|Elflocko| Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 As good a place as any for this... [quote][size="6"][b]The Obama Postmortem[/b][/size] November 3rd, 2010 An Autopsy of a Political Suicide It’s the day after the Republican sweep we all knew was coming. If Obama had any dignity, if he was honest with himself and with us, he would resign. It’s abundantly clear that he isn’t up to the job. But you don’t become president by being honest or dignified. So now it’s wound-licking time. The President and his cronies are comforting each other. “It’s not your fault the economy sucks,” a Yes Man reassures Obama, sinking his heels into the new Oval Office carpet. “It was like that when we got here.” Do they scratch him behind his ears? They should. It feels nice. “It was the poor economy—not the wisdom of the Republicans’ ideas or the brilliance of their tactics—that assured they would retake control of the House,” coos MarketWatch’s Rex Nutting. Which is true. And doesn’t matter. Democrats are taking solace in history. It’s the midterms! The party that holds the White House always loses seats in Congress. Look at Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. They suffered midterm defeats, then roared back to landslide reelection wins two years later. Not to worry! The voters will vote against the other party next time! Which is also true. And also doesn’t matter. In the broken-down shambles of the excuse for a political system we have in the United States, there’s only one stage of grief: denial. Barack Obama may well be reelected in 2012. Considering that the current GOP frontrunners are Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney, the odds favor him. But the Obama experiment is effectively dead. There will be no change, and so there is no hope. Remember what happened to Clinton after the “Republican Revolution” sweep of 1994? He spent 1995 locked in a bizarre “co-presidency” with House Speaker Newt Gingrich before figuring out that his “partner” was more interested in obstructionist sabotage than bipartisanship. Obama is heading down the same bloody path with John Boehner. But Clinton did get that second term. During which he accomplished many things, such as…um…well, he did get impeached. Does that count? I don’t understand why presidents want to get reelected. No president since FDR has gotten much done after his first term. Must be an ego thing. Either that, or it’s cool to have your own chef. If Obama was going to shine, it was going to be during 2009. Elected by a sizable margin with an undeniable, media-backed mandate for change during a severe economic crisis he could exploit to push through his agenda, Obama also enjoyed the rare luxury of a Democratic House of Representatives and a nearly filibuster-proof Democratic Senate. So what does he have to show for that marvelous gift? Three major items: One: a healthcare overhaul that increases premiums and insurance company profits, and doesn’t include the public option he and everyone else said was absolutely essential. The good news is, the Republicans will probably repeal or defund this monster before it takes effect. Two: a financial reform package no one knows about. Which is just as well, since it doesn’t crack down on the banksters. Three: more dead Afghans. They’re not much, but I hope Obama is proud of them. That’s as good as he’s going to get from now on. What killed the Obama presidency? Political suicide. There were several death blows: First and foremost, the economy. 60 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of Republicans told exit pollsters that the lack of jobs was their number-one issue. Obama never proposed a jobs program. He gave trillions of taxdollars to thieving banksters who ought to have been arrested instead, then tried to pass off this outrageous giveaway as economic stimulus. To make things worse, he stuck with an impossibly absurd argument: more people would have lost their jobs without it. Even if the phony stimulus stopped things from getting worse—and it didn’t—people don’t care. They want the 20 percent of Americans who already lost their jobs—their friends, spouses, children and parents—to find new ones. Obama never addressed that. He didn’t even try. Second, he alienated his base. He didn’t even know who his base was. Obama’s campaign was a potent mix of vague pabulum (“hope,” “change”) and, when he deigned to specify, center-right specifics (stop torture but expand the war against Afghanistan, bipartisan cooperation with the Republicans, no gay marriage, etc.). The problem was that the vagueness that helped him cobble together a winning coalition of leftist and independent voters made it impossible for him govern. Leftists got turned off when he doubled down in Afghanistan and refused to close Guantánamo; independents are notoriously fickle anyway. If Obama’s advisors had been smart, they would have recognized two truths, one old and one new. The old truth is that the safest time to deliver to your base is the first year of a presidency; the passage of time allows the anger of the moderates to cool in time for the next election. The new truth for Obama was that his base comprised liberals who actually disagreed with much of what he stood for but had paid more attention to the “hope” and “change” posters than to his platform. He didn’t understand that. Moreover, the world changed between September and November of 2008. Global capitalism collapsed. Millions of Americans lost their jobs and their homes during the next year. Wall Street, bankers, big business, the golden boys of the previous century, were discredited—but unpunished for their countless sins. By mid-2009 America had become a left-wing country, not in the media but among the citizenry, telling polls that their preferred economic system was socialism. Team Obama didn’t understand that. They still don’t. The inarticulate rage of the inchoate Tea Party caught the president by surprise. Neither Obama nor the political clones that form his center-right cabinet can see that in a binary political culture anger gravitates to the opposite pole. If Obama were Republican, the Tea Party would be identified with the left. The takeaway is anger, not ideology. People are pissed. They hate the bailouts, but the bailouts aren’t the main point. More than anything else, the American people are angry that their government doesn’t even pretend to give a damn about them. (Ted Rall is the author of “The Anti-American Manifesto.” His website is tedrall.com.) COPYRIGHT 2010 TED RALL[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 I thought Bush bailed out the Crooked bankers and Obama bailed out the shitty auto companies? [quote name='Elflocko' timestamp='1288892857' post='937300'] As good a place as any for this... [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='Ben' timestamp='1288894341' post='937306'] I thought Bush bailed out the Crooked bankers and Obama bailed out the shitty auto companies? [/quote] Bush started it, he finished it. Different dogs, same owners... