Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditThat was quick.
Less than a month into his presidency, Barack Obama has found that no one is really buying bipartisanship. His base hates it, as the blogs will tell you. His allies in Congress resent it, as Sen. Schumer signaled on Sunday morning. And while media outlets still prioritize a bipartisan process over actual policy substance, like this weird Washington Post editorial, even centrist pundits are souring on Obama's bipartisan bouquets. Time's Joe Klein, a fan of bipartisanship, has concluded that bipartisanship is currently impossible because there are no good faith partners in Washington:
Obama should now understand that the Republicans are not reliable partners--at least, not for the moment. Most are stuck in the contentious past, rutted in Reaganism, intent on taking a Hooverist course on the economy... The President's default position, after the stimulus fight and the Gregg fiasco, should be to appoint Democrats to significant domestic policy positions...
I don't happen to think Sen. Gregg's indecision qualifies as a fiasco, but it does add a personal flavor to the Republicans' political posture. Here's the bottom line: They're just not that into Obama.
Yes, the President can keep calling them and saying all the right things. He can woo them and invite them over, like that hyped White House "bipartisan super bowl party." He can go to their home, like his trek to Maryland for two and a half hours of lamb chops and neocons. He can even add their ideas to his legislation and their nominees to his cabinet, as The Nation's Ari Berman recounts.
If Obama is taking all those actions based on their own intrinsic value -- for healthy debate and a wide circle of advisers -- then fine. The notion that this bipartisan process will yield more GOP support, however, has been officially shredded. If it doesn't work now, with Obama's recent election mandate, booming approval ratings and a public eager for government action to address the economic crisis, it's not going to work. And anyone who thinks the G.O.P. will get more cooperative is placing a bet on politicians growing less political as the next elections draw closer.
Team Obama is already recalibrating, naturally. Rahm Emanuel recently noted that an "insatiable appetite" for bipartisanship made Obama's team "get ahead" of itself. The President, for his part, clarified that bipartisan outreach does not make him a "sap." And throughout his career, Obama has pivoted deftly from the soft touch to knockout blows. He explained this approach during a campaign interview back in 2007, in a clip which the blogger Jed Lewison recently flagged:
I don't like people trying to take advantage of that [outreach]. This is why actually if you watch my political interactions. I am always best as a counter-puncher. You know, somebody comes at me I will knock them out. If not, I will try to understand their point of view and that actually serves me well. I give people the benefit of the doubt; I try to understand their point of view -- if I perceive that they try to take advantage of that then I will crush them.
It's about that time, obviously.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
Might as well treat the Repubs like Dubya treated the Dems after 9/11...
ask Max Cleland.
Posted by Mask at 02/16/2009 @ 2:29pm
Mask, why isn't it "Ask Ted Kennedy"?
Teddy crafted a horribly shitty education bill, but W got credit for trying and didn't get splattered by the stink of failure when the program cratered because it was unequivocally bipartisian.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/16/2009 @ 2:37pm
You only need bipatisianship when the program takes time to work.
Thus, the war in Iraq was 100% bipartisian, so W got an extra four years to see it through.
The Prescription Drug benefit wasn't bipartisian, it was rammed through by Repubs only, but because it is wildly popular with seniors and it costing much less than CBO projections, he didn't need the cover of bipartisianship to give it extra time to work.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/16/2009 @ 2:39pm
I hit the back button too quickly. On the next page is an advertisement for
"Free government money"
with a picture of Obama. Is this intended as self-parody?
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/16/2009 @ 2:41pm
The Republicans are spending a lot of time staring at themselves in a mirror, wondering how it all came to this.
I've looked closely at almost all of the bills provisions. There's no way that the republicans should be voting against it in it's entirety. It addresses the mass of regular citizens in the US, that's for certain.
Big business has failed us in so many ways that it's time to re-create the country based on what the citizens need, not based on reconstituting failed capitalist agendas. Someone will certainly figure that out later.
The Republicans are afraid. Afraid of each other. Their support of history's worst president is clear testimony to their complete and utter confusion about the real world and how it works. To see them in 'lockstep' with each other as the nation struggles makes them look like fascists.
So, Mr. Obama, marginalize them until they ask, pretty please, to be part of the process. Leave the door partway open, but keep the chain on it.
Posted by ficheye at 02/16/2009 @ 3:02pm
bipartisanship is an oxymoron
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 3:03pm
Obama needs to think outside the box.
The conventional wisdom in DC is that "progressivism" equals "socialism" which by implication equals the dirty "c" word --hint, it contains more than four letters.
Rapidly spiraling events --beginning with an economy in a deepening tailspin-- ought to bring out a populist version of Barack Obama railing against the "no we can't" crowd (the vast majority of Washington), and calling for truly bold measures. Based on every clue dropped by Obama thus far, I'll be surprised if he goes strong to the hoop even though the rapidly deteriorating situation clearly demands that he does.
Will Obama start playin' street (instead of Street) ball?
Time to go for the popcorn --and hope like hell he's got some fight in 'em.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 02/16/2009 @ 3:04pm
Correction to above.....
Actually, it's time to take to the streets --with shotguns and pichforks if necessary-- and "put the skeer" in Washington.
Until that happens......probably nothing of real significance will happen in a long addle-brained and atrophied DC.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 02/16/2009 @ 3:11pm
Obama has not made an effort for bipartisanship. Every speech he makes he takes potshots at "the last administration" or the repubs in congress then he has no reason expect them to want to help him. He has only himself to blame for this. Why doesn't he do, in his speeches, what he asked others to do - drop the past and concentrate on moving forward.
Posted by RawHonesty at 02/16/2009 @ 3:14pm
Obama has not made an effort for bipartisanship. Every speech he makes he takes potshots at "the last administration" or the repubs in congress then he has no reason expect them to want to help him. He has only himself to blame for this. Why doesn't he do, in his speeches, what he asked others to do - drop the past and concentrate on moving forward.
Posted by RawHonesty at 02/16/2009 @ 3:15pm
Obama has not made an effort for bipartisanship. Every speech he makes he takes potshots at "the last administration" or the repubs in congress then he has no reason expect them to want to help him. He has only himself to blame for this. Why doesn't he do, in his speeches, what he asked others to do - drop the past and concentrate on moving forward.
Posted by RawHonesty at 02/16/2009 @ 3:15pm
Ok. First the site didn't accept my post and redirected me to twitter, now it is posting it 3 times - wtf?
Posted by RawHonesty at 02/16/2009 @ 3:18pm
This is SO funny!
Like these guys think that Obama can't play 'hardball'...
It is the mark of a civilized person to exhaust all the potentials of diplomacy in each separate situation... and let the effects of true statesmanship exalt the logic and forthrightness of all involved.
Then again... it may be entirely possible... that the right-wing won't 'respect' Obama until he's knocked them down a few times... taken them down a few notches... and brought them to their senses...
