August 6, 2011

"Obama is not a flaccid Jimmy Carter... He is instead a Franklin Delano Roosevelt -- but a bizarro FDR."

David Sirota strains to understand and characterize the President.
In forging such bipartisan complicity with what were once exclusively right-wing Republican objectives, Obama has achieved even more than what he fantasized about when he famously celebrated a previous bizarro FDR. In an illustrative 2008 interview with a Nevada newspaper, Obama lauded Ronald Reagan for "chang[ing] the trajectory of America" and "put[ting] us on a fundamentally different path."

Reagan was a truly strong executive -- but the Gipper was nothing compared to our current president.
Got that, wingers?

91 comments:

Paddy O said...

If I believe it strongly enough, it becomes true.

Don't criticize my beliefs or we'll insist you get psychatric evaluation!

rhhardin said...

I liked "malevolent stupidity" as better characterizing Obama.

Seeing Red said...

They keep trying to make him seem like Reagan.

I thought they hated Reagan?

Mutnodjmet said...

Frankly, I hold the beltway, legacy media as much to blame for the downgrade as the Congress or President, if not more so. For example, they fiddled over Palin's Alaska emails while our economy burned. The Tea Party was talking about the Debt Ceiling even more the 2010 election. The elite punditry class waited until the supposed deadline was looming.

The Fourth Branch of government is even more odious than the 1st and 2nd in this matter.

Seven Machos said...

Reminds me of the goofy paean in Esquire the other day. Was it or was it not sarcasm? When readers can't tell the difference, maybe it's time to stop digging.

The Democrats should seriously consider nominating Hillary Clinton.

Ron said...

In a world that declares Obama FDR, this means that Althouse is George Bernard Shaw, and me? Hell, P. G. Wodehouse at least! Yay, me!

Shouting Thomas said...

The Democrats should seriously consider nominating Hillary Clinton.

Jesus Christ, God Almighty!

Seven Machos, as awful as that seems, it might be a lifeline.

mesquito said...

The Political Class is losing its mind.

YoungHegelian said...

Does Salon ever print anything now that isn't Left Coast left-wing pissiness?

I stopped reading them a few years back when they'd print just the nastiest screeds against G.W. Bush & conservatives in general.

And, now, from these folks comes "Obama the right-winger" trope, because, he, unlike them, has finally figured out we've maxxed out the federal credit card.

Seven Machos said...

If the 2012 race is between, say, Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, I won't be anywhere near elated, but I will be confident that people who know what they are doing will be in charge no matter what. So when that call comes at three in the morning...

Shouting Thomas said...

At least, the writer has finally admitted that Jimmy Carter suffered from erectile dysfunction.

Apparently, Obama can keep it up?

How do we know?

Coketown said...

Once Obama was compared to Jesus. Now he's contrasted to a flaccid Jimmy Carter. How the mighty have fallen.

By the way, a note to the editors of Salon.com: Jimmy Carter's shriveled, flaccid, old, stringy, dysfunctional, gray, potentially spotted penis has no place in our public discourse. Doing so commits an as-yet-unnamed argumentative fallacy by which you win the debate by grossing out your opponents.

Eric said...

I know what all the words mean, but put together like that they just don't make any sense.

Shouting Thomas said...

A friend e-mailed me today, and asked whether Obama had a stable of babes on the side.

As we know, the press is pretty uninterested in digging up dirt on The One.

Anybody got a clue?

The One's dad was a bigamist. Like father like son?

Sixty Grit said...

It's known as Coketown's law.

Lem said...

Reagan was a truly strong executive -- but the Gipper was nothing compared to our current president.

The tea party is to Obama what the Soviet Union was to the Gipper.

Bizarre indeed.

Michael K said...

The workings of the paranoid mind are strange and exotic. Anyone who could believe Obama is conservative must believe fairies. What Obama is is a weird version of Herbert Hoover. Hoover was a progressive and did everything that Obama has done after the 1929 crash. The results, I fear, will be similar. All we can hope for now is that Roosevelt doesn't appear.

Seven Machos said...

Thomas -- Do you really want to even think about throwing a Democrat in that briar patch?

Some people never learn.

Seven Machos said...

What Obama is is a weird version of Herbert Hoover.

Exactly. But why the unnecessary use of weird?

Seeing Red said...

I know I should save this for another time but couldn't resist, cos the MMGW thread is far down now, via Insty:

Scientists say current concerns over a tipping point in the disappearance of Arctic sea ice may be misplaced.

