Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

[Rover]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I'm pretty amused by the talking heads thinking this Catholic Church thing will have any effect on Obama's re-election. How many Catholics between the ages of 16-45, married or not, have never used contraception? I'm going to say 1, who plays QB for the Denver Broncos, and that's pretty much it. So basically people are supposed to get all riled up over something that they engage in themselves? Got it...

As far as The Mittster goes, he can't even win over Evangelicals in his own party. I fail to see how he then wins over lapsed Catholics without a strong allegiance to either party.

Beyond that, while I agree with the "its early" statement, Romney's problem is a combination of he's well known and not well liked. Dukakis was not well known, therefore it was easy to paint a picture of him via negative advertising (and his own poor performance as a candidate). I can't think of another major party candidate like him in my lifetime, perhaps Mondale who was certainly well known and had his own problems getting out of the primaries. Even losing but well known politicians like Dole and McCain were well thought of personally when they ran, no doubt in part because of their war heroism (something else Mittens lacks).

 

[bronconick]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Obama screwed the pooch on the contraception thing. Romney's actually getting street cred from Catholics now.

Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

Satan worshipping Papists? Big deal.

/is Catholic.
// every Catholic I know uses birth control except one family that had 8 kids.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

A comment that was made is, I think, very telling of the problems that we are having in this country. The first time I remember noticing it was while Clinton was president, it continued to pick up steam while W. was president, and it is still going on now. I'm thinking of the old bumper stickers that said that [then-NRA president] Charlton Heston is MY president. People said crap like that about Bush as well. Now we hear it about Obama. But here's the thing...

Clinton was EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT. George W. Bush was EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT. And Obama is EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT.

If anyone is stuck with him, we all are. Same went for W. Same went for Clinton. And every other U.S. President. Regardless of who made the comment on this occasion, the fact is that as long as so many of us see two America's, "Our America" and "Their America" we are all ****ed. The thing I like about Obama, maybe the best thing about him (and for the record, yes I do like Obama) is that I believe that he tried to take those two Americas and put them back together.

I know I will be lambasted by the conservatives for refusing to see Obama for what he is, and that I'll be lambasted by the other liberals for secretly being a fascist, but I really think that the whole "United we stand, divided we fall" thing might be a good lesson. Disagree with me about Obama, but I don't see how anyone can view the pig-headed refusal to accept the potential for legitimacy in anyone else's point of view as anything but a destructive force.

Pardon the interruption. Carry on the pig-headed refusals while I go back to sitting quietly in the corner.

I think the "us vs. them" phenomenon is a natural progression as power gets more and more centralized by the federal gov't. There is far more at stake now than their ever has been. I honestly don't think we are going to get away from it until we take power away from Washington and give more of it back to the States.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

A comment that was made is, I think, very telling of the problems that we are having in this country. The first time I remember noticing it was while Clinton was president, it continued to pick up steam while W. was president, and it is still going on now. I'm thinking of the old bumper stickers that said that [then-NRA president] Charlton Heston is MY president. People said crap like that about Bush as well. Now we hear it about Obama. But here's the thing...

Clinton was EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT. George W. Bush was EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT. And Obama is EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT.

If anyone is stuck with him, we all are. Same went for W. Same went for Clinton. And every other U.S. President. Regardless of who made the comment on this occasion, the fact is that as long as so many of us see two America's, "Our America" and "Their America" we are all ****ed. The thing I like about Obama, maybe the best thing about him (and for the record, yes I do like Obama) is that I believe that he tried to take those two Americas and put them back together.

I know I will be lambasted by the conservatives for refusing to see Obama for what he is, and that I'll be lambasted by the other liberals for secretly being a fascist, but I really think that the whole "United we stand, divided we fall" thing might be a good lesson. Disagree with me about Obama, but I don't see how anyone can view the pig-headed refusal to accept the potential for legitimacy in anyone else's point of view as anything but a destructive force.

Thank you!

 

[MUnRPI]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I think the "us vs. them" phenomenon is a natural progression as power gets more and more centralized by the federal gov't. There is far more at stake now than their ever has been. I honestly don't think we are going to get away from it until we take power away from Washington and give more of it back to the States.