Because that's the kind of people they are...;^)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8hqGu-leFc
Play Ball!
Posted by ttr at 02/16/2009 @ 3:18pm
Nice little Robert Johnson ditty, ttr, but where's the beef, man?
;-)
Obama badly needs to step up..... or get stepped on.
Jus' you watch now.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 02/16/2009 @ 3:36pm
"Republicans rebuffed Obama's bipartisanship, is it time for Obama to fulfill his pledge to "crush them"?"
No they didn't rebuff Obama,
...they rebuffed the spending program which has very little to do with jobs or stimulus...just pay backs to voting groups.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 3:44pm
Repubs are playing smart politics. They don't see themselves as "gambling" america's prosperity because they (we) don't believe prosperity can be created from the government.
Here's an interesting article:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ articles/2009/02/ the_real_lessons_of_the_great.html
Michael Barone argues that FDW won, and went full steam ahead with greater collectivism. Some governors "looked the other way" as union engaged in illegal strikes. Then the voters had had enough. The governors in the state were tossed out on their ears and the same would have happened to FDR had it not been for WWII.
There'll be no war to save Obama when there is widespread anarchy as the disaffected demand more and more and more and more in ever more disruptive demonstrations for demands.
He'll be out soon enough as average workers get sick and tire of being taken advanatage of. At which point, the Repubs will come back in and restore order.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/16/2009 @ 3:45pm
"The Republicans are spending a lot of time staring at themselves in a mirror, wondering how it all came to this"
They got here by spending too much and were fired, justly so....
sound familar? The Dems may be looking into same mirror...and soon.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 3:48pm
Sorry JoMamma and Darin, nobody outside of the Deep South, Idaho, Wyoming, and Oklahoma wants to be ruled by Republicans. Really, you should look at recent election results.
Posted by onthehelm at 02/16/2009 @ 4:03pm
Sorry JoMamma and Darin, nobody outside of the Deep South, Idaho, Wyoming, and Oklahoma wants to be ruled by Republicans. Really, you should look at recent election results.
Posted by onthehelm at 02/16/2009 @ 4:03pm
I understand and accept the results of the elections...and have been around long enough to see it change back and forth..
and change will come again...you know that word...change..especially when one side fucks up?
Keep watching.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 4:07pm
Yes, am familiar with change. And you are confusing change of the every so often variety with the type that happened with the New Deal...you know, that time when people said, "Fuck this," and largely voted Democrat for a very, very long time...especially because the Republicans fucked up.
Not easy to win a vote when you are going to be tarred as the party that hates American workers, is anti-American; etc.
Yes, I will be watching. With a bag of popcorn.
Posted by onthehelm at 02/16/2009 @ 4:18pm
Well regarding Mask and his insistance that Nadya prove's I'm wrong, I guess you have to fight fire with fire, no matter how childish that may be.
So Mask, remember when you said not all muslims are terrorists? Well check this out:
http://www.buffalonews.com/437/story/578644.html
Prominent Orchard Park man charged with beheading his wife
Ha ha, you're wrong. All muslims are terrorists because one guy in NY beheaded his wife.
Oh God, I'm so clever.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/16/2009 @ 4:19pm
Sorry JoMamma and Darin, nobody outside of the Deep South, Idaho, Wyoming, and Oklahoma wants to be ruled by Republicans. Really, you should look at recent election results.
Posted by onthehelm at 02/16/2009 @ 4:03pm
Nonsense. Riverside County CA where I live is predominatly Republican. Likewise, all of Nevada except for the urban center in Clark County (which is predominantly black and hispanic) is Republican. Rural Michigan is Republican as is upstate NY.
Really you should look at decades of election results
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 4:21pm
Sorry JoMamma and Darin, nobody outside of the Deep South, Idaho, Wyoming, and Oklahoma wants to be ruled by Republicans. Really, you should look at recent election results.
Posted by onthehelm at 02/16/2009 @ 4:03pm
You should also check out the midwest...and how many states Obama won with a hand full of votes...
It is early and in another 6 months the economy will be...Obamas...or yours...
and what you do to manage it will be yours to wear like a tar and feather coat...to use your words.
Our model should not be the UAW or California...they are finished...yet those 2 places are Dem/lib infested like a parasite killing the host..and what the libs want to do for the rest of us.
Which is why we hide our assets instead of investing forward..we know who is in the hen house.
Perhaps you should goggle a map of the election as it voted on a county by county basis...you might be surprised...
it is from maps like this that the deduction is inferred that the urban, umemployed, home of govt parasites that vote in checks for themselves off the backs of the working self reliant out in the rest of the country.
Check out the map...and then we will talk about Ameirca haters and other such horseshit usualy uttered by the inexperience of youth with empty wallets and no skills in demand worth great income...due to their own choices.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 4:34pm
The Reps like to use the excuse that stimulus package was not good enough for them, I really feel there is more to it than that and they are not keen to help Obama now or ever. The Reps have been used to running the show and this really irks them now that Obama is in charge....times are changing and they don't like it one bit. He has tried to be inclusive and they have rebuffed him, so that tells me a lot about how they will work with him in the future and it doesn't look too good to me. They no longer owns the keys to the castle and they can't stand it.
Posted by Caj at 02/16/2009 @ 4:40pm
Posted by Caj at 02/16/2009 @ 4:40pm
I support the President but not the policy...
Sound familar?
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:01pm
Obama does not have to crush the GOP for being partisan, it is obvious to me the GOP are crushing themselves without any Democratic help at all.
Posted by NewEra at 02/16/2009 @ 5:06pm
Posted by NewEra at 02/16/2009 @ 5:06pm
Or..the repubs are letting the dems be dems...and getting out of their way...
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:12pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 4:34pm "and then we will talk about Ameirca haters and other such horseshit usualy uttered by the inexperience of youth with empty wallets and no skills in demand worth great income"
This is a funny line Jom. Because this is completely contrary to the case. The people I hear utter America Hater the most is Republicans like LVL not youth.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 5:14pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 5:14pm
I have never read anything by LVL that suggests he hates America...quite the opposite.
Disagreeing does not equal hate or with those who disagree with me..or you.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:16pm
From a source I don't usually agree with and most liberals like to mention;
Is It Time to Bail Out of America?
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS 1/29/09
On January 28 Obama announced his $825 billion bailout plan. This comes on top of President Bush's $700 billion bailout of just a few months ago.
Obama says his plan will be more transparent than Bush's and will do more good for the economy.
As large as the bailouts are--a total of $1.5 trillion in four months--the amount is small in relation to the reported size of troubled assets that are in the tens of trillions of dollars. How do we know that by June there won't be another bailout, say $950 billion?
Where will the money come from?
Obama's bailout plan, added to the FY 2009 budget deficit he has inherited from Bush, opens a gaping expenditure hole of about $3 trillion. Who is going to purchase $3 trillion of US Treasury bonds?
