Do those who voted for Obama feel like they've been... - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

RogueGypsy · 12-08-2010, 11:57 AM

SCREWED!!??

Even the staunchest of my Democrat friends are making noises about Obama's 'unfulfilled promises'. The news is full of his diminishing approval ratings, then today I read this:

"WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) -- In his latest effort to find common ground with Republicans in Congress, President Barack Obama said today that he was willing to agree that he is a Muslim."

And this:

".....But Mr. Obama's willingness to back down on his claim of being a Christian does not seem to have satisfied his Republican opposition, as GOP leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) today insisted that the President must also agree that he was born in Kenya.

While Mr. Obama did not immediately agree to Rep. Bohener's demand, he hinted that yet another compromise might be in the offing: "My place of birth has been, and will always be, negotiable." "

From:

Andy Borowitz: In Latest Compromise With GOP, Obama Agrees He Is a Muslim

Personally, I'm not a fan of the guy, never have been. He just reminds me of all the sleaziest used cars salesman I've ever met. So this just makes me chuckle.

But if I had voted for him or liked him, I'd be really offended by this. Here, he's either admitting to lying to everyone to advance his own career or he's admitting he's a spineless sheep bending to the will of his antagonist. Either way, what a twat.

And how is the birth place of a US president 'negotiable'?

SO for all the staunch defenders of Obamanomics and those who chastised and ridiculed any who questioned his religion or birth place, how ya feelin' today?

..

.

Cynthetiq · 12-08-2010, 12:13 PM

wait you didn't see the /sarcasm or /satire tag?

maybe you need to read more of the Borowitz Report.

Cimarron29414 · 12-08-2010, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RogueGypsy

SCREWED!!??

Even the staunchest of my Democrat friends are making noises about Obama's 'unfulfilled promises'. The news is full of his diminishing approval ratings, then today I read this:

"WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) -- In his latest effort to find common ground with Republicans in Congress, President Barack Obama said today that he was willing to agree that he is a Muslim."

And this:

".....But Mr. Obama's willingness to back down on his claim of being a Christian does not seem to have satisfied his Republican opposition, as GOP leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) today insisted that the President must also agree that he was born in Kenya.

While Mr. Obama did not immediately agree to Rep. Bohener's demand, he hinted that yet another compromise might be in the offing: "My place of birth has been, and will always be, negotiable." "

From:

Andy Borowitz: In Latest Compromise With GOP, Obama Agrees He Is a Muslim

Personally, I'm not a fan of the guy, never have been. He just reminds me of all the sleaziest used cars salesman I've ever met. So this just makes me chuckle.

But if I had voted for him or liked him, I'd be really offended by this. Here, he's either admitting to lying to everyone to advance his own career or he's admitting he's a spineless sheep bending to the will of his antagonist. Either way, what a twat.

And how is the birth place of a US president 'negotiable'?

SO for all the staunch defenders of Obamanomics and those who chastised and ridiculed any who questioned his religion or birth place, how ya feelin' today?

RogueGypsy,

At the risk of "falling for" your satire, I do believe Cynthetiq is correct: this is a satire.

filtherton · 12-08-2010, 12:47 PM

Misunderstood satire aside, I'm not shocked by anything that Obama's done. Which doesn't make many of the regrettable things any more palatable. I'd still take him over any of the likely 2012 GOP nominees.

I'm absolutely certain that I'd be even more disappointed had McCain won.

The_Jazz · 12-08-2010, 12:57 PM

Quote:

SO for all the staunch defenders of Obamanomics and those who chastised and ridiculed any who questioned his religion or birth place, how ya feelin' today?

I think I feel....superior. Superior in that the very first thing I noticed was that the author is a self-described "comedian".

Seriously, wasn't this line enough to clue you in?

Quote:

White House sources indicated today that the president might be willing to meet the GOP halfway on his birthplace and say that he was born in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

/open mockery

No one (and I mean no one) that the Republicans put forth would have done better by any measurable metric. What do Hoover, Carter and Obama (it seems) have in common? They were all screwed by circumstances out of their control.

flstf · 12-08-2010, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RogueGypsy

SO for all the staunch defenders of Obamanomics and those who chastised and ridiculed any who questioned his religion or birth place, how ya feelin' today?
.

I am very offended to learn that our President is willing to admit he was not born in the USA and therefore not eligible to be President as well as renouncing his Christianity in favor of Islam. Time to get out the "Palin in 2012" bumper stickers.

SecretMethod70 · 12-08-2010, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Misunderstood satire aside, I'm not shocked by anything that Obama's done. Which doesn't make many of the regrettable things any more palatable. I'd still take him over any of the likely 2012 GOP nominees.

I'm absolutely certain that I'd be even more disappointed had McCain won.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

No one (and I mean no one) that the Republicans put forth would have done better by any measurable metric. What do Hoover, Carter and Obama (it seems) have in common? They were all screwed by circumstances out of their control.

Agreed entirely. I'm certainly disappointed (very disappointed in many cases), but I'm not under the illusion that I would have been less disappointed had McCain won. Nor do I envision a Republican candidate for 2012 that could appeal to me more than Obama, despite my level of displeasure.

roachboy · 12-08-2010, 02:10 PM

while i'm not entirely sure that i want to bother with this thread given the idiocy of the op, i'll nonetheless say that i'm less disappointed in the minor capitulation to the right around this bush tax cuts for the wealthy (because in the doing obama got alot of other things that the administration had been after, including extension of unemployment) than i am in the administration's decision to take the pressure off israel to stop building those fucking settlements around jerusalem and in the west bank.

**that** is a capitulation to the right. an abject capitulation.

Baraka_Guru · 12-08-2010, 02:34 PM

I don't see how moving further away from solvency is a capitulation to the right. Oh wait, we are talking about the Republicans here....

Cimarron29414 · 12-08-2010, 02:38 PM

bg-

I'm curious, in your mind, when the Democrat President and Democrat Congress knowingly spent $1.4T more than they could possibly bring in (based on current tax rates), did they move us closer or further away from solvency? Oh wait, we ARE talking about Spend then Tax democrats here.

