American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Rock Harders]Mongers-

Yes, Obama allowed this attempt at healthcare reform to become so worthless and convoluted that it serves no purpose. This bill will now be filibustered and will die (as it should, see my earlier post) However, the right-wing Jesus freak crowd should hold their tongue a little longer in writing off Obama's Presidency after only a year in office. I seem to remember a young, brash President, with a similarly low class upbringing and high class education as Obama, stumbling in his first year or two in office at the end of a recession and turning it around enough after a mid-term congressional ass-whipping wake up call to be re-elected by a wide margin. If that same President hadn't got caught with his pants down (literally) he would and may still be regarded as many as one of the finest Presidents since WW2. November 2012 is still a long ways away.

Suerte,

Rock Harders[/QUOTE]Perhaps, but remember the former President you speak of didn ’t get reelected from the far left, he did it by moving to the center, and I think he is smarter than Obama.

Obama and the boys will either move to the center or they will be joining Jimmy Carter.

But I actually think Obama is too arrogant to move to the center, so I suspect he will crash and burn!

But as you say 2012 is a long way off and a lot can happen between now and then.

Perhaps this just slipped past you Obama freaks, but the Dems in the Senate are now set to take up another bill to raise the debt ceiling another $1.9 Trillion, raising it above $14.3 Trillion to cover all the bailouts, handouts, down turn in tax revenues (even as they raise taxes) and expanded government spending on other "entitlement" programs and extensions of unemployment / Cobra benefits.

Great going guys you have even outspent your own projected costs of your programs by a factor of nearly 100%. Damn you guys are good – and you only have 10+% unemployment, a near stagnant economy, your Home Land Security guys are telling Congress – Yea TSA is gonna drop the ball again on something different so don't be surprised, and how about all that infrastructure spending that went out but never got built (you know bridges, roads and stuff like that)

Man what a bargain for a three ring circus!

I vote to reinstate Ricardo in the forum, you guys are having too much of a love-fest here. Reminds me of betters trying to cash in their tickets after the 1st quarter.

It's like a riveting soap opera. What drama! What will happen next?

Doppelganger- Thank you for your civil response. As you probably can guess, I just do not take it as a given that government involvement will be wasteful. To the extent that it is, efforts can and should be made to make it more efficient. But the alternative is a private sector that fails in expanding coverage and treating people fairly. This is an inherent difference between the two sides on this issue - skepticism of government efficiency vs. skepticism of private sector effectiveness. As far as the "deals", I wish they could have got it done without them. I won't say it justifies scrapping the bill. I'm going to be following what happens with this as the reform effort moves forward. On the fiscal side, I've said before there will be a major focus on jobs and deficit reduction initiatives this year; if they don't follow through I will change my tune but I believe they will.

Walleye- First off let me say I've long considered you to be one of the more helpful posters on the board when others have posted questions. I'm therefore surprised at the derogatory comments you have included in your responses to Schmoj and I.

Many of your "facts" are just opinion. I'm more inclined to believe the CBO assessment on coverage and costs before I believe yours. And whether the word 'crisis' or some other word is used, does not strike me as particularly relevant. Both sides agree on the need for health care reform.

Of course I know the House bill has a public option. I was referring to the fact it had been conceded. I know you were eager to portray me as a dummy. You misread my statement on anger as well.

Yes, I am a genius. And stupid and gullible. Thank you. LOL

The anger is real but not of the scale nor necessarily all directed the way Republicans would like to portray it. Obama is going to call Republican's bluff and burst this bubble of BS they have been inflating. Both sides need to be seen as working together, not just Dems. If Republicans continue to be seen as obstructionist, their strategy could backfire.

Good Lord man your party just lost a seat it held for 47 years, a seat they thought "belonged" to the Democrat Party, in the bluest state in the union and you are still in denial?

Sidney,

I doubt Senator Brown will have much impact on the situtation. As one of the Democratic senators said when asked about the bill to raise the debt ceiling - "We have already ordered and eaten the meal, now it is a question of paying the bill'. The money is for the most part gone and the nation as a whole must now pay for the party regardless of the hangover. The only alternative is to default - something which will not happen. I can only hope the spending stops here with Brown's election and the 2010 elections later this year.