Not the US consumer. The consumer is out of work and out of money. Private sector credit market debt is 174% of GDP. The personal savings rate is 2 percent. Ten percent of households are in foreclosure or arrears. Household debt-service ratio is at an all-time high. Household net worth has declined at a record rate. Housing inventories are at record highs.
Not America's foreign creditors. At best, the Chinese, Japanese, and Saudis can recycle their trade surpluses with the US into Treasury bonds, but the combined surplus does not approach the size of the US budget deficit.
http://www.counterpunch.org/
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 5:17pm
Nor have I heard anyone here on ther repub side call anyone an America hater because they came out contrary to a post or a policy..
I HAVE heard many leftys here ask the assinine childish question of someone who makes a point in a post..and be responded with "Why do you hate America?"
And always from the left here.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:18pm
......nobody outside of the Deep South, Idaho, Wyoming, and Oklahoma wants to be ruled by Republicans.....
Posted by onthehelm at 02/16/2009 @ 4:03pm
Yeah? California "wants to be ruled by Republican(s)"....at least, a RINO (who is struggling with his own identity and the hard fact of a Demo-dominated legislature).
By your statement, can we infer the great states of Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Kansas (in the news today), Illinois, Ohio, Penn...are rip-roaringly HAPPY to be ruled by Dems?
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 5:31pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 4:34pm
Also funny to hear you talk about California when it's governor is a Repub, and the biggest reason California can't get a decent budget pushed through is because Republicans refuse to cooperate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/us/17cali.html?hp
Interesting article about it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 5:32pm
Oh God, I'm so clever.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/16/2009 @ 4:19pm
Gee, me too! (hat tip to Bench)
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 5:33pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:18pm
You must not have read any of LVL's posts then saying that the left wants to destroy America and set up a socialist paradise.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 5:33pm
Interesting article about it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 5:32pm
LVL believes, as I do, that the lefy socialistic policies will destroy America...not that the left WANTS to destroy America..maybe yopu are reading things in the posts that are not there.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:37pm
MELBER: "Obama has pivoted deftly from the soft touch to knockout blows. He explained this approach...:
....You know, somebody comes at me I will knock them out. If not, I will try to understand their point of view and that actually serves me well. I give people the benefit of the doubt...."
Yes, Magic did "knock them out"...so that he can run unopposed.....modeled after a lot of the heroes of the Left!
Why the hurried advice to give up on "bipartisanship" after just 3 weeks? Didn't Magic give Rev. Wright 20 years' worth of the "benefit of the doubt"? Wasn't he downright Santa Claus when it came to Tim Geithner's little old tax problem? LOL!
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 5:40pm
Interesting article about it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 5:32pm
The hard truth is Arnold is a RINO..I can't see what he does or says that is conservative or even closely republican..
and the State has been run by the Legislature in Sacremento for years by Dems which have Gerrymandered themselves into power with ZERO chance of ever switching parties due to those voting lines drawn up years ago..no matter what the mix of the population is..
The budget impass is over raising taxes again..which the repubs do not want to do, since wealth and business is fleeing California faster than ever...
and the dems will not cut expenses because the unions will not accept any cuts, despite the condition of the state...
but tax increases will win out...
and more will flee. Last month the number of people leaving CA was higher than those coming in..including the flood of illegals which now practically run the place.
The real hard truth no one will face is California can not run the way it has any longer..Arnold should go on TV and be honest and cut spending across the board..and reduce services...more and more cities will file bankruptcy..I believe pensions are the issue..they owe more than they can pay...govt employees retire while in their 40s and collect full salary and bennies until death...good union policy except not economicaly viable, which did not matter to Dem politicins who agreed to those terms, because the promises did not matter...getting(votes) power did...and you will see that same in our federal system now..Chicago Patronage Machine...been around Illinois for generations and now has infested Washington... To our detriment..and will cause our loss of the country.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:50pm
LVL believes, as I do, that the lefy socialistic policies will destroy America...not that the left WANTS to destroy America..maybe yopu are reading things in the posts that are not there. Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:37pm
Actually I have seen LVL claim many times that the left WANTS to destroy America. You can deny it all you want but I know many people here will confirm what I am saying.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 6:07pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:50pm
Read the article. Your point about budget decreases rings false. They tried to pass 14 billion dollars in budget decreases.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 6:09pm
"He'll be out soon enough as average workers get sick and tire of being taken advanatage of. At which point, the Repubs will come back in and restore order."
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/16/2009 @ 3:45pm
That's when you belched, passed faced first, out, over and started blowing bubbles into the kool-aid of which you doubtless have a fresh glass of, now, right?
That wasn't analysis that was the bottom of the glass ...
Posted by V at 02/16/2009 @ 6:16pm
Like I've pointed out many times on other threads, Obamanation and the Undemocrats want to turn the rest of the nation into "NEW baja California" because it is such a "successful" socialistic state with now $42,000,000,000. of debt! (bwahahaha!) (My conservative state is projected in the red $600 million!)
I am proud of the return to base conservatism the Republican party has finally seen the light about which is its true strength and vitality! Palin was the first true shining start of this and we should thank her for it!
It is entertaining to watch Obamanation and the Undemocrats literally start to hang themselves with their sheer arrogant elitist totalitarian attitudes they display concerning governance of our representative republic. They have NO respect for the citizens, the constitution, or our laws which is obvious and continue to make that very plain in every concievable aspect of governance to date.
Next on Obamanations agenda is attacking the first amendment "free speech" and he is beginning talks on that already!
Question is will American actually give them a year or two before they let them know just how they feel about the gestapo tactics being employed by this admin. and congress? This will be intresting!
Posted by comancheamerican at 02/16/2009 @ 6:37pm
Also funny to hear you talk about California when it's governor is a Repub, and the biggest reason California can't get a decent budget pushed through is because Republicans refuse to cooperate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/us/17cali.html?hp
Interesting article about it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 5:32pm
Interesting you bring up California which is fighting to survive Democratic attempts to put the last nail in it's coffin.
We already are among the highest taxed states in the nation with the highest gasoline and income taxes.
The Dem proposal would increase the state gas tax by 50%
It would put a 5% surcharge on what is already the highest state income tax.
It will double the car tax on registrations
How do you think already struggling Californians are going to afford that?
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 6:37pm
I support the President but not the policy...
Sound familar?
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:01pm
In this case they don't even support the President that's as clear as day by their actions. Now, if he had gone along with ALL their requirements such as their favorite thing "tax cuts" everywhere they would have fallen over each other to vote "yes"!! It's alright, as they will be seen down the road for what they are and like I said earlier we'll see then who will be smirking.
Posted by Caj at 02/16/2009 @ 6:38pm
How do you think already struggling Californians are going to afford that?
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 6:37pm
See the same fertility doctor as Octomom!