Baraka_Guru · 12-08-2010, 04:04 PM

Deficit spending during an economic meltdown isn't a new concept, and virtually every advanced economy in the world does it. Republicans have cried foul about deficit spending and now they want to maintain tax cuts.

Rather than work toward balancing the budget in the long-term during and after recovery, the Democrats will need to do more with less, thanks to the Republicans' need to dream their Reaganomics fantasy.

The stimulus spending is temporary. The tax cuts should be as well. I think the last thing Americans should be doing right now is listening to Republicans.

RogueGypsy · 12-08-2010, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

wait you didn't see the /sarcasm or /satire tag?

maybe you need to read more of the Borowitz Report.

Yes I saw it, I'm a fan of Borowitz (who didn't like 'The Facts of Life' or 'Fresh Prince of Bel Air')??. This is, apparently, a failed attempt at continuing the satire. Maybe I should have posted this in Humor, but that kind of defeats the purpose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

RogueGypsy,

At the risk of "falling for" your satire, I do believe Cynthetiq is correct: this is a satire.

+1 for you too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

while i'm not entirely sure that i want to bother with this thread given the idiocy of the op,

In the spirit of your response:

You Sir, are a Cunt. Not only has your myopic intellect given you away, it appears to have interfered with your use of the <SHIFT> key. There's one on each side of the key board. Once you've pulled your head out of your ass and wiped the shit from your eyes, they're easy to see.

All that aside, I think I just got an even bigger chuckle out of the immediate and weak defense of: 'Although he's disappointing, he's still better than.......'

When is enough, enough? Why do we, as a populous, continue to accept whatever garbage comes through the system? Maybe everyone voting Non-Party in the next election would send a loud enough message to both parties. Do what you say of GTFO!

This really wasn't meant as a troll, just a continuation of satire. Maybe I need to macro a /sarcasm/ & /satire/ key.

..
..

amonkie · 12-08-2010, 05:58 PM

TFP Staff message:

Debate the Post, not the poster.

Intent doesn't mean its still not a troll. Trolls will be eaten. You have been warned.

filtherton · 12-08-2010, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

I'm curious, in your mind, when the Democrat President and Democrat Congress knowingly spent $1.4T more than they could possibly bring in (based on current tax rates), did they move us closer or further away from solvency? Oh wait, we ARE talking about Spend then Tax democrats here.

I'm pretty sure the borrow and spend thing is the Republican model.

mrmacq · 12-08-2010, 06:08 PM

Elsewhere, moments after his capture in London, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said, "I knew I shouldn't have signed up for Foursquare."

please dont egg the simpletons on

they live for this crap

Cimarron29414 · 12-09-2010, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

Deficit spending during an economic meltdown isn't a new concept, and virtually every advanced economy in the world does it. Republicans have cried foul about deficit spending and now they want to maintain tax cuts.

Rather than work toward balancing the budget in the long-term during and after recovery, the Democrats will need to do more with less, thanks to the Republicans' need to dream their Reaganomics fantasy.

The stimulus spending is temporary. The tax cuts should be as well. I think the last thing Americans should be doing right now is listening to Republicans.

I see, so now that the other team is moving us further from solvency we must inject the "necessity" of that action rather than stick to whether it technically moves us towards solvency or further away. Got it. Carry on.

ASU2003 · 12-09-2010, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

No one (and I mean no one) that the Republicans put forth would have done better by any measurable metric. What do Hoover, Carter and Obama (it seems) have in common? They were all screwed by circumstances out of their control.

Well, he got screwed by Rush, the Tea Party, and Fox News. They mounted a loud, unified opposition (with some lies thrown in) to get the base of the GOP riled up. The new "fiscal conservatives" weren't the old neocon social conservatives... and if you weren't with them, you were wrong.

Yes, I am a little disappointed in the fact that I thought that Americans could work together on solving the problems instead of "being right" when the trickle down polices have not and will not work. That for-profit healthcare is not the best care in the world. And people are working harder and more productivity, yet not getting ahead, requiring both parents to work, and still not having enough to retire in their 50s. I'm disappointed that we are still in Iraq as much as we are, that the military numbers and bases haven't been touched, and Gitmo is still there. (I wonder if the Cuban transition process got leaked on wikileaks...) I thought that we would be transitioning to more renewable power and less coal. The oil spill actually produced the result of stopping drilling for 7 years off the east coast (where they tried and could find oil before), but at a big cost to the gulf. (I don't blame him for the spill, Obama wasn't able to do everything, but we haven't seen any less dependency on foreign oil, or reduction in the amount of money we send overseas. And GM, even owned by a lot of taxpayers for a period of time couldn't get GM to design a 100% electric car that can be charged by solar shingles made in Michigan.

I thought that a gas tax would have been implemented along with other taxes to cover the spending, and he would of been against the tax breaks for people making over $250k. (Unless it is a political move that he would veto after he got some other stuff passed). The GOP played him on that by threating to block anything until they were passed, but there isn't any time to do anything else now.

Baraka_Guru · 12-10-2010, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

I see, so now that the other team is moving us further from solvency we must inject the "necessity" of that action rather than stick to whether it technically moves us towards solvency or further away. Got it. Carry on.

Actually, no, I don't think you get it. Are you assuming that the Democrats' mode of economics during Obama's terms is the norm?

Cimarron29414 · 12-10-2010, 07:15 AM

I'm not assuming anything. I live here. I see what they are doing.

Baraka_Guru · 12-10-2010, 07:34 AM

Fair enough. It's interesting to note how much of an anomaly this is though. Normally the Democrats teach the Republicans about fiscal responsibility by drawing down the deficit, but these are crazy times I guess. Only time will tell if they'll do it again.

SecretMethod70 · 12-10-2010, 07:48 AM

That's exactly right, Baraka. By and large, the Democrats have historically been seen as the party that is more responsible regarding domestic issues (which includes the economy), while Republicans are the party more trusted on foreign policy issues. These are, in fact, crazy times, but not without precedent. Just like businesses spend money to earn more in return, that's what the philosophy is behind some of the proposed government spending as well. (Increased unemployment benefits will enter back into the economy at a rate of nearly 100%, while tax breaks for the rich are much more likely to be held onto or invested for further personal gain.)