Exactly. People might not like this but the roots of the Tea Party and OWS movements were formed over the same principal: People are sick of corruption. Washington is useless. We can't reform an archaic tax code because of Wall Street lobbyists, we can't reform a failing education system because the teachers union etc. etc. There is corruption on both sides of the aisle, public sector and private sector. We need a president who can lead the country, not polarize it. Unfortunately, none of the presidential candidates are leaders and we are in for another four years of shenanigans

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

What people should do then is vote for and encourage all efforts to put redistricting into the hands of a non partisan committee. Take two examples this year, CA and AZ. There's a lot of angst and turnover in the CA delegation but you know what - that's the breaks. Congressional districts need to make geographic sense and if that forces some tough decisions so be it. Arizona's law withstood a highly partisan challenge from Insane Old Sea Hag Jan Brewer who tried to impeach the independent head of the redistricting commission for no other reason than the map wasn't partisan enough for her. A lot of entrenched politicans are going to have a problem with this but its the best and most realistic way to change things. In Mass, which doesn't have a commission, the legislature miraculously came up with a map that really could have been drawn independently. Fat slob Barney Frank was too upset about having to actually come back to Massachusetts and introduce himself to new voters so he ended up retiring instead. So be it if he can't be bothered to do that. I think you'd see a lot less gridlock if people had to run in less than air tight districts.

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Obama screwed the pooch on the contraception thing. Romney's actually getting street cred from Catholics now.

Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

NEWTIE RULES! Check this out from his campaign (and as an aside, is there any issue that Romney hasn't taken both sides on?):

hour
agoGingrich: Romney required Catholic hospitals to provide emergency contraceptionBy NBC's Alex Moe and Mark Murray
Follow @AlexNBCNews Follow @mmurraypolitics

CINCINNATI, OH –- Newt Gingrich today tried to link Mitt Romney and Barack Obama as one in the same when it comes to their stances on birth control for religious institutions.

“Romneycare and Obamacare they're too similar,” Gingrich told the crowd inside Price Hill Chili Restaurant at his first campaign event in the Buckeye State this morning. “There's been a lot of talk about the Obama administration's attack on the Catholic Church. Well the fact is, Gov. Romney insisted that Catholic hospitals give out abortion pills against their religious belief when he was governor.”

Gingrich was referring to a Feb. 3 Boston Globe article, which reported that Romney -- in Dec. 2005 -- "required all Massachusetts hospitals, including Catholic ones, to provide emergency contraception to rape victims, even though some Catholics view the morning-after pill as a form of abortion."

advertisement
More from the article: "[Romney] said he was acting on his legal counsel’s interpretation of a new state law - one passed by lawmakers despite his veto - but he also said that 'in his heart of hearts,’ he believed that rape victims should have access to emergency contraception."

Since Jan. 30, Gingrich has relentlessly criticized the Obama administration for including a provision in the health-care law that requires all religious institutions to cover birth control in their insurance plans, despite religious teachings.

“The Obama administration is engaged in a war against religion,” the former House Speaker, who converted to Catholicism, told supporters at a rally in Jacksonville, FL two weeks ago after hearing the letter sent by Catholic Bishops to churches read at mass. “Their decision last week that they would impose on every Catholic institution, every Jewish institution, every Protestant institution, the Obamacare standard of what you have to buy as insurance. It is a direct violation of freedom of religion and an example of the increasingly dictatorial attitude of this administration.”

Yesterday in Colorado, Romney jumped in the battle, calling the Obama administration’s coverage for contraception a "violation of conscience” and has written in the past that he "stands with" the Catholic Bishop’s opposed to the mandate in the health care law.

But today, Gingrich argued that when Romney was governor, he made religious institutions cover birth control as well.

“Over and over, you get the same pattern. And I think that a Massachusetts moderate finds it very hard to draw a sharp contrast with somebody who is an Illinois radical," Gingrich told the 150 person crowd in the Buckeye State.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

every Catholic I know uses birth control except one family that had 8 kids.

My parents are 85+, strongly pro-life, weirdly pro-Rome (must have been the Catholic school upbringing), and would never have dreamed of using birth control back in the day, and even they think the whole birth control gambit is a just a ginned up righty talking point to try to wedge Catholics.

There will be 0% effect on the Catholic vote, while on the other hand Obama reassured women that he's not going to fold every time a few crazies yap their religious freedom is being "violated" because they can't stone women in public like the Taliban.

In short: poutrage loses, good policy, and good politics.