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 6:41pm
LVL believes, as I do, that the lefy socialistic policies will destroy America...not that the left WANTS to destroy America..maybe yopu are reading things in the posts that are not there. Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 5:37pm
Actually I have seen LVL claim many times that the left WANTS to destroy America. You can deny it all you want but I know many people here will confirm what I am saying.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 6:07pm
It's because I've repeatedly told you that you either suffer from a reading disorder or you willfully ignore the facts.
I have said that "some" leftists want to destroy America and that is a fact. They make no pretensions about undoing the constitution.
As JM said, others may not be willfully wanting to destroy America, but their move towards a full socialist state will have that effect. And by destroy, I mean that we will no longer be the pre-eminent power in the world. We will have a lower overall quality of life. We will no longer be the envy of the world in personal opportunity.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 6:42pm
In this case they don't even support the President that's as clear as day by their actions. Now, if he had gone along with ALL their requirements such as their favorite thing "tax cuts" everywhere they would have fallen over each other to vote "yes"!! It's alright, as they will be seen down the road for what they are and like I said earlier we'll see then who will be smirking.
Posted by Caj at 02/16/2009 @ 6:38pm
First of all, Republicans in the House didn't get any input into the legislation. That is not conducive to support.
2nd, yes there would have been support if there had been a practical approach to the bill.
If they would have frozen discretionary spending like all companies and families have to do in tight times.
If they would have granted small business where 90% of jobs come from, a series of tax credit incentives.
If the tax "relief" in the form of $13 per week to W2 earners was meaningful; or that some similar kind of credit would be applied to the 40 million plus Americans who are not W2 earners and thus don't even get the $13 per week benefit.
And if California passes this 14 billion dollar tax hike, the $13 per week is already gone for more than 10% of the US population.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 6:53pm
Here's why, Mr. President, They're Just Not That Into You.......
John Hinderaker's summary, at Power Line, of the latest Ras Poll:
Most Don't Expect Pork Bill to Help
February 16, 2009 Posted by John at 3:08 PM
Rasmussen finds that only 38% of voters think the Democrats' pork bill will help the economy. 29% think it will hurt, while 24% expect it will make little difference. Among voters not affiliated with either party, 27% think it will help, and 34% think it will hurt. By 35%-32%, voters say they are less likely to vote for someone who voted for the pork bill.
Finally, most people seem to have followed the story pretty closely, and a large majority understand that hardly any Republicans voted for the Democrats' bill.
All of this will mean little if the economy recovers quickly and the Democrats can sell the idea that the stimulus bill was largely responsible. But neither of these is likely to happen. On the contrary, the next couple of years will, in all probability, bring both inflation and countless stories of how the "stimulus" money was wasted. In which case, the public's view of the Democrats' pork bill has most likely already peaked.
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 6:57pm
Oh, I don't think repukes hate America. After all, America has brought them all they ever wanted at the expense of the American middle class.
No more bipartisanship please. We don't need them and we don't want them. If REAL republicans ever get back in the picture, instead of the neocon traitors that now control the party, we may revisit that.
One does not invite the Hun to the party.
Posted by myfoot at 02/16/2009 @ 6:58pm
Read the article. Your point about budget decreases rings false. They tried to pass 14 billion dollars in budget decreases.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/16/2009 @ 6:09pm
Combined with tax increases...the short fall is $42 Billion...not $14 billion in decrease expenses...
what are the INCREASES and where are they going, or should I say, to whom?
THAT is the problem...more taxes to go to...
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 7:00pm
Back to Obama,
He campaigned as member of the far left. Between election day and inaugural day he acted like a centrist (which made conservatives like myself hopeful).
From inaugural day on he has gone back to his far left roots and conservatives are right to oppose him.
What the libs here and elsewhere want is for conservatives to either deny our principles or simply surrender.
That leads to a conclusion that what they really want is a typical socialist one party solution.
Ah, but they can take cheer in their hero, Hugo Chavez. He took that route this weekend and is now dictator for life.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 7:02pm
as they will be seen down the road for what they are and like I said earlier we'll see then who will be smirking.
Posted by Caj at 02/16/2009 @ 6:38pm |
Yes, inded,,we shall see...smirking or hiding.
Mask should file this one.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 7:06pm
Ah, but they can take cheer in their hero, Hugo Chavez. He took that route this weekend and is now dictator for life.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 7:02pm
If he survives the economic crash headed his way...he is already broke, oil revenues and sales down, promises and expenses up....SA has a history of rewarding tyrannts with a dose of their own medicine.
The calender has already begun to back down on Chavez...he wioll run out of US bogeyman before to long..I think we should cut bqack our purchases from him bt 1/2...he has already quietly begged US companies to come back and most have say...NO.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 7:10pm
While I seldom agree with him, Alexander Cockburn's article in today's Counterpunch is worth reading. A kind of pox on both their houses.
The Republicans don't have a plan, and though Obama has been energetically selling his package even his fans are beginning to wonder if he really has a convincing vision either.
There's nothing rhetorically tremendous in Obama's stimulus plan, just a billion here and a billion there, on and on in an endless array.
There's always something cloudy about Obama, just when I've almost persuaded myself to like the guy, always hedging his bets, doffing his cap to the ruling powers, even micromanaging his press conferences so there are no follow-up questions.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02132009.html
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 7:16pm
I think we should cut bqack our purchases from him bt 1/2...he has already quietly begged US companies to come back and most have say...NO.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 7:10pm
agreed!
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 7:17pm
CCC, here's something from HuffPo...by a Lefty Author who admits overwhelmingly, mainstream economists do NOT think the Pork Bill will work....and then proceed to demonstrate her economic IQ....convincingly low!
Ann Pettifor
Author, Debtonation - The Coming First World Debt Crisis
Posted February 15, 2009 | 07:59 PM (EST)
The Fiscal Stimulus Will Pay For Itself
Rachel Maddow gets it. Economists and Republicans don't.
I watched Prof. Jeffrey Sachs on Rachel Maddow's show the other day. She asked whether the fiscal stimulus would work. "No" he said emphatically, it would not. "No one has the tools....to fix this......the fiscal hole will cripple us for the long-term."
She tentatively mentioned 'the multiplier.' He brushed this aside with a counsel of despair. "We might have a few more jobs in the short-term but a massive deficit in the long-term..."
Scant consolation for 13 million unemployed and underemployed Americans. Their lives could be transformed by this fiscal stimulus.
And anyway, as Keynes once noted, in the long term we're all dead.
Sachs's analysis is overwhelmingly shared by mainstream economists. And by Republicans. These have been whipping voters into a frenzy with talk of 'generational theft.' Future generations, they argue, will be paying for this fiscal stimulus for decades to come. That is simply not true, as I will show below....
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 7:22pm
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 6:57pm
HAPP, curious...
why is Rasmussen almost the ONLY poll you guys cite???
Let me guess... "It's the one closest to the truth"????
(which just happens to coincide with YOUR views?)
