dagblog - Comments for "Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive"

The "corporate news media" is

Jason Everett Miller — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 19:22:47 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

The "corporate news media" is owned by corporations, not republicans.

Disney owns ABC. NBC Universal is a division of GE which owns MSNBC. CNN is owned by Westinghouse/CBS. Even Fox News is owned by a public company, despite the number of shares the ideologue Murdock holds.

The American media has been playing a game of false equivalents for decades because it keeps eyeballs glued to the tube.

I suggest that opening with

Jason Everett Miller — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 19:11:11 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

I suggest that opening with ad hominem attacks proves I have less to learn than the critic. If you have something constructive to add to my proposition that doesn't involve a typo, please feel free. Otherwise, go Cheney yourself.

Yet somehow, the "liberal"

Jason Everett Miller — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 19:09:23 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

Yet somehow, the "liberal" farming solution led us to a nation of less nutritious food and unaccountable super agriculture companies. Soundbites and partisan warfare don't fix a plural society.

Ideology is ineffective no matter which side practices its implementation.

Truman demonizing his "opponents" instead of pursuing sustainable solutions is why long-time partisans make horrible presidents. Don't forget, this is also the guy who ordered the atomic destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Let's talk next about how Charles Manson is the best guy to debate NEA grants.

A little learning is a

axolotlcheesehead — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:58:32 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

A little learning is a dangerous thing, Jason. That's a statement which can be taken in different ways . . . I suggest you have a LOT MORE to learn.

For instance, "coup de grace," (with a circumflex over the a.)

He faced down editorial

Jason Everett Miller — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:02:42 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

He faced down editorial boards across the country, many on video, so to say he can't speak for himself is just more Soundbite Soldiering.

"Obama is acting like he is

eds — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:57:51 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

"Obama is acting like he is more concerned about appeasing the losers and assuring them that he is not beholden to the people who elected him or ready to govern through assertive leadership"

That's one spin a person could put on it. The curious thing about the truth is that it can easily be spun for better or worse.

I missed a "than" which would make "more" a measurable notion. As it is, it's just vacant fluff.

Obama is acting like the guy who campaigned without resorting to negative ads when he could have, who calls for unity and wants to assure everyone reasonable will have their voices heard. His kind of assertive leadership is just different, and that's part of what got him elected, imo.

You are trying to make Obama

Jason Everett Miller — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:25:45 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

You are trying to make Obama into what you thought he would turn into, rather than what he actually is. That isn't anymore realistic with politicians than it is with a significant other.

Obama is doing exactly what he campaigned on, so any disillusionment is purely on you. Speaking as someone who also "put my energies and money into" Obama's campaign, I am quite happy with his pragmatic and principled approach. I never expected it to pay off dividends in the very first skirmish. I am not sure I agree with all of his choices, but so far Geitner is playing his role well as are the other cabinet picks.

The democratic Congress is running around with their heads in their rears, but perhaps that was part of the plan as well. They just couldn't help but accommodate the liberal and push a bunch of small ticket, ideological-driven items into the bill, knowing what the response from republicans (and many moderate democrats) would be.

That is purely a checkers move and politics is definitely chess.

One plans a dozen moves ahead of the coup de grasin chess, not caring that an opponent might be using a checkers strategy. That doesn't make Obama naive or stupid. It just makes him unwilling to start playing checkers in the middle of a chess match because the other side (many on his side as well) is doing the same thing.

The purpose of the game is get Checkmate, not shout "King Me!" from the top of your lungs.

Right on!

loki — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:15:13 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

Right on!

It's always fun to watch

brantlamb — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:10:34 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

It's always fun to watch wingnuts put words in the mouths of Democrats. Nice try, honey.

It's called ceding to the

Jason Everett Miller — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 15:45:11 +0000

In reply to Truman to Obama: Put them on the defensive

It's called ceding to the wishes of representatives for 45% of the country, plus whatever percentage of moderate democrats who don't think this spending actually accomplishes what it sets out to do.

I know three moderate democratic friends who have varying degree of heatburn with the bill as it exists. They are also suspicious of thing that big that they rush through the process. So am I. These guys can't get things right that they debate for months, so how is a couple weeks enough time to get it right?

Would another month or two be so bad? I think not. Look at TARP to see how well Congress performas under pressure.

I think Congressional democrats totally spoiled Obama's play, unless these "pork" programs were sacrificial pigs to be removed in the interst of "giving" republicans tax cuts they always planned on adding.

To Zipper's point, he was talking of the progressive (liberal) left who use "fighting words" vice intelligent thought. There are many pragmatic progressives that you continue to paint as "surrender monkeys" or whatever, rather than forcing them to be more progressive. Just because Harold Ford et. al. acted one way in the past, doesn't mean they will act the same way in the future.

Taking out a bunch of special interest pet projects, no matter how needed, is not the same thing as using republican ralking points. Compromising on language, but attaining your progressive goals just the same, is not the same thing as the Clinton "Third Way" that was really a third rail.

Times have changed and the democrats will have to deliver progressive change, notwithstanding the strange DC dance they must do for cameras, or they will lose big in the 2010 primaries. Just like Congressional republicans will if they continue to offer sound bites instead of solutions.