Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, Jan 16, 2012.
Good job, as usual, by Andrew Sullivan.
I completely agree. Honestly, I have nothing to add.
There was no point where I believed or even hoped for a second that Obama would be capable of living up to the hype. I have been critical of him since day one.
He is, however, still the only sane choice.
I've been quite critical of him as well and agree, he is the only sane one running.
I still say this election is super important given 2 Supreme Court seats are likely to open up by 2016.
Edit: I should mention I've never been a huge fan. I disliked Obama's speeches during the previous election that layered fluff rather than real statements. I just dislike pointless bickering even more.
What annoys me is that there are idiots who would actually work against him out of spite. That is twelve year old behavior, and it should be enough to vote those politicians out. Sadly I don't think it will have much of an effect. Rush has always been worthless. The behavior comes down to premeditated diametric opposition. It would actually be difficult to come up with a less productive strategy. Waste four years just to get someone voted out while taking a salary for it the entire time?
Yes, I pretty much also agree with this.
My major problem with this never-ending drum majoring from the Obama camp that decries any complaint about any aspect of his performance as nonsensical and continually characterizes people like me as petulant children for having the audacity to complain about the administration's missteps, is that it spends all its time excoriating the left and center for failing to support Mr. Obama instead of listening to us. We're really not petulant children, and the Obama administration and his supporters don't seem to have any interest in listening to why we're unhappy.
And so we're left with a President whose major political credential is that he's not the pack of rabid idiots running against him.
And we all share the blame for that.
Obama's re-election will be meaningless if republicans maintain control of the house and get more control of the senate.
Agreed. We need to evacuate the Teahadists who infected Congress in 2010 and have done nothing but dig in their heels like misguided toddlers since they took office. We don't need to replace them with Democrats, necessarily, just sane Republicans will do.
I don;t see that happening, given their abysmal approval ratings.
And if Obama wins and the Republicans maintain control of at least one house, they'll be out for revenge and will do even more (if that's even possible) to block everything he does.
And what do you think would happen if they took all three branches? That's what's really terrifying.
Yes, a long dark winter for the United States, waiting for those children to stumble through the wardrobe and save Narnia....
You never know since usually what happens is everyone hates congress but thinks there congressman is the one good one.
It's really scary seeing the US as it is today, it seems that along with outsourcing jobs you guys decided to outsource your brains as well and now don't have much left.
Who will pick up the pieces if the GOP succeeds in taking all branches and then proceeds to destroy what's left as it's sure to do...
It's really scary how much religious nuts seem to be in power, or how much religious nuts have cropped up.
Heck i'm more afraid of the future of the US than my own country which still looks like *****
Well, it would be the difference between remaining at a stand still on lots of important issues and careening over the edge of insanity. Obama's still done a lot of good things with executive powers (consumer protection agency) and federal agencies. I've been as disappointed with Obama as everyone else with regards to things like indefinite detention, Gitmo, taxes, and the economy, but I don't believe for a second believe we'd be better off with anyone on the GoP side now that Huntsman is gone (after that "I believe in science line" he was toast). Despite his numerous short comings, Obama has come out on the right side of so many issues like the environment, gay and civil rights, and other regulations that even with a full GoP congress he'd still be my preference.
I was approaching an intersection, going a bit uphill, so there were no sight-lines to speak of, when I saw a 5 year old kid stealing the stop sign, pole and all. I woke up before I had a chance to chase him down to deliver a sound thrashing.
That 5 year old kid stealing the stop sign must certainly represent the right wing.
What are you talking about?
Politicians in general irritate me. So much of their speech is just fluff and answering easy questions or preying on emotions, and it works on so many people. Half of them (conservatively) don't even realize it. They're not your friends. They don't know you. You're voting for a candidate and their entourage of accompanying political figures to do a job. It's a job interview, not drinks at the bar.
Politicians in general irritate me. So much of their speech is just fluff and answering easy questions or preying on emotions, and it works on so many people. Half of them (conservatively) don't even realize it. They're not your friends. They don't know you. You're voting for a candidate and their entourage of accompanying political figures to do a job. It's a job interview, not drinks at the bar. It really doesn't matter what part we're talking about here. What matters is what they intend to do as a group (as in President + cabinet members and appointed positions).