Posted by Mask at 02/16/2009 @ 7:43pm
so funny............
a few months ago, happy was all for debt.
debt was money!
and larry wanted to invade, invade, invade......
and now,
they've become fiscal warriors.
about as much b.s. as a reagan presidency......
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 7:44pm
Freedom of Speech.....the next BIG BATTLE! IF somehow, Fairness Doctrine is imposed, we damn better applied that to academia....the faculty must be 50/50 split on right/left ideology!
Student Sues, Says Prof Called Him a "Fascist Bastard"
Updated 8:45 AM PST, Mon, Feb 16, 2009
A student is suing Los Angeles City College over an incident in which a professor refused to let him finish a speech against gay marriage, according to the Los Angeles Times. (LA Times)
Student Jonathan Lopez told the Times that the professor, John Matteson, called him a "fascist bastard" and refused to let him finish his speech during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved Proposition 8 banning gay marriage.
Lopez also said the teacher threatened to have him expelled when he complained to college authorities.
Lopez is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization based in Scottsdale, Ariz., and co-founded by evangelical leader James Dobson of Focus on the Family. Alliance staff counsel David J. Hacker told The Times Lopez was a victim of religious discrimination.
"He was expressing his faith during an open-ended assignment, but when the professor disagreed with some minor things he mentioned, the professor shut him down," Hacker said. "Basically, colleges and universities should give Christian students the same rights to free expression as other students."
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 7:45pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 7:44pm
Yep, have some lovely quotes from HAPP on deficits and how un-concerned he WAS with them....even to the point of the US just "cancelling out our foreign debt" if we wanted to and them fer'rin countries couldn't do a dang thing about it!
Remember "that HAPPY", HAPPY?
Posted by Mask at 02/16/2009 @ 7:49pm
Actually, Bush treated the dems fairly well. But if you want to "crush" the repubs, go ahead and try. Just remember payback is a bitch and the political swing back the other way will occur sometime - it Always does. The danger the dems face is overextending, since there is no one to say no, sort of like children. Both parties do this if they get complete control - they just can't help themselves.
Posted by pyeatte at 02/16/2009 @ 7:50pm
a few months ago, happy was all for debt.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 7:44pm
I still am....and what you don't expand on, is the use of debt by responsible folks for assets/investments that aren't overpriced or sitting atop a bubble!
Funny you raise the debt issue.....I spoke to the chief lending officer of a small-to-middling community bank just last Tuesday (at a Scout meeting, btw, my 18-yrs old got his Eagle Scout rank last Dec.). I was a borrower of his but at his prior bank.
I was assured that his (new) bank would be HAPPY to look at into backing any RE investments I might make....but, but, but....will NOT back any ventures I may mount in, say, Las Vegas....I'll have to source my debt locally...what I suspected but had to check as part of preparation.
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 7:52pm
why is Rasmussen almost the ONLY poll you guys cite???
Posted by Mask at 02/16/2009 @ 7:43pm
I cite whatever `hot' poll someone else hasn't posted that brings me HOPE....LOL!!
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 7:54pm
about as much b.s. as a reagan presidency...... Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 7:44pm
Yes, Mr. Frosty. I agree.
I'd have to say the the 'wingers' are drawn to this thread like I am drawn to ones about GW and Cheney. Freedom of speech being a beautiful thing, all one can do is let them go at it.
But it seems like they have all the answers, and I wonder... why aren't they running for office, why aren't they out there fixing things up they way they think they ought to be fixed? Retroactive bitching after being 'in charge' for eight long years isn't very constructive. I guess, for them, it's fun, and if that's all we've got left, I'm having some of it too.
Raptor!
Posted by ficheye at 02/16/2009 @ 7:58pm
Mr. President,
You are doing great. The care package was passed and soon will be delivered. We know it will help but will it be the cure, not for everything.
The GOP did you a favor by showing they are part of the problem and not solution, not so good for the country but great for the Democrats.
Your approval rating is holding so the blogs that say you are not pleasing liberals are not representative of pretty much anything.
The next big fight will be over Pentagon spending, I might park the new Marine One Helicopter in front of a Ford, Chevy and Chrysler and explain 1 new Helicopter is enough to buy 250,000 new cars or save a auto plant.
Do the same thing for all the over promised out of control marginally needed pet projects that do little to help our defense but does drain our pocket books.
Call the bluff of the Defense contractors by offering to freeze designs, sign a fixed price contract for any system that can be built and tested in the 30 months, or else they return the money. Their upside a huge contract with a bonus, their downside they get nothing. Oh yeah tell any General or Col they cannot retire and work for any contractor in any capacity for 3 years, that should reduce the din.
Keep up the good work and just hope the Republicans continue to just say no.
Posted by geek at 02/16/2009 @ 7:59pm
The lack of political awareness as well as short-sighted myopia and a blind hatred of George Bush has sealed America's fate. No sound decisions are made out of anger and hatred eats the hater up from the inside out. I would simply point the Obama voter, unable to see past their noses, to the presidential administration of one Juan Peron and first lady Eva, of Argentina. Therein lies the fate of this nation.
Posted by uPay2Play1 at 02/16/2009 @ 8:02pm
Gee, me too!
Posted by Happy at 02/16/2009 @ 5:33pm
;-)
Posted by Benchrest at 02/16/2009 @ 8:08pm
Yes, am familiar with change. And you are confusing change of the every so often variety with the type that happened with the New Deal...you know, that time when people said, "Fuck this," and largely voted Democrat for a very, very long time...especially because the Republicans fucked up.
Posted by onthehelm at 02/16/2009 @ 4:18pm
I read an article some time ago about the parties in power in different countries when the Great Depression hit...turns out that whichever party was in charge at the time, liberal or conservative, got tossed out for many years in favor of the opposing group...policies didn't matter...the only thing that did was whoever was in charge got the blame for causing it...
Posted by usc1 at 02/16/2009 @ 8:11pm
and larry wanted to invade, invade, invade......
and now,
they've become fiscal warriors.
about as much b.s. as a reagan presidency......
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 7:44pm
I still want military action where needed and I've always been a fiscal warrior.
I have criticized Bush and the Republicans for as long as I've posted here about the lack of conservative fiscal discipline.
So, no go FZ, I've been consistent.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 11:13pm
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 11:13pm
Forget FZ...he is like a mosquito....annoying but nothing really there...
I mean, look at the last post to you...
Can you imagine sitting all day doing nothing but complain about Canada, denounce their everything...including B. S. Trudeu,Clark,or any other whoever ran the place? I mean Reagan, of all people ran the table here and is listed in the US top 10 presidents, beloved by even his rivals..except the loons, of course..a man who changed the entire face and heart of the nation after the idiot Carter crapped on himself and us,(who actually dropped in popularity again)...
So,
There is nothing there.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/16/2009 @ 11:26pm
how's the spanish coming, jm?
larry's doing well.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 11:47pm
too funny....
<b>actually, it goes way back....