It's a shame "I live here" doesn't actually work to change the facts. (By the way, I live here too and disagree with you, further proving that that argument is bullshit. I guess the world isn't as black and white as you'd like to see it.)

KirStang · 12-10-2010, 07:54 AM

I wish Obama would give the GOP a good spanking. For the most part, they've been particularly unhelpful--preferring to pursue a blocking strategy than a strategy towards moving the country forward.

And extending tax cuts while we're reaching untenable levels of debt? For christ-sakes, OBAMA STAND YOUR GROUND!

Cimarron29414 · 12-10-2010, 08:13 AM

sm-

My point was that I don't have to "assume" that the democrats are doing this or that. I see every day what they are doing because I live within it. I watch what they spend money on, who they give it to, which palms are greased, etc. That is why I said "I live here." It was not an implication that bg's opinion should be disregarded because, in fact, he does not live here.

As for the rest, we'll see...

SecretMethod70 · 12-10-2010, 08:26 AM

Unfortunately, we won't see. While I certainly think this administration is doing better than a McCain-Palin administration would have, that doesn't mean I think this administration is doing all the right things. Short term spending can lead to long term gain, but that doesn't mean that money should be thrown at everything and anything. Every dollar spent on unemployment insurance benefits leads to approximately $1.60 in stimulus - a net gain - while dollars spent on tax breaks for the already rich lead to a net loss (I forget the exact figure, but it's somewhere between 30 and 60 cents stimulus per dollar spent). Combine the two, and you end up negating the positive effects that extending unemployment benefits is supposed to bring. This is just one example.

As much as I'm upset at the Obama administration for "compromises" like this one, I'm also keenly aware that these policies are brought on by Republican obstructionism and gamesmanship - a focus on what can score political points over what benefits the country. Nevertheless, in 2012 you can bet the Republican party will complain about the deficit even though they spent the last months of 2010 demanding more spending on top of the president's agenda.

roachboy · 12-10-2010, 08:34 AM

the idea is ludicrous that there is a free-spending party and a party of frugality inside the sad american financial oligarchy. there's merely two different patronage systems.

both parties like buying lots of shiny toys for killing people in great number.
they differ on how much they like to spend on improving the quality of life for regular people.

but it's perverse....the right apparently sees regular people as malleable peasants that do their lords's bidding.
if there's a war to be fought, the peasants are the ones who die in it.
if there's austerity to be imposed in order to maintain the total party lifestyle proper to the lords, the peasants suffer for it.

what's best about the peasants is that they're so convinced that their interests and those of the lords are the same that they willingly bear these afflictions, presumably because at least that way they know the Face of the Lord is directed toward them so they exist socially. without that Recognition, the peasants would be adrift, identity-less, without a proper place or a conception of places that are proper which is required to have a proper place.

in the new feudalism that is the logical extension of conservative economic policies, the barriers that separate peasant from lord grow and grow, but curiously so does the belief amongst the peasantry that the opposite is the case, if they just try and try and try they'll someday be lords...this when the reality is they'll always be peasants and the system they support functions to assure that even as the peasants wander about inside it saying how very not true that is.

maybe that's because the lords tell the peasants that this counter-factual scenario is the case and the peasants like to be like the lords and like to like what the lords tell them to like and so now they like counter-factual scenarios and they like them with all their peasanty little hearts, so devoted are they to interests which by any rational standard at all are not their own.

incidentally, i will simply repeat that i am far more disappointed about the capitulation on the question of israeli settlements in the west bank and around jerusalem, which i see as a pure and unmotivated cave-in to the right, than i am in the appearance of capitulation in the tax bill.

Baraka_Guru · 12-10-2010, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

Nevertheless, in 2012 you can bet the Republican party will complain about the deficit even though they spent the last months of 2010 demanding more spending on top of the president's agenda.

Absolutely. By the time the campaigning gears up, there is a good chance that the economy will have posted some clear and undeniable signs of recovery, maybe even steady job growth by then. This will be a result of a number of factors, including local stimulus spending, government monetary policy measures unprecedented in scope but unsurprising in practice, and, most significantly, a global recovery. It will be an odd orchestration of extreme economic measures post-meltdown and a global business cycle doing what business cycles do. Pent-up demand will begin to unleash itself when people finally shed debt and have faith in their jobs and the economy. It's not inevitable but it's highly probable. It's happened for decades.

The Republicans will take most of the credit for this recovery and will suggest that the continued tax cuts were responsible for bolstering growth and saving America from Obama's "reckless spending" and that making the tax cuts permanent and repealing the health care reform is the only true way to allow America to thrive after so many years of turmoil.

The timing will be perfect for this bullshit. The Republicans wouldn't be the Republicans if they didn't do this.

filtherton · 12-10-2010, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

but it's perverse....the right apparently sees regular people as malleable peasants that do their lords's bidding.
if there's a war to be fought, the peasants are the ones who die in it.
if there's austerity to be imposed in order to maintain the total party lifestyle proper to the lords, the peasants suffer for it.

what's best about the peasants is that they're so convinced that their interests and those of the lords are the same that they willingly bear these afflictions, presumably because at least that way they know the Face of the Lord is directed toward them so they exist socially. without that Recognition, the peasants would be adrift, identity-less, without a proper place or a conception of places that are proper which is required to have a proper place.

in the new feudalism that is the logical extension of conservative economic policies, the barriers that separate peasant from lord grow and grow, but curiously so does the belief amongst the peasantry that the opposite is the case, if they just try and try and try they'll someday be lords...this when the reality is they'll always be peasants and the system they support functions to assure that even as the peasants wander about inside it saying how very not true that is.

maybe that's because the lords tell the peasants that this counter-factual scenario is the case and the peasants like to be like the lords and like to like what the lords tell them to like and so now they like counter-factual scenarios and they like them with all their peasanty little hearts, so devoted are they to interests which by any rational standard at all are not their own.