 

[pirate]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

A
If anyone is stuck with him, we all are. Same went for W. Same went for Clinton. And every other U.S. President. Regardless of who made the comment on this occasion, the fact is that as long as so many of us see two America's, "Our America" and "Their America" we are all ****ed. The thing I like about Obama, maybe the best thing about him (and for the record, yes I do like Obama) is that I believe that he tried to take those two Americas and put them back together.

Pardon the interruption. Carry on the pig-headed refusals while I go back to sitting quietly in the corner.

Fair enough, I personally don't think his "Main St. vs. Wall St", "The rich don't pay their fair share", "1% vs. 99%" is congruent with taking two Americas and putting them back together.

That isn't an endorsement of the status quo, but I think he ran on, and has presided on, a platform of over-emphasizing the difference, casting 100% of the blame on a small percentage of the population and spending more time addressing the issues of one half than the other.

Even if he gets more tax dollars out of Warren Buffet, that isn't a long-term strategy. Buffet can alter his behavior or, upon his departure from this earth, his wealth could be diffused in a variety of ways...are we going to start ascribing budget deficits to Buffet or his estate donating $1B to charity?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Fair enough, I personally don't think his "Main St. vs. Wall St", "The rich don't pay their fair share", "1% vs. 99%" is congruent with taking two Americas and putting them back together.

That isn't an endorsement of the status quo, but I think he ran on, and has presided on, a platform of over-emphasizing the difference, casting 100% of the blame on a small percentage of the population and spending more time addressing the issues of one half than the other.

Even if he gets more tax dollars out of Warren Buffet, that isn't a long-term strategy. Buffet can alter his behavior or, upon his departure from this earth, his wealth could be diffused in a variety of ways...are we going to start ascribing budget deficits to Buffet or his estate donating $1B to charity?

Have you looked at the income disparity charts for the last 30 years? Have you noticed that the middle income salaries have stalled the last 10 years while the top 1% have skyrocketed? You're not seeing the big picture.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

My parents are 85+, strongly pro-choice, weirdly pro-Rome (must have been the Catholic school upbringing), and would never have dreamed of using birth control back in the day, and even they think the whole birth control gambit is a just a ginned up righty talking point to try to wedge Catholics.

There will be 0% effect on the Catholic vote, while on the other hand Obama reassured women that he's not going to fold every time a few crazies yap their religious freedom is being "violated" because they can't stone women in public like the Taliban.

In short: poutrage loses, good policy, and good politics.

We'll see. It's good policy to give Deadmeat veto power over the religious convictions of millions of Americans? I think lots of Americans, including non-Catholics, will disagree. His Wonderfulness is the most divisive president in history. The only one close to him is Nixon. He says and does the most disgraceful things while the useful idiots in the media continue to sing his praises. But the people in flyover country, "clinging to their guns and religion," are starting to catch on. As his close advisor on religion once said: "God d*mn America."

 

[pirate]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Have you looked at the income disparity charts for the last 30 years? Have you noticed that the middle income salaries have stalled the last 10 years while the top 1% have skyrocketed? You're not seeing the big picture.

I'm not saying that hasn't happened...with globalization and the explosion of the internet there is more money to be made in more places and clearly every person isn't equally positioned to do so.

I know full well that there were huge abuses and mistakes on wall street...I also know that a working professional couple in any large city or any young doctor with $300k in loans and $250k in income is 'rich' according to Obama and he routinely lumps them in with Bernie Madoff in setting the middle class against them...there are a million scenarios but I still contend that Bill Gates isn't taking money away from the US middle class when he sells an ipad in China. But any american who invested in Apple does make money when he sells an ipad in China. That isn't their fault, nor should they alone be blamed for what ails this country.

America's problem isn't solely Bill Gates making billions, it also is that so few of its young people will be qualified to work for Apple...in any capacity. 30 years ago I was handed a sheet in school listing the growth fields in the next 20+ years...so I chose to go into one of them. I'm not Bill Gates but I didn't borrow all that money for college to study something that clearly wouldn't provide a career or income sufficient to achieve some level of advancement from the class I grew up in. (insert snarky Kepler comment regarding pulling oneself up by their bootstraps being a myth here)

I don't blame the large majority of 'the rich' that didn't earn their money from synthetic CDO's or stealing it, a la Madoff, for the country's economic situation. And I sure don't think blaming them makes me any richer, feel any better nor encourages my kids to achieve.