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/12/2009 @ 10:10pm
Takes a Canuck to tell it like it really is!
Posted by Happy at 02/12/2009 @ 10:25pm</b>
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 11:51pm
larry,
wouldn't it be cheaper to not need to have such a big military?
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 11:51pm
larry,
wouldn't it be cheaper to not need to have such a big military?
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/16/2009 @ 11:51pm
Yes, but unfortunately there is a lot of evil out there and a lot of people who wish to do harm to the US and others who cannot defend themselves.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/17/2009 @ 12:26am
The Republican party is nothing more than an exclusive white man's club. Having an African-American president must be more than they can bear!
Posted by WalterJohnson at 02/17/2009 @ 02:54am
wouldn't it be cheaper to not need to have such a big military?
Posted by frosty zoom
Military spending and wars is all the Republicans have to offer this country. They've been beating this drum so long now, they can't stop.
There was a time when the 9/11 attacks put asses in the seats and voters in the booth, but now....
People see their 401k's circling in the crapper and their home values evaporating. The businesses they work for are closing....
Posted by koroviev at 02/17/2009 @ 03:18am
Posted by V at 02/16/2009 @ 6:16pm
Ever hear of a guy named Jimmy Carter? Ever hear of a guy named Mayor Dinkins? The executive who cannot keep order is out on his ass.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/17/2009 @ 08:08am
Yes, but unfortunately there is a lot of evil out there and a lot of people who wish to do harm to the US and others who cannot defend themselves.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/17/2009 @ 12:26am
but wouldn't it be cheaper to stop funding the evil guys?
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/17/2009 @ 08:25am
Ah, but they can take cheer in their hero, Hugo Chavez. He took that route this weekend and is now dictator for life.
Posted by antisocialist at 02/16/2009 @ 7:02pm
Given oil is below $50 a barrel, I sure as hell wouldn't insure that life for more than one year.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/17/2009 @ 08:25am
The Republican party is nothing more than an exclusive white man's club. Having an African-American president must be more than they can bear!
Posted by WalterJohnson at 02/17/2009 @ 02:54am
I tend to agree!!!
Posted by Caj at 02/17/2009 @ 08:41am
Fd,
Spanish is useless in America for doing business and getting ahead. The question should be how is the English of thee here wanting to be American.
I realize this makes no sense to you. However, when I move to A Spanish speaking country I am obligated to speak Spanish.
I have no need to speak Spanish. My children do know Spanish which is good because your types will make a necessity for the next generation to know Spanish just to speak to the people in their own country.
It saddens me to see the decendants of the once mighty Aztecs and Incas standing behind leaf blowers and roofing hammers. It is an avoidable situation.
I do speak German and it does help when in Europe. I learned a few Chinese words but I am useless in China and in many ways in the same way most Mexicans are here. I would be reduced to low job and economic status if I had to move to China. I would, however, immerse myself in Chinese in order to improve my position.
Since you are a Spanish speaker and have a Spanish speaking wife, why areypu living in Mexico where you can live well with no real income? Or is it the other things that keep you in Canada, like all the other advantages western society gives you... For free?
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/17/2009 @ 09:40am
FZ,
Yes it would save money with no mlitary to pay for , how much would we save if we didn't carry so many people on all the social systems?
If people would REALLY take more personal responsibility for themselves and not rely on the nanny state we would be able to keep another 30% of wages.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/17/2009 @ 09:44am
If people would REALLY take more personal responsibility for themselves and not rely on the nanny state we would be able to keep another 30% of wages.------Posted by YourJomamma at 02/17/2009 @ 09:44am
Want to tell us again how your mother is taking "more personal responsibility" for her healthcare, MAASCH???
Posted by Mask at 02/17/2009 @ 10:48am
We both understand and overstate the importance of bipartisanship.
First, the base the author mentions elected Obama because he promised to end the old ways of Washington. His base is not left-wing bloggers, most of whom tend not to believe in any need to compromise with anyone about anything.
Second, let us define our terms. Bipartisanship for the sake of winning the vote of a sanctimonious, lying hypocrite like Eric Cantor (obscenity is terrible if it's Janet Jackson's breast but not if it is an anti-union or anti-Democratic commercial, and his hero is that philandering liar Newt Gingrich) is not bipartisanship but stupidity.
But can we count? Has anyone noticed that Senate Democrats have held together? So let's give a little credit to a moderate, Harry Reid. However, even that won't give us enough votes to bring anything to the floor. What happened on the stimulus bill will need to keep happening: making adjustments to win the vote of one of the three moderate Republicans. That is bipartisanship, and that is what will make the Obama agenda even remotely possible.
You don't like it? I don't either. So, let's get out there in 2010 and defeat Republican Senate incumbents or win open seats for Democrats. Otherwise, quit calling on Obama to ignore Republicans because, if he does, nothing is going to get done.
Posted by Michael Green at 02/17/2009 @ 11:22am
We both understand and overstate the importance of bipartisanship.
First, the base the author mentions elected Obama because he promised to end the old ways of Washington. His base is not left-wing bloggers, most of whom tend not to believe in any need to compromise with anyone about anything.
Second, let us define our terms. Bipartisanship for the sake of winning the vote of a sanctimonious, lying hypocrite like Eric Cantor (obscenity is terrible if it's Janet Jackson's breast but not if it is an anti-union or anti-Democratic commercial, and his hero is that philandering liar Newt Gingrich) is not bipartisanship but stupidity.
But can we count? Has anyone noticed that Senate Democrats have held together? So let's give a little credit to a moderate, Harry Reid. However, even that won't give us enough votes to bring anything to the floor. What happened on the stimulus bill will need to keep happening: making adjustments to win the vote of one of the three moderate Republicans. That is bipartisanship, and that is what will make the Obama agenda even remotely possible.
You don't like it? I don't either. So, let's get out there in 2010 and defeat Republican Senate incumbents or win open seats for Democrats. Otherwise, quit calling on Obama to ignore Republicans because, if he does, nothing is going to get done.
Posted by Michael Green at 02/17/2009 @ 11:22am
Posted by Mask at 02/17/2009 @ 10:48am
Have you ever heard of "sophistry". Do you know where the word comes from?
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/17/2009 @ 11:28am
Who here signs a contract without being allowed to see the fine print.
It is ridiculous to now say, no more Mr. Nice guy, no more bipartisanship, after the Democrats have pushed through the biggest spending bill in history without consulting the Democrats, without so much as showing them the full 1000 page bill they were asked to vote on. Even the Senate/House conference committee was denied many pages and many details.
The President did not even have the goodness to produce his own bill. He let the House Democrats build one out of all their long sought for pet projects. Everything, including the old Welfare legislation that we thought had finally been escaped under Clinton, was resurrected.
Why should the Republicans have signed on to something that excluded them and made a mockery of "temporary, targeted and timely"?