I liken it to Stockholm Syndrome, except instead of being based on the perception of nicer-than-expected treatment, it's based on envy.

RogueGypsy · 12-10-2010, 01:37 PM

Let me first say, this string was intended as satire, which was a colossal fail on my part. Since it evolved into an actual discussion, I'll roll with it.

RoachBoy- I apologize for calling you a Cunt. I misread 'op' as 'original poster' and took offense to a non-existent personal attack. I apologize.

As I said I'm not an Obama fan, but as our leader it's in my best interest he do well. Frankly, he's disappointed me no more than any other leader in memory.

I guess my biggest disappointment so far has been his change of attitude toward 'change'. He came in with big ideas and a can-do attitude, that has since withered to compromise and a band-aid.

I hear the arguments about idiots on both sides of the aisle in Congress and the Senate, but a true leader could and should pull everyone together. While running for office, it looked like he could pull this off. I've since come to believe his charisma, character and personality are just as scripted as his speeches. It's too bad really, we need change and I don't care which side it comes from, ultimately we are all on the same side. As long as the change is good for the nation, I'm all for it.

I just see all the Us ~vs~ Them as a further distraction for us, while they continue to grow richer and we continue to grow poorer. I no longer believe our government speaks for the people, nor do I believe they have our interests at heart.

It does surprise me that so many continue to defend a man who is no different than those they despise. He may speak different words, but his actions are the same. How does he deserve your support?

The Health care bill is already making things worse.
Gitmo is running along.
The war in the Middle East is still sucking us dry.
We are still dependent on foreign oil.
The economy is still in the toilet.
TSA is out of control.
The response to Wiki leaks has highlighted how much of a lie "transparency of government" is.
We are the laughing stock of the World because they all think we're supporting this stupidity.
And no one has been called to task over any of it.

It brings to mind a quote I read in my youth.

"Your actions speak so loudly, I can't hear what you're saying"

I don't see the possiblilty of any positive change in the near future either. As long as it takes $150M to run for President, the quality of the candidates will always lean toward the interests of the wealthy. As a people we need to enact the change.
Term limits in Congress and the Senate.
Ban lobbiest completely.
Remove business from government.
Ban government from business.
Enact a law mandating every law apply equally to everyone including politicians.
Complete transparency of government.
And loudly protest everything that is not in the interest of the nation.

Really, we are standing-by while 1% of the nation bends us over and takes turns. All the while arguing about who was worse, Bush or Obama. Neither, they are both blood sucking assholes looking to get even richer off the labor of the people.

The time has come to end the elected aristocracy and salvage what's left of our nation.

..

SecretMethod70 · 12-10-2010, 01:48 PM

I see the appeal of term limits, but I don't think they're all that necessary if government is designed to work for the people. Right now it's not, but term limits address the symptom and not the actual problem, while having downsides of their own.

Totally agree about businesses though...

Sounding Circle: Jefferson Was Right

Quote:

Most Americans don’t know it but Thomas Jefferson, along with James Madison worked assiduously to have an 11th Amendment included into our nation’s original Bill of Rights. This proposed Amendment would have prohibited “monopolies in commerce.” The amendment would have made it illegal for corporations to own other corporations, or to give money to politicians, or to otherwise try to influence elections. Corporations would be chartered by the states for the primary purpose of “serving the public good.” Corporations would possess the legal status not of natural persons but rather of “artificial persons.” This means that they would have only those legal attributes which the state saw fit to grant to them. They would NOT; and indeed could NOT possess the same bundle of rights which actual flesh and blood persons enjoy. Under this proposed amendment neither the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, nor any provision of that document would protect the artificial entities known of as corporations.

Jefferson and Madison were so insistent upon this amendment because the American Revolution was in substantial degree a revolt against the domination of colonial economic and political life by the greatest multinational corporation of its age: the British East India Company. After all who do you think owned the tea which Sam Adams and friends dumped overboard in Boston Harbor? Who was responsible for the taxes on commodities and restrictions on trade by the American colonists? It was the British East India Company, of course. In the end the amendment was not adopted because a majority in the first Congress believed that already existing state laws governing corporations were adequate for constraining corporate power. Jefferson worried about the growing influence of corporate power until his dying day in 1826. Even the more conservative founder John Adams came to harbor deep misgivings about unchecked corporate power.

A few years after Jefferson’s unsuccessful attempt to incorporate this amendment into the Bill of Rights, the fourth Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, John Marshall, unilaterally asserted the Court’s right to judicial review in the seminal case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803. In practice this meant that the Supreme Court would have sole and unchecked power to determine what the Constitution meant. Jefferson was aghast. His fear lay in the knowledge that an unelected branch of government, one which is not subject to the will of the citizens, and is effectively immune from check by the two elected branches of government (Only one Supreme Court Justice has ever been impeached—none have ever been convicted and removed) was now solely responsible for determining the meaning of the Constitution. The meaning of the Constitution, and hence the very nature of our political system, was now in the hands of an un-elected and effectively uncontrollable body. “The Constitution has become a thing of wax to be molded as the Court sees fit” Jefferson lamented.

In 1886 Jefferson’s twin Constitutional nightmares collided in a train wreck which has effectively derailed true democracy in this nation and indeed across the globe as other nations have either copied our unfortunate example, or have fallen under the dominion of our multinational corporations—or both.. The precipitating event was the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. This case is cited to the present day as having conferred the status of “natural” as opposed to “artificial” personhood upon American corporations. In fact the Supreme Court declined to rule on the issue. J.C. Bancroft Davis, the Clerk of the Court, an attorney, who curiously was also a former railroad company PRESIDENT, used his position to simply write this conclusion into the head notes which summarized the case. Ever since this fateful event; this sleight-of-hand rewriting of the Constitution, corporations have had the status of “actual” persons whose rights are fully protected by the Constitution. It was a coup against democracy which succeeded because there were no real external checks and balances on the Court, and because the Court itself chose not to act to repudiate Davis’ rewriting of the Constitution. The thing stood. Precedent was established. Jefferson’s “thing of wax” nightmare had come to pass.