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khatmandude Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='Elflocko' timestamp='1288894596' post='937310'] Bush started it, he finished it. [b]Different dogs, same owners...[/b] [/quote] I like that. My usual line is different teacher, same curriculum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted November 4, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='John~Galt' timestamp='1288844618' post='937167'] Wow. This thread is a perfect example of the problem in politics today. There is no conversation. Those we disagree with are either "bat shit crazy homophobe redneck bible thumpers" or "left wing nut job socialists." We don't talk debate issues we throw bombs and try to shout down our opponents. We call them "enemies" and then proceed to treat them that way. If you are for gay marriage you are for the destruction of the American family, if you are against it you are a homophobic bigot. For tax cuts? You are a shill for corporate fat cats and want to destroy the middle class. Against tax cuts? You are class warfare mongering elitist prick. Against cap and trade? You want to let corporations destroy America. For cap and trade? You are a union loving America hating socialist. I could go on for pages and pages but you get the point. It would be great to actually have a national conversation on these incredibly important issues without demonizing those who disagree with us. Instead we are fan boys of our chosen political party or ideology and will stop at nothing to marginalize those that disagree. Our elections are about sound bytes and star power rather than where a particular candidate truly stands on the issues. Someone mentions Sarah Palin and invariably someone else makes it abundantly clear that they believe her to be a right wing nut job that is a clear and present danger to American democracy. Mention Obama and we hear all about communism and how he is some sort of Manchurian candidate. No one is talking rationally about where these particular people stand on issues, they just demonize them and go on. We celebrate elections like sporting events. We pat our own backs when our guy wins and drone on endlessly about how stupid Americans are and how we are going to hell in a handbag when our guy loses. You Jon Stewart fans completely missed the point about the restore the sanity thing. He was saying lets tone it down and have a reasonable conversation about the issues. I agree with that idea. I have in the past done exactly what I am complaining about tonight, but not any more. Screw the pundits and bloggers. I am going to pay attention to the issues our would be leaders care about and vote accordingly. I am going to do my best to be part of the rational political discourse. [/quote] This thread was actually started as a little tongue in cheek. During the Health Care Monstrosity discussion I stated that this falls election would be a bloodbath for democrats because of it.... I was just kind of throwing out an obnoxious "I told you so".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Tigre Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 How many times during the past two days I have heard the statement "we need to work together for the American people". Heard it in 2008 too. And 2006. And 2004. And... It is a load of bullshit. Nobody is going to "work" with anybody across any aisle. The ideology is too well-formed on both sides. And that goes for that equally bullshit description of "moderate" as well. "Bipartisanism" exists only when there is a win-win for both sides of the aisle. But believe it or not...there is more of this half-a-baby approach that goes on than the public sees on CBS. I work in the state and local government arena. Guys who by day tear each other to shreds at the podium on the "issues"...are drinking gin and tonics together at bars later on and really getting the deals hammered out that we see later as "bipartisan agreements". But make no mistake: whatever they agree upon...they do for their own party or individual benefit. This past year's tumult in government was fueled solely by what one party in the government thought they could get by the fly-overs without fuss...and when the fly-overs did fuss, the opposite party seized it as an opportunity to make hay without "bipartisanism". In the end though, each side got what it wanted...and John Q is still sitting out here making a fuss. But at least they are taking John Q seriously now...as we have finally caused it to dawn on them that we are not the illiterate proles they have historically seen us as being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' timestamp='1288899670' post='937326'] This thread was actually started as a little tongue in cheek. During the Health Care Monstrosity discussion I stated that this falls election would be a bloodbath for democrats because of it.... I was just kind of throwing out an obnoxious "I told you so".... [/quote] Nothing like the takeover when Clinton was in office though, then they took both houses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted November 4, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1288910721' post='937355'] Nothing like the takeover when Clinton was in office though, then they took both houses. [/quote] I'll say the same thing I said when Obama was elected even though I did not vote for him.... I hope they do well...just for the sake of the country and the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' timestamp='1288911120' post='937356'] I'll say the same thing I said when Obama was elected even though I did not vote for him.... I hope they do well...just for the sake of the country and the people. [/quote] I hope the rhetoric im hearing about not compromising from both sides doesnt happen. we need them to work for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1288911422' post='937357'] I hope the rhetoric im hearing about not compromising from both sides doesnt happen. we need them to work for us. [/quote] I think we both know better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 [quote name='Elflocko' timestamp='1288912289' post='937358'] I think we both know better... [/quote] Sadly and the people will suffer for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 NYTimes account of Repub strategy: [url="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/us/politics/04campaign.html?ref=us&pagewanted=all"]Democrats Outrun by a 2-Year G.O.P. Comeback Plan[/url] Mashup of post election speeches given in the past two days. Exposes Dem weakness (folly, imo) and Repub intransigence: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzeTwo7DhoI[/media] I'm guessing that we should be using another, 1916-ish term for the middle ground: "no man's land." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sois Posted November 4, 2010 Report Share Posted November 4, 2010 It must be easy to win elections when yoru name is Bohner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted November 5, 2010 Report Share Posted November 5, 2010 [quote name='Elflocko' timestamp='1288912289' post='937358'] I think we both know better... [/quote] This. Republicans aren't going to agree to shit unless the Dems concede a boatload of shit in their favor... And, Obama has already come out and set the tone by saying that he's more than happy to listen to Repub ideas as long as it positively enhances things the Dems already put in place (ie healthcare, etc.) and nothing regarding rolling back, etc... and, we're the ones that get boned... oh yeah, and sois... it is Boehner (pronounced BAY-ner) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sois Posted November 5, 2010 Report Share Posted November 5, 2010 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1288961498' post='937455'] oh yeah, and sois... it is Boehner (pronounced BAY-ner) [/quote] I had a bayner this morning when i woke up, it think it was morning wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted November 5, 2010 Report Share Posted November 5, 2010 [quote name='sois' timestamp='1288963722' post='937470'] I had a bayner this morning when i woke up, it think it was morning wood. [/quote] Then quit playing with yourself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 5, 2010 Report Share Posted November 5, 2010 Found this blurb from Bush speech writer David Frum. [quote]Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this debacle now. … No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the "doughnut hole" and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents' insurance coverage?[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted November 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1288986490' post='937555'] Found this blurb from Bush speech writer David Frum. [/quote] Not repealed....but unfunded. All spending bills start in the House. How good is a Health Care Bill with no money? Just getting the repeal started is a political win by the Republicans aimed at 2012. It is no secret that the majority of Americans are against this particular "Health Care Monstrosity". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 6, 2010 Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' timestamp='1289003016' post='937632'] Not repealed....but unfunded. All spending bills start in the House. How good is a Health Care Bill with no money? Just getting the repeal started is a political win by the Republicans aimed at 2012. It is no secret that the majority of Americans are against this particular "Health Care Monstrosity". [/quote] You defund Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, ect. Yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted November 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1289003211' post='937634'] You defund Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, ect. Yet? [/quote] The GOP rode in on a wave of discontent from Americans and one of the bigger reasons was the health care bill... I fully expect them to use it to exploit the democrats moving towards the next election in every manner they can.... I really think the GOP is set up perfectly to add the Senate and the Presidency to their power structure in 2012 barring an extreme gaffes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 6, 2010 Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' timestamp='1289003586' post='937640'] The GOP rode in on a wave of discontent from Americans and one of the bigger reasons was the health care bill... I fully expect them to use it to exploit the democrats moving towards the next election in every manner they can.... I really think the GOP is set up perfectly to add the Senate and the Presidency to their power structure in 2012 barring an extreme gaffes.... [/quote] I'm sure you do, but you didnt answer my question. (get the point?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted November 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1289003666' post='937641'] I'm sure you do, but you didnt answer my question. (get the point?) [/quote] No... I must be missing something.... Can you explain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 6, 2010 Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' timestamp='1289003712' post='937642'] No... I must be missing something.... Can you explain? [/quote] That much like Medicade, Medicare, Social Security, there was knashing of teeth on those too, but they havent been defunded or repealed. And for 2012, that remains to be seen because the GOP is [url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/05/gop-earmark-ban-tea-party_n_779480.html"]already ignoring what the tea party wants[/url]. Could be interesting if they have their own infighting going on. You see this tea party that everyone was riding high on was co-opted by the republicans and used for their own political gain, but they have no intention on doing what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted November 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1289003959' post='937643'] That much like Medicade, Medicare, Social Security, there was knashing of teeth on those too, but they havent been defunded or repealed. And for 2012, that remains to be seen because the GOP is [url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/05/gop-earmark-ban-tea-party_n_779480.html"]already ignoring what the tea party wants[/url]. Could be interesting if they have their own infighting going on. You see this tea party that everyone was riding high on was co-opted by the republicans and used for their own political gain, but they have no intention on doing what they want. [/quote] We will see..... ....but none of the programs you have listed hold a candle in scope or cost to the Health Care Monstrosity of 2010. It is 100% clear that the majority of Americans are against the Health Care reform in it's current form. Why wouldn't the GOP do everything they possibly could to use this to hurt the democrats in every possible manner? First they start by trying to repeal it...which is sure to fail and then the don't fund it.....all the while they look like they are doing everything they can to protect the American people against the big bad democrats and their big bad government.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 6, 2010 Report Share Posted November 6, 2010 The point remains, none of those programs have been defunded, and i'd be surprised if they defund healthcare. Oh they may make some small insignificant snips here and there, but by in large its here to stay. I just hope they work on improving it because lord knows it needs improving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.