Moreover, to say the Democrats are merely treating the Republicans as they were treated under Bush forget that Bush did not play the paragon of virtue game. Obama did. He ran on a CHANGE agenda. TRANSCENDING the OLD POLITICS was the hallmark of Obama's candidacy. That is how he captured the nomination. That was his promise to the nation. That is why voters chose him in November. But now Obama's operatives see no reason to behave differently than in the past.
The speed with which Barack Obama welshed on all his promises is amazing. He has hired lobbyist, tax delinquents, Penetta agrees that under certain circumstances torture is acceptable. The President is now unwilling to renegotiate NAFTA, to sit down without preconditions, etc., etc.
But it is not his fault? The Republicans are not cooperating? They leave him no choice?
The culprit was a demagogic campaign of virtue full of phony and impracticable promises.
Posted by Hugo_Pirovano at 02/17/2009 @ 11:33am
<i>Posted by WalterJohnson at 02/17/2009 @ 02:54am </i>
Patent nonsense. I'd love to see you try and justify it.
Posted by Thrawn at 02/17/2009 @ 11:36am
It's really ridiculous to think that bipartisanship can be formed by an invitation to eat popcorn while watching the Super Bowl. Votes in Congress don't come that cheap.
Posted by pawlowski at 02/17/2009 @ 12:09pm
There may be few issues where bipartisanship may work, But bringing faith based issues into politics has prevented any hope compromise. I am not only referring to religion, but faith based ideology. I have never seen such a gulf between the two major parties.
Posted by P. J. Casey at 02/17/2009 @ 12:31pm
>>>And anyone who thinks the G.O.P. will get more cooperative is placing a bet on politicians growing less political as the next elections draw closer. <<<
Going nuclear on the filibuster, or one more election cycle of Republican losses in the senate will get them off this phony Reagan philosophical kick.
When you have NO power, then you adjust.
Posted by Metteyya at 02/17/2009 @ 12:32pm
It is not just the market downturn and the banks and the layoffs concerning Americans, but consumers are also not very confident in the US government's ability to help. We are tired of the same old message, it is the other parties fault. Albert Einstein once stated that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. In my opinion, the results we have seen lately from the US government is bordering on insanity.
The problem is non bi-partisanship. It is a sad state of affairs that each party refuses to do nothing but to stand behind the party that supports them. How does anything ever get done. It is sad but true that it is in the interest of the Republican party to see Obama fail, because then they would have another chance in four years to win the majority of the votes. "Human history is the sad result of each one looking out for himself." Julio Cortazar.
We shouldn't have two opposing teams, but one US team. After all if things don't improve other countries will not see it as a Republican or a Democrat failure, but as a US government failure.
Posted by kaybeth34 at 02/17/2009 @ 1:23pm
Let's think outside the box: What Congress needs is redesigning. In my opinion, that would help improve consumer confidence more than anything. The fundamental problem with Congress is the following: For someone to be successful politician, they usually have to obtain the backing of either the Democrats or Republicans and/or have backing of lobbyist and other special interest groups. For the politician to remain in Congress he must please those that put him there. "The force of selfishness is as inevitable and as calculable as the force of gravitation." ~Haillard
Here's an idea let's vote Congress men/women in by utilizing modernize technology. I think all campaigns and votes should be held similar to reality shows. Every season we are presented with a new set of candidates, they are given challenges, their history is dug into, their past achievements clearly represented and every new season we vote candidates in to the House of Republicans and do the same for candidates of the Senate. No more Democrats, no more Republicans; just representatives of the people.
This would solve three major problems: 1) the cost of campaigning 2) the non bi-partanship currently in Congress and 3) problems with taking campaign funds from special interest groups. Different, definitely; but, here's the Catch 22, guess who would have to make it law. That's right, our non-functioning government.
Posted by kaybeth34 at 02/17/2009 @ 1:25pm
The best news since he announced as a candidate for President is that Barack Obama not only sees the long haul but is equipped to remember how long it is and has the patience to stay on the course.
Great pundits such as Ari Melber must meet a deadline due considerably earlier than the elections of 2010. Ari can conviently ignore that our President isn't necessarily wooing the ELECTED Republicans. He is really wooing those who put them in office and that's where his 2010 schedule points.
President Obama has pointed out that it has taken our nation a long time to get into the mess it is in. And, he adds, it will take a long time to get us out!
So go ahead and meet your deadlines even if the articles in the Naiton continue to disappoint us readers with their lack of substance and constant sniveling. We'll wait here and maybe you'll see the improvements when President Obama has had more than a month to work on the problem.
Posted by HawaiiBill at 02/17/2009 @ 3:01pm
Want to tell us again how your mother is taking "more personal responsibility" for her healthcare, MAASCH???
Posted by Mask at 02/17/2009 @ 10:48am
Sure..I will tell you loudly.
I found out she pays her own health care and my brother paid for the rest out of what my father left her after he died....
you know..the money the dems want to take away from her(death tax) and give her govt health care instead?
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/17/2009 @ 3:15pm
Most of these posts sound like Republican talking points. How much are you being paid to go onto The Nation web site and repeat the same worn-out rants? I'm not reading anything new.
Posted by hprobst at 02/17/2009 @ 6:22pm
Our planet has virtually become a "Global Village" - whatever is happening is almost in full view of everyone.
The Republicans' recent playing peace time politics, in fact perfect Obstructionism, during the recent passage of Obama's first Stimulus package, ratifies the fact that the Republicans and the Democrats are poles apart in terms of their stoicism. The vehement validation of Obama's theme of "Change we need" in US Elections 2008 is its self-speaking evidence.
The entire world has witnessed the Democrats despite possessing the nation's mandate to reign, run and manage all their domestic as well as the planetary affairs as they deem fit, still generously and repeatedly offering Bipartisan Bouquets to the Republicans, even while cleaning the massive mess created and left behind by the Republicans, in reply to the Republicans' utterly unwarranted and deliberate obstructions in the essential legislation process so desperately needed to overwhelm the economic crises of catastrophic magnitude ever witnessed by the planet which the Republicans let or led that to happen. So has the world witnessed the nonacceptance of Obama's bipartisan bouquets by the Republicans.
Such an unnatural attitude elicits that the Republicans are reluctant to come on board with Obama, though they are expected to recognise that their miserable failures in the Economic and Foreign Policy sectors have caused their relegations to a minority party and their subsequent vacation in disgrace of the White House occupancy and also what the nation's mandate and its instructions demands of them. Repeated failures in his these laudable efforts may force Obama to ensure he was not trying to take out blood out of Italian marble.
Posted by Qayyum Khan at 02/19/2009 @ 02:04am
Our planet has virtually become a "Global Village" - whatever is happening is almost in full view of everyone.
The Republicans' recent playing peace time politics, in fact perfect Obstructionism, during the recent passage of Obama's first Stimulus package, ratifies the fact that the Republicans and the Democrats are poles apart in terms of their stoicism. The vehement validation of Obama's theme of "Change we need" in US Elections 2008 is its self-speaking evidence.