Consider the implications: Actual flesh and blood persons are indeed all roughly equal in overall attributes. But a corporation can possess MILLIONS of times greater resources than does any “natural” person, or even a group of such persons. Neither labor unions, nor any other category of “special interest” group possesses this attribute of personhood and so they too are fundamentally and intrinsically unable to compete against corporate “persons.”

To make a long and sad story short: The concentrated power of corporate persons has overwhelmed our democratic system. The unsound decisions of our unchecked and unbalanced Supreme Court have handed the “keys to the Kingdom” over to our corporate overlords. An analogy with an AIDS infection is instructive: After 1886, our democratic “immune system” resisted Davis’ corporate personhood infection of our national body politic by deploying the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the Progressive Movement, the Labor Movement, and the New Deal. All of these bought time. But now, in the era of global mega-corporations, after a long struggle, our “democratic immune system” is finally being overwhelmed. Democracy, rule of, by, and for the people, is dying in America.

Contemporary America is a nation almost wholly under the dominion of plutocratically wealthy, corporate quarterly-profit über alles overlords. A seamless web of corporate power connects our multinational corporations with our mass media—now almost wholly owned by a handful of mega-corporations. This military-industrial-media complex largely determines which politicians will and will not get elected. Thus they control the government. They control access to money as well as determine how a candidate will be presented to the viewers. The very policies that our “elected” officials are “allowed” to espouse are rigorously circumscribed: Remember Clinton’s national healthcare proposals? Our media will never tell us that every other developed nation on Earth has universal health care for their citizens. Arguably, our corporate media has seen to it that the average American is as brainwashed as is say, the average citizen of North Korea. Our primary role in this atrocious system is simply to consume. We are consumers, corporate subjects, not citizens. Under this materialistic system our lives are devoid of deep meaning as we are conditioned to work ever harder and go ever deeper in debt to accumulate ever more useless junk as though if we just piled up enough of this crap we would somehow, magically, become happy.

What is to be done? Let’s open our eyes and admit that the emperor has no clothes. Let’s admit that our democratic, constitutional, system was derailed more than a century ago. Until we return power to the hands of flesh and blood citizens EXCLUSIVELY, until corporations are summarily striped of “personhood”, until this legal obscenity is abolished, we can have no real freedom, democracy cannot flourish. Furthermore, to ensure that the will of the people is respected and reigns supreme, all members of our federal judiciary must face periodic reelection by the citizens—just as is the case for our judiciary here in California. Until and unless these things come to pass we cannot be a free people. Because we are fundamentally NOT a free people, because our ability to act and to build freely upon our inspirations is constrained by corporate forces beyond our present control, we cannot live up to our full potentials as human beings. Once these goals are accomplished there shall be such an explosion of innovation in economic and political and scientific entrepreneurship as to make Periclean Athens seem timid. It’s up to each of us to act NOW. Freedom itself hangs in the balance.

Dr. Mike Byron, a contributing writer for Liberal Slant, teaches Political Science at CSU San Marcos, as well as at Palomar, Mira Costa, and Mesa Colleges. He was the Democratic Party’s write-in candidate for the 49th Congressional District last year.

roachboy · 12-10-2010, 01:52 PM

we're cool, rogue. thanks for posting that.

Willravel · 12-10-2010, 02:00 PM

I'm disappointed that President Obama seems infinitely more willing to compromise than I am, but I'm (just barely) old enough to remember President Clinton in the late 90s caving left and right. Or rather just right. This seems to be what most Democratic leaders do when in power.

Senator Bernie Sanders is starting a filibuster on the tax cut extension for the wealthy right now. I'd very much like to vote for his name in a presidential election.

docbungle · 12-10-2010, 05:32 PM

Obama has never been a frothing-at-the-mouth progressive, and a lot of Dems seem to have forgotten that, or maybe never believed it in the first place. I see a lot of people angry at him for being the same person they elected.

Reality, of course, has gotten in the way of campaign promises. People seem to think this is something new, as if it hasn't happened to every single president that has ever been elected in the history of the United States...not to mention they've only given him half a term to accomplish everything before giving Republicans the House (I'm sure that'll be a big help!).

The most outspoken Dems seem to expect an unprecedented level of perfection from Obama. They expect him to be a purist. I think that is what happened with G.W. Bush and those same Dems don't have too many nice things to say about that era.

ASU2003 · 12-10-2010, 07:29 PM

The far left doesn't understand what game Obama is playing here. What does he want to accomplish with this tax cut in the next two years? Does he think that nothing will get done if he stops this? Does he think that the next house will only vote on this issue over and over until 2012? Is this tax cut really the best move for the country if it includes some unemployment and alternative energy stuff in it? Where are the TEA party people saying that we need to pay for this, and the deficit will grow by $800 billion (or do they care about keep the government from getting the money and cutting spending)? And what is Clinton gaining from this? Has someone paid off the right people?

And will Obama be up against a farther left candidate in the primary next year (shivers, it is only 1 year away from another election cycle...)?

roachboy · 12-11-2010, 06:47 AM

the "far left"? who on earth are you talking about?

obama is a centrist. he's always been a centrist. he's about process. his administration doesn't seem to quite get the battle for news cycles and importance of appearing to be clear. rather, the communications strategy seems geared around process as well, which is i suppose a form of transparency, but it puts the administration at a continuous disadvantage in terms of framing its own actions. this isn't new as an issue...you'd have thought that they'd have figured out that this is a Problem. ever since machiavelli wrote that instruction manual for people holding power, it's been clear as day that image matters, that it is an aspect of power.

the problem with the republican tax cut extension is that it does nothing good for the economy at all. it does nothing good for anyone. it is not fiscally responsible. it does not help unemployment. it is a simple bone thrown to the nimrods on the right who still find themselves in the position of having to pretend that they were not of the bush period, that it is their economic ideology that is responsible for the disaster we've been in. so they're in marketing mode, illusion-building mode. and the administration capitulated in a high-profile way in order to get a series of measure that it wanted---and then did very little to control the way the capitulation was framed. with the result that the democrats are (were?) trying to scuttle the deal.

bad communication, really.

but caving in to the israeli far right was and is more egregious a failure.