The point was that duper feels Obama has tried to bring the two Americas together, I respectfully disagree. I don't think he is crazy, stupid or any of that stuff...I see the situation differently and said as much. I'm happy to debate it but I won't accuse you or anybody else of being ignorant of the situation if you choose to disagree. How could we all see it exactly the same way?

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I'm pretty amused by the talking heads thinking this Catholic Church thing will have any effect on Obama's re-election. How many Catholics between the ages of 16-45, married or not, have never used contraception? I'm going to say 1, who plays QB for the Denver Broncos, and that's pretty much it. So basically people are supposed to get all riled up over something that they engage in themselves? Got it...

Yes, the stats say 98% of Catholic women have used contraception at some point.

That's not really what's it about though. There people who think the church's position on contraception is profoundly silly, but still vehemently oppose the Obama administration on this. The guy they had on Up With Chris this weekend likened it to the crazy uncle in the family. Yes, he's crazy, but by god, he's your uncle.

Which is why Obama supporting Catholics like EJ Dionne have come out against him on this.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

A comment that was made is, I think, very telling of the problems that we are having in this country. The first time I remember noticing it was while Clinton was president, it continued to pick up steam while W. was president, and it is still going on now. I'm thinking of the old bumper stickers that said that [then-NRA president] Charlton Heston is MY president. People said crap like that about Bush as well. Now we hear it about Obama. But here's the thing...

Clinton was EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT. George W. Bush was EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT. And Obama is EVERY AMERICAN'S PRESIDENT.

If anyone is stuck with him, we all are. Same went for W. Same went for Clinton. And every other U.S. President. Regardless of who made the comment on this occasion, the fact is that as long as so many of us see two America's, "Our America" and "Their America" we are all ****ed. The thing I like about Obama, maybe the best thing about him (and for the record, yes I do like Obama) is that I believe that he tried to take those two Americas and put them back together.

I know I will be lambasted by the conservatives for refusing to see Obama for what he is, and that I'll be lambasted by the other liberals for secretly being a fascist, but I really think that the whole "United we stand, divided we fall" thing might be a good lesson. Disagree with me about Obama, but I don't see how anyone can view the pig-headed refusal to accept the potential for legitimacy in anyone else's point of view as anything but a destructive force.

Pardon the interruption. Carry on the pig-headed refusals while I go back to sitting quietly in the corner.

I kind of scoff at this new tone, respect sort of thing. I think people in both parties would do well to "man up", to use an outdated expression. Anyways, we can agree to disagree on that.

I do have a more factual complaint though. You really think this started with Clinton? I think you're off by around 200 years.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I know this is no place for legit political discussion but I'm Off to my precinct to participate in the Minnesota caucus.

 

[joecct]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I kind of scoff at this new tone, respect sort of thing. I think people in both parties would do well to "man up", to use an outdated expression. Anyways, we can agree to disagree on that.

I do have a more factual complaint though. You really think this started with Clinton? I think you're off by around 200 years.

Heard in the radio today that the fault line really started with the nomination of Robert Bork. After that it became "I gotta get even". Then the idiot impeachment of Slick Willy.

The commentator made the point that the Republicans are for "Big Government, Corporate Welfare, and (??). Democrats are for Big Government, Individual Welfare, and (??)". Whatever the ?? was, it was the same thing. This November, then, what the heck are we voting for?

I'm for small government and less intrusion on individual liberties. Somebody once wrote - "I fit harms no one, do it." I'm not certain I'd go that far, but it has a certain ring to it.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Heard in the radio today that the fault line really started with the nomination of Robert Bork. After that it became "I gotta get even". Then the idiot impeachment of Slick Willy.

The commentator made the point that the Republicans are for "Big Government, Corporate Welfare, and (??). Democrats are for Big Government, Individual Welfare, and (??)". Whatever the ?? was, it was the same thing. This November, then, what the heck are we voting for?

I'm for small government and less intrusion on individual liberties. Somebody once wrote - "I fit harms no one, do it." I'm not certain I'd go that far, but it has a certain ring to it.

If you accept that the commentator is talking about politicians, it makes complete sense.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Wait, you're telling me Rick Santorum swept tonight? Fo' real?

 

[joecct]

If you accept that the commentator is talking about politicians, it makes complete sense.

He was. Oh the ?? was big deficits.

Can we toss them all out to the unemployment line??

 

[pirate]

He was. Oh the ?? was big deficits.

Can we toss them all out to the unemployment line??

Wasn't our current VP the leader of the Bork confirmation process?