The entire world has witnessed the Democrats despite possessing the nation's mandate to reign, run and manage all their domestic as well as the planetary affairs as they deem fit, still generously and repeatedly offering Bipartisan Bouquets to the Republicans, even while cleaning the massive mess created and left behind by the Republicans, in reply to the Republicans' utterly unwarranted and deliberate obstructions in the essential legislation process so desperately needed to overwhelm the economic crises of catastrophic magnitude ever witnessed by the planet which the Republicans let or led that to happen. So has the world witnessed the nonacceptance of Obama's bipartisan bouquets by the Republicans.
Such an unnatural attitude elicits that the Republicans are reluctant to come on board with Obama, though they are expected to recognise that their miserable failures in the Economic and Foreign Policy sectors have caused their relegations to a minority party and their subsequent vacation in disgrace of the White House occupancy and also what the nation's mandate and its instructions demands of them. Repeated failures in his these laudable efforts may force Obama to ensure he was not trying to take out blood out of Italian marble.
Posted by Qayyum Khan at 02/19/2009 @ 02:06am
Our planet has virtually become a "Global Village" - whatever is happening is almost in full view of everyone.
The Republicans' recent playing peace time politics, in fact perfect Obstructionism, during the recent passage of Obama's first Stimulus package, ratifies the fact that the Republicans and the Democrats are poles apart in terms of their stoicism. The vehement validation of Obama's theme of "Change we need" in US Elections 2008 is its self-speaking evidence.
The entire world has witnessed the Democrats despite possessing the nation's mandate to reign, run and manage all their domestic as well as the planetary affairs as they deem fit, still generously and repeatedly offering Bipartisan Bouquets to the Republicans, even while cleaning the massive mess created and left behind by the Republicans, in reply to the Republicans' utterly unwarranted and deliberate obstructions in the essential legislation process so desperately needed to overwhelm the economic crises of catastrophic magnitude ever witnessed by the planet which the Republicans let or led that to happen. So has the world witnessed the nonacceptance of Obama's bipartisan bouquets by the Republicans.
Such an unnatural attitude elicits that the Republicans are reluctant to come on board with Obama, though they are expected to recognise that their miserable failures in the Economic and Foreign Policy sectors have caused their relegations to a minority party and their subsequent vacation in disgrace of the White House occupancy and also what the nation's mandate and its instructions demands of them. Repeated failures in his these laudable efforts may force Obama to ensure he was not trying to take out blood out of Italian marble.
Posted by Qayyum Khan at 02/19/2009 @ 02:08am
Our planet has virtually become a "Global Village" - whatever is happening is almost in full view of everyone.
The Republicans' recent playing peace time politics, in fact perfect Obstructionism, during the recent passage of Obama's first Stimulus package, ratifies the fact that the Republicans and the Democrats are poles apart in terms of their stoicism. The vehement validation of Obama's theme of "Change we need" in US Elections 2008 is its self-speaking evidence.
The entire world has witnessed the Democrats despite possessing the nation's mandate to reign, run and manage all their domestic as well as the planetary affairs as they deem fit, still generously and repeatedly offering Bipartisan Bouquets to the Republicans, even while cleaning the massive mess created and left behind by the Republicans, in reply to the Republicans' utterly unwarranted and deliberate obstructions in the essential legislation process so desperately needed to overwhelm the economic crises of catastrophic magnitude ever witnessed by the planet which the Republicans let or led that to happen. So has the world witnessed the nonacceptance of Obama's bipartisan bouquets by the Republicans.
Such an unnatural attitude elicits that the Republicans are reluctant to come on board with Obama, though they are expected to recognise that their miserable failures in the Economic and Foreign Policy sectors have caused their relegations to a minority party and their subsequent vacation in disgrace of the White House occupancy and also what the nation's mandate and its instructions demands of them. Repeated failures in his these laudable efforts may force Obama to ensure he was not trying to take out blood out of Italian marble. Being nice to those who don't deserve is always worse.
Posted by Qayyum Khan at 02/19/2009 @ 02:26am
Our planet has virtually become a "Global Village" - whatever is happening is almost in full view of everyone.
The Republicans' recent playing peace time politics, in fact perfect Obstructionism, during the recent passage of Obama's first Stimulus package, ratifies the fact that the Republicans and the Democrats are poles apart in terms of their stoicism. The vehement validation of Obama's theme of "Change we need" in US Elections 2008 is its self-speaking evidence.
The entire world has witnessed the Democrats despite possessing the nation's mandate to reign, run and manage all their domestic as well as the planetary affairs as they deem fit, still generously and repeatedly offering Bipartisan Bouquets to the Republicans, even while cleaning the massive mess created and left behind by the Republicans, in reply to the Republicans' utterly unwarranted and deliberate obstructions in the essential legislation process so desperately needed to overwhelm the economic crises of catastrophic magnitude ever witnessed by the planet which the Republicans let or led that to happen. So has the world witnessed the nonacceptance of Obama's bipartisan bouquets by the Republicans.
Such an unnatural attitude elicits that the Republicans are reluctant to come on board with Obama, though they are expected to recognise that their miserable failures in the Economic and Foreign Policy sectors have caused their relegations to a minority party and their subsequent vacation in disgrace of the White House occupancy and also what the nation's mandate and its instructions demands of them. Repeated failures in his these laudable efforts may force Obama to ensure he was not trying to take out blood out of Italian marble. Being nice to those who don't deserve is always worse.
Posted by Qayyum Khan at 02/19/2009 @ 02:42am
"""Republicans rebuffed Obama's bipartisanship, is it time for Obama to fulfill his pledge to "crush them"?"
No they didn't rebuff Obama,
...they rebuffed the spending program which has very little to do with jobs or stimulus...just pay backs to voting groups.""
"Just pay backs to voting groups"? I assume you mean everyone who has been economically swindled and devastated by the Republican crime cartel, and finally voted for someone who represents their interests. Yes, you are correct. These are exactly the people who need and require the benefits of the stimulus bill.
On a further note, Spending and stimulus are synonymous. Taxcuts to the wealthy are simply not a good stimulus for the economy nor are they morally good for the country as a whole. It has been shown that extending unemployment and spending to help the poor has over twice the stimulus effect as taxcuts,
Giving a hundred dollars to someone who desperately needs it, almost guarantees the money will be spent and cycle through the economy; amplifying the unit power of the money, creating real wealth. Taxcuts for people who do not materially need the money offers no such guarantee. As an example; an individual who received a million dollar windfall in the form of a taxcut that he wasn't required to spend, might be tempted to gamble it on some derivative index or hedge fund. These types of investments are zero sum games. They produce no common wealth it is merely money that exchanges hands within a pool of gamblers who equally do not need the money, nor are required to spend it.
Posted by Mossydog at 02/19/2009 @ 4:24pm