dagblog - Comments for "Post Partisanship"

As I said earlier on ... ...

Beetlejuice — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:11:25 +0000

In reply to Don't know about the cleaning

As I said earlier on ...

... the Democrat controlled Congress proved to be inept at handling the basic needs of the President, the Party and the public they served ... they totally lacked the party discipline the GOP's had and what they did pass was as messy as a botched abortion ... both fetus and mother died.

There's a lot of people who were counting on both Obama and the Democrats to at least put up a good fight even if it meant taking a few lumps and not getting every thing. Instead, there wasn't even a shoving match over the issues and too much was sacrificed without anything gained in return.

I can see sacrificing wants, needs and desires from what I believe are issues that need to be addressed for the common good of all, however, when sacrifices are made on one side and the other side of the aisle doesn't surrender a single issue, then I begin to wonder if I've entered a political Twilight Zone.

Obama and the Democrats are going to have to work harder than they've ever had if they're interested in my vote in 2012. That means they're going to have to take a firm stand on the issues and be willing to fight tooth and nail.

Your first paragraph says a

Barth — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 14:07:00 +0000

In reply to One difference between the

Your first paragraph says a lot, and to a great extent, it is so that the President is no longer seen as the national leader, just one, and mainly the leader of a political party.

I am not sure that the usually stupid American people are unable to see why nothing has been done.

Don't know about the cleaning

Barth — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 14:05:00 +0000

In reply to Currently, the GOP

Don't know about the cleaning of the clock thing, http://www.pollingreport.com/cong2012.htm, but your last paragraph is, it seems to me, the point.

Currently, the GOP

Beetlejuice — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 12:02:00 +0000

In reply to Post Partisanship

Currently, the GOP wish-list-for-the-Presidency is teeming with candidates all trying to prove they're more of a nay-sayer of common sense than the other wanna-be candidates. And the GOP base is lapping it up like a puppy with a bowl of milk all to itself.

That's a difficult dilemma for Obama and the Democrats to overcome when faced with the structural breakdown the country has been straddled with since the waning days of the 2nd Bu$h administration. What's more interesting is the GOPer's have been successful in taking a short position on the US economy ... and it looks as if they're going to clean the Democrat's clocks in 2012.

So the question is ... how can the GOpers be so successful with the public when they blatantly make statements their intent is to run the economy into the ground which in turns destroys the accumulated wealth of the public who put them into office in the first place? I'm amazed so many people are willing to sacrifice their financial well-being as well as those of their neighbors simply based on political ideological principles.

What has been missing from the legislative stew is a strong herb that gives a distinct flavor everyone can recognize ... a herb that gives the stew a taste people from any political ideology can recognize and accept as palatable. It may not be savoring to some, but it will meet the basic requirement as sustenance ... when faced with the alternative - starvation, which is were we're at currently.

As the Master Chef, Obama has only been adding pinches of salt and pepper to the stew. Seems he's deaf to the complains from his diner patrons the courses being served so far have been too bland from one side of the dining room while the other side complaints the meat is too rancid. Perhaps he needs to create another Cabinet post and nominate Martha Stewart to it?

IMO, Obama is too timid to use stronger spices to enhance the legislation in Congress. Whereas, Bu$h didn't give a rat's ass because he knew the GOPer controlled Congress would rubber stamp whatever he sent them. And when the Democrats regained control, what he sent them gave them no choice to discuss or debate issues ... financial meltdown of 2008 for example. Note that in the first two years of Obama's presidency, the Democrat controlled Congress proved to be inept at handling the basic needs of the President, the Party and the public they served ... they totally lacked the party discipline the GOP's had and what they did pass was as messy as a botched abortion ... both fetus and mother died.

While I understand the reason behind the drive for bipartisanship, Obama doesn't grasp the fact that for bipartisanship to succeed, the other party has to acknowledge the need to set aside political ideology and work for the common good of all. The GOPer's realized at the get-go Obama was leaving himself wide open for a political assult and they haven't let up since ... bipartisanship died on the first wave of attacks, yet Obama refuses to believe it's dead.

Obama may get re-elected, however, I fail to see the point other than if he looses there will be one hell of a bat-shit-crazy person sitting in the White House. But there will be one there 2016 if he insists on keeping the ship of state on the same course so does it really matter when?

One difference between the

Elusive Trope — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 00:43:00 +0000

In reply to Don't think so and the 2010

One difference between the days of FDR/Truman and Obama/? is that the today the President is associated much more with his or her Party. There was a time when the president was seen as...well...the president. Not a symbolic representation of an ideology from one or the other side of the aisle. There was a time when the president spoke (on the radio or tv), people stopped and listened regardless of their political leanings. A speech then is different than it is today.

People are not looking for anyone to be punished (they're basically blaming everyone in DC regardless of the letter next to their name). What they want is something to get done. The people are tired of words.

Don't think so and the 2010

Barth — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 00:24:00 +0000

In reply to Mr. Obama and his aides are

Don't think so and the 2010 elections may agree with the FDR groupies. A reasonably full set of accomplishments were seen as insignificant because the President did not defend his positions. The loudest voices were the ones denouncing "Obamacare" even if they no longer tried to push the death panels meme and there was really nobody who wanted to defend it.

In an atmosphere such as this where one party just says no, they need to be called on it and punished for it. Acceding to their demands, just to get something passed is not something people will fight to maintain.

Exhibit A: is, of course, President Truman's attack on the do nothing Congress. He had accomplished little (other than being in the big chair when the war ended) and was president over the wrenching return to a peacetime economy but he fought hard and, against all odds, won.

Mr. Obama and his aides are

Elusive Trope — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 19:32:12 +0000

In reply to Post Partisanship

Mr. Obama and his aides are skeptical that voters will reward bold proposals if those ideas do not pass Congress. It is their judgment that moderate voters want tangible results rather than speeches.

There is a deep truth to this, even if the FDR groupies don't won't to see that reality.

I think the Ramones capture

Elusive Trope — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 19:27:53 +0000

In reply to Post Partisanship

I think the Ramones capture the tone better than Groucho.