[QUOTE=Black Shirt]I vote to reinstate Ricardo in the forum, you guys are having too much of a love-fest here. Reminds me of betters trying to cash in their tickets after the 1st quarter.[/QUOTE]Hi Black Shirt,

You just don't get it, do you?

"Ricardo" was a pseudonym for a Liberal Democrat drone sitting behind a computer screen who was given the task of going out onto the blogosphere to join as many forums, blogs and chat rooms as possible, with the specific intent of posting whatever talking points he was provided with.

In fact, it's doubtful that "Ricardo" was actually a single individual, but more likely a multi-user pseudonym that would be activated by whomever was on duty in the virtual office these drones shared.

Didn't you ever notice that "Ricardo" never actually responded to any questions posed to him, but merely continued to post daily liberal / dem talking points disguised as "reports".

Anyway, if you want to read what "Ricardo" would be posting in this forum were I to permit his spam, all you have to do is visit the daily kooks or the HuffingtonPost websites.

With the exception of Sidney, everyone else here is expected to post only their original opinions, which virtual "Ricardo" never had.

Thanks,

Jackson

[QUOTE=Doppelganger]Good Lord man your party just lost a seat it held for 47 years, a seat they thought "belonged" to the Democrat Party, in the bluest state in the union and you are still in denial?[/QUOTE]Yesterday, Obama said in an interview that Scott Brown was swept into office by the same "disenchantment with government" movement that got him elected to the presidency a year ago.

Talk about being in denial!

Thanks,

Jackson

[QUOTE=Jackson]Hi Black Shirt,

You just don't get it, do you?

"Ricardo" was a pseudonym for a Liberal Democrat drone sitting behind a computer screen who was given the task of going out onto the blogosphere to join as many forums, blogs and chat rooms as possible, with the specific intent of posting whatever talking points he was provided with.

In fact, it's doubtful that "Ricardo" was actually a single individual, but more likely a multi-user pseudonym that would be activated by whomever was on duty in the virtual office these drones shared.

Didn't you ever notice that "Ricardo" never actually responded to any questions posed to him, but merely continued to post daily liberal / dem talking points disguised as "reports".

Anyway, if you want to read what "Ricardo" would be posting in this forum were I to permit his spam, all you have to do is visit the daily kooks or the HuffingtonPost websites.

With the exception of Sidney, everyone else here is expected to post only their original opinions, which virtual "Ricardo" never had.

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]Your post knocked me down for almost a full count! Your theory has no credence whatsover. And I am not trying to demean you, but in another lifetime, you could have been Joe McCarthy. Before you get too carried away, the comparison is only in the blind evangelical zeal that he displayed.

It is very unfortunate that the health reform bill is a poor shadow of what it could have been. In this particular case, Obama did not display enough leadership plus american politics do not truly represent the people anymore. So, expect continued fiascos in the coming years. I did not agree with Bush when he went to Iraq, but I supported him once the decision was made. Obama could do with more support in the first term, but then, it's up to you.

Much of the post-election news coverage has cited multiple reasons people voted for Brown. And if you had to thread together a common denominator, it would not be healthcare. It would be discontent with government. I think Obama got it just about right. Republicans have attempted to frame the MA election as a referendum on healthcare, declaring Brown's 52% win means "The American People do not want this bill". That's an exaggeration and you guys know it. And even though it was not a referendum, Obama and Dems have already signalled they could change course. I call that reacting not denying.

BTW, Brown seems like a decent guy. Let's see how he does in Washington.

I was listening to the Fair and Balanced network this evening, and heard a segment on how Democrats are in "turmoil". There was an audioclip about 2-3 minutes long composed of individual clips of various Democrats speaking on current events. In the middle of this I hear a 10 second clip of some obvious kook calling conservatives vulgar names and claiming certain FOX commentators were involved in 9-11. This short clip did not sound like the others, and did not have any reference to current events. It sounded like it had been spliced in from an audio archive. When I heard it I thought "what the hell was THAT?". BTW this was on O'Reilly's "No Spin Zone".

So what was that? An attempt to make Dems sound kooky by splicing in a kooky clip? A form of psychological programming or association?