Benning. Those would be some fine looking kids. And Warren would probably be cool with it.

Annette Benning is probably about 60 now.

 

[French Rage]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

Annette Benning is probably about 60 now.

I never said it would be an easy pregnancy.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

I never said it would be an easy pregnancy.

I was more worried about the consummation.

 

[ScottM]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

I just think Obama needs to start doing Annette Benning. Those would be some fine looking kids. And Warren would probably be cool with it.

For some reason, I think Michelle might have a problem with this approach. Then again ...

 

[SPIN CONTROL]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

Maybe Obama and the Dems need to watch the American President so he can see what saying nothing and doing even less when the opposition is mounting an offensive and politicking their way up the charts does to you in the polls.

They drink the sand Louis because they don't know the difference.

 

[geezer]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

Clinton's presidency was the best in a generation

lost your credibility a little early in that rant. Talk about selective memories.
Clinton, though, has had a very positively productive post-white house career. The man gets a lot of good things done (and makes an incredible bundle of moolah doing it. kapitalist pig).

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

lost your credibility a little early in that rant.

He didn't have any to start with.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

lost your credibility a little early in that rant. Talk about selective memories.
Clinton, though, has had a very positively productive post-white house career. The man gets a lot of good things done (and makes an incredible bundle of moolah doing it. kapitalist pig).

Dueling bias aside, which was better? Carter folded under the oil crisis. Reagan I was great rhetoric but inaugurated our modern huge deficits, Reagan II was a miasma of "I don't recall." Bush Sr. was a good presidency despite stonewalling on Iran-Contra and putting tax payers $s at risk to recover from the "regulation? who needs that?" S&L disaster. Clinton I built on Bush to balance the budget and got real welfare reform. Clinton II treadd water despite the GOP's lame crucifixion re-enactment. Dubya was a disaster from the moment of the coup d'etat, 9 months before failing to protect the nation from attack, and a year before Cheney dressed him up as Eva Braun.

Granted, it's a weak division, but Clinton shades Poppy.

--- Clinton
1.5 Bush Sr.
8.0 Reagan
11.0 Carter
81.5 Dubya

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

You would have thought that the O-man would be a better QB, but it seems like he's just carrying the clipboard on the sidelines and cheering his team on to mediocrity while The Three Stooges (aka Pelosi, Reid and Waxman) run the backfield.

Frankly, I expected more of him when I voted for him. If he's not more decisive, his approval ratings will be racing Congress' to the basement.

Dunno. I think Rover has a point that its a bit early.

Even so...outside of some work on the economy and working to reassure the American people, a president who just handles crisis may be just what the country needs. The backfield on the other hand may turn out to be a problem.

--- Clinton
1.5 Bush Sr.
8.0 Reagan
11.0 Carter
81.5 Dubya

Pretty good read...maybe Sr is a bit high. And frankly, W is far enough down where he's difficult to see from here.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Obama V: For Vendetta

I'm sorry, I just have to comment on how funny it is to continue to watch Kepler use "Dubya" like it's an insult. His own family calls him that and it was used in his election campaign for Governor of Texas. I had a "Dubya" button in 2000.

But, as long as you think you're being clever (which is practically always, when it's usually never), you keep on keeping on. Looking dumb hasn't stopped you in the past.