Wednesday, December 01, 2010

the Mystery of Obama-ism, pt 1

Alan Silverleib,CNN, "Senate GOP pledges to block all bills until tax dispute resolved"

Nancy Cordes, CBS News, "Unemployed Face Holidays Without Gov't Benefits":
"Tough Choices:" Congress Wrestles with How to Pay for Extending Benefits as Intensity Grows on Debate over Bush-Era Tax Cuts



The republicans are practically giving him the 1990s government shut down shadow-play all over again. It should be a slam dunk for ole Barry, right? Disavow the deficit commission's recommendations, and call the GOP's bluff regarding making the extension of unemployment benefits deficit neutral, linking it to a tax hike on the over 250k set that he winks at and supposedly demonizes. The full-throated, anti-bizarro world argument that raising taxes may actually raise revenue, especially when levied on people who have a lot of it, hasn't been made in a while. But you'd think it wouldn't be a hard sell, right?

But if you are remotely sentient you know he isn't going to do it. I see no point in blaming the tea partiers, they've already done their damage. Obama wants to lose this battle. A while back Rob Payne and I argued about his intelligence, Rob arguing that I was wrong to see Obama as amoral but smart, basically arguing that he was amoral but not very bright- and I'm beginning to think Rob is right. A smarter Barry would realize that if all he does is capitulate eventually this will hurt his re-election chances, and you'd think he'd stop fantasizing about Saint Reagan for just a bit, not for our sakes but just to save his political neck. But I'm guessing he wont see it that way, and obeying the oligarchs who installed him will be more important to him, so the welfare state strip mining project will continue on schedule.


Ruth Calvo, WaPo Writer Blames Public for Unemployment
via Avedon Carol.


Rob Payne, "Every Year"

"Federal Reserve's 'astounding' report: We loaned banks trillions"

Labels: , ,

12 Comments:

At December 02, 2010 5:44 AM, Blogger AlanSmithee said...

God-Emperor Sparkle Pony will, of course, do what he's told to do. But how would capitulation hurt his election chances? There's no downside to ignoring pwogs. They'll vote for a broken toaster if it has a 'D' next to it's name.

 
At December 02, 2010 9:17 AM, Blogger Jonathan Versen said...

A broken toaster! I like that. But I guess I'm talking about the 'non-pwoggie' independents who'll see him as useless.

 
At December 02, 2010 10:20 AM, Blogger Bob In Pacifica said...

I'm not so critical of the voters. When given the choice between a broken toaster and John McCain/Sarah Palin, I'd vote for a broken toaster. In fact, I did.

But, of course, that's the problem with the system. When was the last time a liberal ran for President? McGovern? Carter only looks liberal compared to the current terrain. Clinton was the best Republican the corporatists could imagine. We're stuck between the fascists who offer magical promises to solve things (trickle down, make illegals "disappear", etc.) and fake Democrats who routinely capitulate to the Repubs.

I've made the comparison before, but politics these days are pretty much professional wrestling.

Clearly, Obama is quite comfortable with the corporatists. One would have hoped that a constitutional scholar might have been a little disturbed by the lawbreaking of the last administration, but apparently not so.

It's a fixed game. If you don't like it (and I certainly don't) then you need to figure out how it's fixed and then figure out how to correct it.

 
At December 02, 2010 3:14 PM, Blogger AlanSmithee said...

"When was the last time a liberal ran for President? McGovern?"

Cynthia McKinney in, oh, what was it...2004 I'd say. Approximately.

Of course, all the yellow jellyfish fauxgressives squealed "Twaitor!" on their little pwoggie blogs and voted for the corporate-owned warmongering shill that is God-Emperor Sparkle Pony - thus once again demonstrating why the DP doesn't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut what pwogs want or don't want.

But, yeah, you're probably right, JV. I suspect independent voters are going to avoid SuperBlackJesusRegan like a Uwe Boll film.

 
At December 02, 2010 5:00 PM, Blogger Bob In Pacifica said...

Gee, Alan, I guess that "yellow jellyfish fauxgressive" was directed at me. Let's skip the namecalling if we can. I don't see anything gained by that.

So how about when was the last time that any liberal with a chance of winning the White House ran for President?

Better, in order to avoid confusion over what constitutes liberal or progressive, let's use a more accurate yardstick:

How do you elect a President who represents the interests of the vast majority of Americans instead of the upper 1%?

If you throw up your hands in hopelessness, then I say voting for the lesser of two evils is the most rational choice for Americans.

Work with me, Alan.

 
At December 02, 2010 11:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, you elect such a president by voting for them when they run.

Wacky, I know. But there you are.

-- ms_xeno

 
At December 03, 2010 5:35 AM, Blogger Mimi said...

About the Ylan Mui farce: Where does this pretty, vacant, overly-made-up "financial reporter" get off blaming "the public"--already stuffed up the wazoo with useless crap for which it's in hock--for the crimes perpetrated by the banks and the government? Geez, are they ALL being paid off? I can't be dispassionate about the rape of the American public, followed, automatically, by blaming the victim: From "she was dressed provocatively, officer.." to "it's their fault for saving instead of throwing their money away..."
AAGH!

 
At December 03, 2010 7:03 AM, Blogger Bob In Pacifica said...

Of course, Anonymous, it's so simple!

Except, then, you might explain how come these good candidates never get elected. I voted for Dr. Spock in 1980. How come he didn't win?

 
At December 03, 2010 9:42 AM, Blogger AlanSmithee said...

So how about when was the last time that any liberal with a chance of winning the White House ran for President?

Stop trying to be fucking Socrates, Bob-o. Everyone's heard your lesser-evil weasel shit before and no one is buying. Take your fucking wars and tax cuts for the rich and ram 'em.

Work with me, Alan.

No.

 
At December 03, 2010 10:15 AM, Blogger Bob In Pacifica said...

So, Alan, your point is that there is no way to elect a good Presidential candidate (aside from you apparently not being able to discuss anything without hurling insults)?

Great. We agree.

And you can't come up with a way to change the game?

Great. I agree that you don't seem to be able to figure out how to change anything but only complain.

But you do complain well.

So now you understand why millions of voters stayed home this last November.

I apologtize for being fucking Socrates. Fuck me.

Maybe you don't care how we arrived at this.

How about those Niners, eh?

 
At December 03, 2010 11:25 AM, Blogger AlanSmithee said...

(aside from you apparently not being able to discuss anything without hurling insults)?

Oh, did I hurt your coral-pink little ears, Socrates? I'm ever so fucking sorry.

And you can't come up with a way to change the game?

You want to be told what to do, Bob-o? Go ask your lesser-evil shitstain democrats. They're more that happy to tell you useless chickenshit Obots how to "play the game." Then you can stand in the crowd, wave your Hope For Change sign and "play the game" as much as you fucking want while your masters and betters stick fucking knives in you.

Hell, I'll show up just to cheer them on.

 
At December 03, 2010 4:10 PM, Blogger Jonathan Versen said...

OK that's enough.

 

<< Home