ASU2003 · 12-11-2010, 07:10 AM

The "far" left are the ones that will actually speak their minds and write their congressmen/congresswomen and protest in the streets. They are the ones that will go on TV and argue their case. There is a "far" right as well.

It isn't a bad term to be far left or far right, but it means that you have a vision of the way things should be done and when there is no good reason or explanation for doing something counter to your vision you will get upset. It is very hard, if not impossible to change these people's minds.

And on the tax cut issue, Obama campaigned on this at every stop. There has to be something else going on that made him change his mind, yet he isn't explaining it very well.

flstf · 12-13-2010, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASU2003

And on the tax cut issue, Obama campaigned on this at every stop. There has to be something else going on that made him change his mind, yet he isn't explaining it very well.

I suspect the administration thought that if they had not given tax cuts to the wealthy then the whole tax bill would fail and everyone's taxes would go up. Then all we would hear durng the next election cycle is that President Obama is responsible for raising the middle classes' taxes.

I don't think there are enough votes to get it passed with the $250K limit and next year with the new Republicans coming in it would be impossible.

TheCrimsonGhost · 12-19-2010, 07:08 AM

I feel like I've been screwed and I didn't vote for either of the 2 douche nozzles who ran last election.

ASU2003 · 12-19-2010, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flstf

I suspect the administration thought that if they had not given tax cuts to the wealthy then the whole tax bill would fail and everyone's taxes would go up. Then all we would hear durng the next election cycle is that President Obama is responsible for raising the middle classes' taxes.

I don't think there are enough votes to get it passed with the $250K limit and next year with the new Republicans coming in it would be impossible.

It is a perfect storm, and this issue was a no win for Obama and the Democrats whatever way they went. If they raised taxes, they may have gained some support from deficit hawks, but the unemployment and economy might be stagnate. The GOP would run on lower taxes = trickle down, with big business ready to help them for a few years achieve that. The long term unemployed would be hurting and the media would pick up on their story over and over.

Now if in two years the economy is better Baraka_Guru's prediction will be right.

Quote:

"The Republicans will take most of the credit for this recovery and will suggest that the continued tax cuts were responsible for bolstering growth and saving America from Obama's "reckless spending" and that making the tax cuts permanent and repealing the health care reform is the only true way to allow America to thrive after so many years of turmoil. "

Vote for the dem's to raise taxes, vote for us to lower them for the wealthy, which you might be one day...

12-08-2010, 11:57 AM	#1 (permalink)
RogueGypsy Insane Location: The Great NorthWet	Do those who voted for Obama feel like they've been... SCREWED!!?? Even the staunchest of my Democrat friends are making noises about Obama's 'unfulfilled promises'. The news is full of his diminishing approval ratings, then today I read this: "WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) -- In his latest effort to find common ground with Republicans in Congress, President Barack Obama said today that he was willing to agree that he is a Muslim." And this: ".....But Mr. Obama's willingness to back down on his claim of being a Christian does not seem to have satisfied his Republican opposition, as GOP leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) today insisted that the President must also agree that he was born in Kenya. While Mr. Obama did not immediately agree to Rep. Bohener's demand, he hinted that yet another compromise might be in the offing: "My place of birth has been, and will always be, negotiable." " From: Andy Borowitz: In Latest Compromise With GOP, Obama Agrees He Is a Muslim Personally, I'm not a fan of the guy, never have been. He just reminds me of all the sleaziest used cars salesman I've ever met. So this just makes me chuckle. But if I had voted for him or liked him, I'd be really offended by this. Here, he's either admitting to lying to everyone to advance his own career or he's admitting he's a spineless sheep bending to the will of his antagonist. Either way, what a twat. And how is the birth place of a US president 'negotiable'? SO for all the staunch defenders of Obamanomics and those who chastised and ridiculed any who questioned his religion or birth place, how ya feelin' today? .. . __________________ Methods, application and intensity of application vary by the individual. All legal wavers must be signed before 'treatment' begins. Self 'Medicating' is not recommend. However, if necessary, it is best to have an 'assistant' or 'soft landing zone' nearby. Any and all legal issues resulting from improperly applied techniques should be forwarded to: Dewy, Cheatum & Howe, Intercourse, PA 17534. Attn: Anonymous.

12-08-2010, 12:13 PM	#2 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Location: Manhattan, NY	wait you didn't see the /sarcasm or /satire tag? maybe you need to read more of the Borowitz Report. __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!

12-08-2010, 02:10 PM	#8 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	while i'm not entirely sure that i want to bother with this thread given the idiocy of the op, i'll nonetheless say that i'm less disappointed in the minor capitulation to the right around this bush tax cuts for the wealthy (because in the doing obama got alot of other things that the administration had been after, including extension of unemployment) than i am in the administration's decision to take the pressure off israel to stop building those fucking settlements around jerusalem and in the west bank. that is a capitulation to the right. an abject capitulation. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

12-08-2010, 02:34 PM	#9 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	I don't see how moving further away from solvency is a capitulation to the right. Oh wait, we are talking about the Republicans here.... __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

12-08-2010, 02:38 PM	#10 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	bg- I'm curious, in your mind, when the Democrat President and Democrat Congress knowingly spent $1.4T more than they could possibly bring in (based on current tax rates), did they move us closer or further away from solvency? Oh wait, we ARE talking about Spend then Tax democrats here. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

12-08-2010, 12:47 PM	#4 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	Misunderstood satire aside, I'm not shocked by anything that Obama's done. Which doesn't make many of the regrettable things any more palatable. I'd still take him over any of the likely 2012 GOP nominees. I'm absolutely certain that I'd be even more disappointed had McCain won.

12-08-2010, 04:04 PM	#11 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	Deficit spending during an economic meltdown isn't a new concept, and virtually every advanced economy in the world does it. Republicans have cried foul about deficit spending and now they want to maintain tax cuts. Rather than work toward balancing the budget in the long-term during and after recovery, the Democrats will need to do more with less, thanks to the Republicans' need to dream their Reaganomics fantasy. The stimulus spending is temporary. The tax cuts should be as well. I think the last thing Americans should be doing right now is listening to Republicans. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

12-08-2010, 05:58 PM	#13 (permalink)
amonkie Drifting Administrator Location: Windy City	TFP Staff message: Debate the Post, not the poster. Intent doesn't mean its still not a troll. Trolls will be eaten. You have been warned.

