Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Tophat665 · 06-13-2008, 02:41 PM

Actually, one of pan's two core arguments - if I am correctly apprehending it - to wit - that whoever has the whitehouse next is in an impossible situation, cannot but fail miserably, and will sour the country for their party for the next n*4 years where n>2 - is one of the ones that really scares me. I am seriously worried that whoever takes the whitehouse next, regardless of any actions they take or fail to take, will be presiding over a trainwreck of Hooverian proportions.

So the question is, do we want a young man in full possession of his faculties, or another case of impending alzheimers. Reagan got away with it only because he was losing his mind at the right time for the policies of everyone president from Truman forward to come to fruition. A guy with a slim chance of doing the right thing or a guy with no chance at all. Is the cup half empty or half full if the liquid is cyanide?

That said, his second core argument - that Obama scares him - largely because of 1) pandering and 2) Rev. Wright - is pure twaddle.

All politicians pander. It's a core job function. You might hold it against Obama more because he presents himself as above it, but you'd be naive to believe that in the first place.

I think he handled the Rev. Wright thing pretty well. Black ministers, in my limited experience say some crazy, racist shit until they see the white guy about 10 rows back. The issue is that their racism is based on a not unfounded, historically speaking, assumption that the man (that would be you and me) is trying to keep the black man down. I don't know about you, but I am only trying to keep the crazies down regardless of color. Obama explained at length his view on race relations and correctly identified the problem. When Wright gave him problems after the speech, he kicked him to the curb. I give him credit for giving his friend one chance to make it right. This is high stakes politics, after all. (And if you have a problem with having friends who have some fucked up repugnant viewpoints, well, I'm glad you have enough friends that you can demand perfection. I don't think that is the case with most people.)

You may have noticed today that there was a 5-4 decision on whether Habeus Corpus was a fundamental right in SCOTUS today. 4 years of McCain and that could well go the other way. That will be what he is forced to pay for evangelical votes - another Scalia clone.

I'm sure that did absolutely nothing to change your mind, yet I feel better for saying it anyway.

06-13-2008, 02:41 PM	#108 (permalink)
Tophat665 Minion of the scaléd ones Location: Northeast Jesusland	Actually, one of pan's two core arguments - if I am correctly apprehending it - to wit - that whoever has the whitehouse next is in an impossible situation, cannot but fail miserably, and will sour the country for their party for the next n*4 years where n>2 - is one of the ones that really scares me. I am seriously worried that whoever takes the whitehouse next, regardless of any actions they take or fail to take, will be presiding over a trainwreck of Hooverian proportions. So the question is, do we want a young man in full possession of his faculties, or another case of impending alzheimers. Reagan got away with it only because he was losing his mind at the right time for the policies of everyone president from Truman forward to come to fruition. A guy with a slim chance of doing the right thing or a guy with no chance at all. Is the cup half empty or half full if the liquid is cyanide? That said, his second core argument - that Obama scares him - largely because of 1) pandering and 2) Rev. Wright - is pure twaddle. All politicians pander. It's a core job function. You might hold it against Obama more because he presents himself as above it, but you'd be naive to believe that in the first place. I think he handled the Rev. Wright thing pretty well. Black ministers, in my limited experience say some crazy, racist shit until they see the white guy about 10 rows back. The issue is that their racism is based on a not unfounded, historically speaking, assumption that the man (that would be you and me) is trying to keep the black man down. I don't know about you, but I am only trying to keep the crazies down regardless of color. Obama explained at length his view on race relations and correctly identified the problem. When Wright gave him problems after the speech, he kicked him to the curb. I give him credit for giving his friend one chance to make it right. This is high stakes politics, after all. (And if you have a problem with having friends who have some fucked up repugnant viewpoints, well, I'm glad you have enough friends that you can demand perfection. I don't think that is the case with most people.) You may have noticed today that there was a 5-4 decision on whether Habeus Corpus was a fundamental right in SCOTUS today. 4 years of McCain and that could well go the other way. That will be what he is forced to pay for evangelical votes - another Scalia clone. I'm sure that did absolutely nothing to change your mind, yet I feel better for saying it anyway. __________________ Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.