It's not the first time this has happened, but it is pretty bad right now.
It was a dream. Things in dreams are usually symbolic. A 5 year old kid (teapublican maturity) behaving with reckless irresponsibility (stealing a stop sign, perhaps for entertainment) exactly represents what the right wing looks like to me.
Maybe the teacher will get things done during recess?
True enough, and the more obstructionist right-wing extremists we can show the door the better, but keep in mind that facing off against a second-term President isn't ever the same game as it was during the first term, particularly when nobody entertains the idea that his VP is going on to greater things.
I honestly don't know at this point if Obama has really lacked the necessary fortitude, or if he's playing a longer game, making the noisy clowns on the extremist right fight hard and publicly for "compromise" (here defined as "near total submission") and letting them crow loudly about their victories, on the apparently correct hypothesis that they will own the resulting fluster-cluck.
In short, the right will get tougher, but Obama will be able to get tougher too, and he's got a lot more political capital left than they do. The McConnell Doctrine, effectively suspending the business of the nation during an economic crisis in order to devote all resources to a 2012 Presidential upset, has cost them far more dearly than they expected.
During his inauguration, I might have allowed a glimmer of idealism with regard to Obama, but otherwise, I was willing to criticize him right away, starting with the administration's failure to work hard on FOIA backlogs.
Well, I tend to think that the left and center were too happy to figuratively sit back, giving room for a Republican insurgency under the aegis of the Tea Party.
The criticism was valid, but I get the feeling that it was reinterpreted to mean, in our Manichean political system, that there was support for the GOP.
True, but I think the Obama administration may be more willing to use administrative go-arounds to push policy. The move over the CFPB seems like an opening gambit.
I think the administration would like to claim they're playing a long game, but I think they were surprised by the vehemence of the congressional GOP members and didn't know how to pull the right levers.
Now, I think they know and they also know when they can ignore the machine entirely.
Yeah, I do see that. Most of the radical center has little love for the conservative right. I don't have any patience for obstructing gay marriage, spending time and effort trying to criminalize or otherwise stop women's choice, wasting time denying climate science, tacking up copies of the ten commandments, etc. I feel we've clearly stated what we want but we don't get listened to. But most of the radical center also has no patience for antagonizing business, for excessively providing services to the difficult-to-reach while our business hubs languish (e.g. working on high speed internet in Appalachia while Korean cities have internet that is many times faster than American city internet), etc.
I mean, I also understand the point that the GOP is remarkably obstructionist. They need to throw their louts out, and if they actually read Ayn Rand instead of just using her as a strawman, they would understand she was describing many of them more than she was describing our current left (one is particularly struck by her population of miscreant politicians with juvenile nicknames and the current crop of oddly nicknamed GOP stars).
On the other hand, the presidency is not some unionized gig where you can refuse to do your job because conditions are imperfect. The president has a bottom line responsibility, and that responsibility is not ceded because Congress is full of idiots. The idiocy of the right (and the blue dogs or whatever the idiot coalition on the left is calling themselves) did not stop everything that the WH failed to accomplish, nor did it actively cause many of the most egregious actions the WH has taken itself.
Oh come on people, don't you know that we need someone who has so much money that they can't be tempted by the money that floats around in that cesspool that we call Washington. We need someone who knows the inner workings of the venture capital world, and the trust of those on Wall St. so we can get our economy working again. The people on Wall St. and the bankers, those are the ones who make our economy work, and they shouldn't be demonized for living the American Dream. Anyone, if they study hard and work hard, can make it. We should be holding them up and giving them MORE breaks because they are the ones who have held the line against the socialist welfare state that the Democrats like Barack Hussein Obama wants us in. They just want to take our money and give it to lazy people because they are jealous! Those lazy people don't do anything to help the economy, why do they deserve the handouts? They don't! Neither do the old people who should have been saving for their retirement or working better jobs instead of working in factories or other menial jobs so easy that a chinese high school drop out can do it now.
[/right wing out of body experience]