12-08-2010, 06:08 PM	#15 (permalink)
mrmacq Upright Location: lotus land 3rd igloo on the right	Elsewhere, moments after his capture in London, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said, "I knew I shouldn't have signed up for Foursquare." please dont egg the simpletons on they live for this crap __________________ never stop questioning,curiosity has its own rewards

12-10-2010, 07:15 AM	#19 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	I'm not assuming anything. I live here. I see what they are doing. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

12-10-2010, 07:34 AM	#20 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	Fair enough. It's interesting to note how much of an anomaly this is though. Normally the Democrats teach the Republicans about fiscal responsibility by drawing down the deficit, but these are crazy times I guess. Only time will tell if they'll do it again. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

12-10-2010, 07:48 AM	#21 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	That's exactly right, Baraka. By and large, the Democrats have historically been seen as the party that is more responsible regarding domestic issues (which includes the economy), while Republicans are the party more trusted on foreign policy issues. These are, in fact, crazy times, but not without precedent. Just like businesses spend money to earn more in return, that's what the philosophy is behind some of the proposed government spending as well. (Increased unemployment benefits will enter back into the economy at a rate of nearly 100%, while tax breaks for the rich are much more likely to be held onto or invested for further personal gain.) It's a shame "I live here" doesn't actually work to change the facts. (By the way, I live here too and disagree with you, further proving that that argument is bullshit. I guess the world isn't as black and white as you'd like to see it.) __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling Last edited by SecretMethod70; 12-10-2010 at 08:11 AM..

12-10-2010, 07:54 AM	#22 (permalink)
KirStang Future Bureaucrat	I wish Obama would give the GOP a good spanking. For the most part, they've been particularly unhelpful--preferring to pursue a blocking strategy than a strategy towards moving the country forward. And extending tax cuts while we're reaching untenable levels of debt? For christ-sakes, OBAMA STAND YOUR GROUND!

12-10-2010, 08:13 AM	#23 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	sm- My point was that I don't have to "assume" that the democrats are doing this or that. I see every day what they are doing because I live within it. I watch what they spend money on, who they give it to, which palms are greased, etc. That is why I said "I live here." It was not an implication that bg's opinion should be disregarded because, in fact, he does not live here. As for the rest, we'll see... __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

12-10-2010, 08:26 AM	#24 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Unfortunately, we won't see. While I certainly think this administration is doing better than a McCain-Palin administration would have, that doesn't mean I think this administration is doing all the right things. Short term spending can lead to long term gain, but that doesn't mean that money should be thrown at everything and anything. Every dollar spent on unemployment insurance benefits leads to approximately $1.60 in stimulus - a net gain - while dollars spent on tax breaks for the already rich lead to a net loss (I forget the exact figure, but it's somewhere between 30 and 60 cents stimulus per dollar spent). Combine the two, and you end up negating the positive effects that extending unemployment benefits is supposed to bring. This is just one example. As much as I'm upset at the Obama administration for "compromises" like this one, I'm also keenly aware that these policies are brought on by Republican obstructionism and gamesmanship - a focus on what can score political points over what benefits the country. Nevertheless, in 2012 you can bet the Republican party will complain about the deficit even though they spent the last months of 2010 demanding more spending on top of the president's agenda. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

12-10-2010, 08:34 AM	#25 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	the idea is ludicrous that there is a free-spending party and a party of frugality inside the sad american financial oligarchy. there's merely two different patronage systems. both parties like buying lots of shiny toys for killing people in great number. they differ on how much they like to spend on improving the quality of life for regular people. but it's perverse....the right apparently sees regular people as malleable peasants that do their lords's bidding. if there's a war to be fought, the peasants are the ones who die in it. if there's austerity to be imposed in order to maintain the total party lifestyle proper to the lords, the peasants suffer for it. what's best about the peasants is that they're so convinced that their interests and those of the lords are the same that they willingly bear these afflictions, presumably because at least that way they know the Face of the Lord is directed toward them so they exist socially. without that Recognition, the peasants would be adrift, identity-less, without a proper place or a conception of places that are proper which is required to have a proper place. in the new feudalism that is the logical extension of conservative economic policies, the barriers that separate peasant from lord grow and grow, but curiously so does the belief amongst the peasantry that the opposite is the case, if they just try and try and try they'll someday be lords...this when the reality is they'll always be peasants and the system they support functions to assure that even as the peasants wander about inside it saying how very not true that is. maybe that's because the lords tell the peasants that this counter-factual scenario is the case and the peasants like to be like the lords and like to like what the lords tell them to like and so now they like counter-factual scenarios and they like them with all their peasanty little hearts, so devoted are they to interests which by any rational standard at all are not their own. incidentally, i will simply repeat that i am far more disappointed about the capitulation on the question of israeli settlements in the west bank and around jerusalem, which i see as a pure and unmotivated cave-in to the right, than i am in the appearance of capitulation in the tax bill. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

12-10-2010, 01:37 PM	#28 (permalink)
RogueGypsy Insane Location: The Great NorthWet	Let me first say, this string was intended as satire, which was a colossal fail on my part. Since it evolved into an actual discussion, I'll roll with it. RoachBoy- I apologize for calling you a Cunt. I misread 'op' as 'original poster' and took offense to a non-existent personal attack. I apologize. As I said I'm not an Obama fan, but as our leader it's in my best interest he do well. Frankly, he's disappointed me no more than any other leader in memory. I guess my biggest disappointment so far has been his change of attitude toward 'change'. He came in with big ideas and a can-do attitude, that has since withered to compromise and a band-aid. I hear the arguments about idiots on both sides of the aisle in Congress and the Senate, but a true leader could and should pull everyone together. While running for office, it looked like he could pull this off. I've since come to believe his charisma, character and personality are just as scripted as his speeches. It's too bad really, we need change and I don't care which side it comes from, ultimately we are all on the same side. As long as the change is good for the nation, I'm all for it. I just see all the Us ~vs~ Them as a further distraction for us, while they continue to grow richer and we continue to grow poorer. I no longer believe our government speaks for the people, nor do I believe they have our interests at heart. It does surprise me that so many continue to defend a man who is no different than those they despise. He may speak different words, but his actions are the same. How does he deserve your support? The Health care bill is already making things worse. Gitmo is running along. The war in the Middle East is still sucking us dry. We are still dependent on foreign oil. The economy is still in the toilet. TSA is out of control. The response to Wiki leaks has highlighted how much of a lie "transparency of government" is. We are the laughing stock of the World because they all think we're supporting this stupidity. And no one has been called to task over any of it. It brings to mind a quote I read in my youth. "Your actions speak so loudly, I can't hear what you're saying" I don't see the possiblilty of any positive change in the near future either. As long as it takes $150M to run for President, the quality of the candidates will always lean toward the interests of the wealthy. As a people we need to enact the change. Term limits in Congress and the Senate. Ban lobbiest completely. Remove business from government. Ban government from business. Enact a law mandating every law apply equally to everyone including politicians. Complete transparency of government. And loudly protest everything that is not in the interest of the nation. Really, we are standing-by while 1% of the nation bends us over and takes turns. All the while arguing about who was worse, Bush or Obama. Neither, they are both blood sucking assholes looking to get even richer off the labor of the people. The time has come to end the elected aristocracy and salvage what's left of our nation. .. __________________ Methods, application and intensity of application vary by the individual. All legal wavers must be signed before 'treatment' begins. Self 'Medicating' is not recommend. However, if necessary, it is best to have an 'assistant' or 'soft landing zone' nearby. Any and all legal issues resulting from improperly applied techniques should be forwarded to: Dewy, Cheatum & Howe, Intercourse, PA 17534. Attn: Anonymous.

12-10-2010, 01:52 PM	#30 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	we're cool, rogue. thanks for posting that. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

12-10-2010, 02:00 PM	#31 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	I'm disappointed that President Obama seems infinitely more willing to compromise than I am, but I'm (just barely) old enough to remember President Clinton in the late 90s caving left and right. Or rather just right. This seems to be what most Democratic leaders do when in power. Senator Bernie Sanders is starting a filibuster on the tax cut extension for the wealthy right now. I'd very much like to vote for his name in a presidential election.

12-10-2010, 05:32 PM	#32 (permalink)
docbungle It's all downhill from here Location: Denver	Obama has never been a frothing-at-the-mouth progressive, and a lot of Dems seem to have forgotten that, or maybe never believed it in the first place. I see a lot of people angry at him for being the same person they elected. Reality, of course, has gotten in the way of campaign promises. People seem to think this is something new, as if it hasn't happened to every single president that has ever been elected in the history of the United States...not to mention they've only given him half a term to accomplish everything before giving Republicans the House (I'm sure that'll be a big help!). The most outspoken Dems seem to expect an unprecedented level of perfection from Obama. They expect him to be a purist. I think that is what happened with G.W. Bush and those same Dems don't have too many nice things to say about that era. __________________ Bad Luck City

12-10-2010, 07:29 PM	#33 (permalink)
ASU2003 immoral minority Location: Back in Ohio	The far left doesn't understand what game Obama is playing here. What does he want to accomplish with this tax cut in the next two years? Does he think that nothing will get done if he stops this? Does he think that the next house will only vote on this issue over and over until 2012? Is this tax cut really the best move for the country if it includes some unemployment and alternative energy stuff in it? Where are the TEA party people saying that we need to pay for this, and the deficit will grow by $800 billion (or do they care about keep the government from getting the money and cutting spending)? And what is Clinton gaining from this? Has someone paid off the right people? And will Obama be up against a farther left candidate in the primary next year (shivers, it is only 1 year away from another election cycle...)?

12-11-2010, 06:47 AM	#34 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	the "far left"? who on earth are you talking about? obama is a centrist. he's always been a centrist. he's about process. his administration doesn't seem to quite get the battle for news cycles and importance of appearing to be clear. rather, the communications strategy seems geared around process as well, which is i suppose a form of transparency, but it puts the administration at a continuous disadvantage in terms of framing its own actions. this isn't new as an issue...you'd have thought that they'd have figured out that this is a Problem. ever since machiavelli wrote that instruction manual for people holding power, it's been clear as day that image matters, that it is an aspect of power. the problem with the republican tax cut extension is that it does nothing good for the economy at all. it does nothing good for anyone. it is not fiscally responsible. it does not help unemployment. it is a simple bone thrown to the nimrods on the right who still find themselves in the position of having to pretend that they were not of the bush period, that it is their economic ideology that is responsible for the disaster we've been in. so they're in marketing mode, illusion-building mode. and the administration capitulated in a high-profile way in order to get a series of measure that it wanted---and then did very little to control the way the capitulation was framed. with the result that the democrats are (were?) trying to scuttle the deal. bad communication, really. but caving in to the israeli far right was and is more egregious a failure. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

12-11-2010, 07:10 AM	#35 (permalink)
ASU2003 immoral minority Location: Back in Ohio	The "far" left are the ones that will actually speak their minds and write their congressmen/congresswomen and protest in the streets. They are the ones that will go on TV and argue their case. There is a "far" right as well. It isn't a bad term to be far left or far right, but it means that you have a vision of the way things should be done and when there is no good reason or explanation for doing something counter to your vision you will get upset. It is very hard, if not impossible to change these people's minds. And on the tax cut issue, Obama campaigned on this at every stop. There has to be something else going on that made him change his mind, yet he isn't explaining it very well. Last edited by ASU2003; 12-11-2010 at 07:13 AM..

12-19-2010, 07:08 AM	#37 (permalink)
TheCrimsonGhost Upright Location: Los Angeles, CA	I feel like I've been screwed and I didn't vote for either of the 2 douche nozzles who ran last election.