Danish researchers analysed ancient pieces of driftwood in north Greenland which they say is an accurate way to measure the extent of ancient ice loss.

Writing in the journal Science, the team found evidence that ice levels were about 50% lower 5,000 years ago.

They say changes to wind systems can slow down the rate of melting.

They argue, therefore, that a tipping point under current scenarios is unlikely.

While modern observations by ship and by satellite give us a very accurate picture of the recent state of the ice, historic information is limited. The ice comes and goes without leaving a permanent record.

But a Danish team believes it has found an indirect method that gives a clear picture of the ice loss dating back 11,000 years.



wv:dipushee

Di pushee's coming on MMGW!

Seeing Red said...

The tea party is to Obama what the Soviet Union was to the Gipper.



But, but but

Ronnie RAYGUN didn't DO ANYTHING!

It was Gorby! It was the times, he just happened to be president!

Anyone have a neck brace?

I'm getting whiplash.

YoungHegelian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rialby said...

Makes you realize just how far apart people are in this country. I, on the Right, believe Barack Obama to be the most feckless, left-wing POTUS of all time. At the same time, there is an entire part of America that believes him to be willing to comply with right-wing objectives. Wild.

Robert Cook said...

I don't know about the FDR comparison, but Sirota is just stating the obvious: Obama is no liberal.

Coketown said...

It's known as Coketown's law.

That was vague. "It."

Rialby said...

Vera Baker was sent away to Martinique to cool her heels for a few years while Obama ran for the presidency. No idea if Obama's operatives have let her back in country.

Shouting Thomas said...

I don't know about the FDR comparison, but Sirota is just stating the obvious: Obama is no liberal..

Kookie! Kookie!

Yes, you're right. If he were really a liberal, he'd legalize prostitution and nationalize all the whorehouses.

It's so obvious!

YoungHegelian said...

@Shouting Thomas:

Rumor has it he was linked to Vera Baker.

If this is true, I have no idea. To use the old French saying -- I wasn't standing at the foot of the bed holding the candle.

But, let me tell you, if I was the most powerful man in the world, and went looking in the DC area, Vera Baker would get ignored in favor of:

http://www.abc7dc.com/talentbios/getbio.cfm?id=116

george said...

Give him a break, Sirota has quite obviously never visited the Earth before.

This sort of cognitive dissonance happens when you get your hearts desire. The leftest of leftists gets in power and enacts your whole agenda only to see everything turn to shit. It can't possibly be the heavy handed policies these people promoted that were responsible so they have to create a fantasy where Obama is somewhere to the right of Stalin and every right thinking person is to the left... so to speak.

It must suck when everything you have ever believed in is proven to be false in such a completely unequivocal fashion.

Seven Machos said...

Hey! It's Robert Cook! Tell us, Bob: what U.S. law allows Americans to be charged with war crimes and judged by courts of international jurisdiction?

Please! I've been waiting since 2003 or so for you to answer this simple question. I don't understand why you don't answer it, as you held yourself out for so long as some kind of expert on international law and war crimes.


What gives, dude? Don't tell me you are just an idiot who has no fucking clue what you are talking about. That would crush my soul.

Chip S. said...

@RCook, Remember what
James Carville
once said? He'd like to be reincarnated as the bond market because then "you can intimidate everybody".

Obama, like Clinton, has found out that governing is different from campaigning in that actions--unlike rhetoric--are constrained by reality.

Obama pushed a leftish agenda hard in his 1st two years and his party got its ass kicked in the midterm elections. That plus the failure of his stimulus plan have left him boxed in, regardless of what he'd like to do.

Sixty Grit said...

My apologies for the lack of precision, Coketown.

Trooper York said...

Shouting Thomas said...
A friend e-mailed me today, and asked whether Obama had a stable of babes on the side.

I thought he was on the down-low.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Maybe it will keep him occupied like golf so he doesn't mess with things he knows nothing about. You know governing.

Robert Cook said...

Chip S.

Continuing the Bush policies is hardly "push(ing) a leftist agenda hard...."

Michael K said...

Exactly. But why the unnecessary use of weird?

Hoover had a record of great accomplishment. He may have been the best prepared man ever to become president but he was a progressive. At the time, progressive ideas had not been disproved as they are now.

The fact that Obama would take the exact same path is weird. Hoover signed Smoot-Hawley; Obama has held up three trade agreements objected to by unions.

Hoover raised taxes and tried to keep wages high. Obama ditto.

Hoover doubled federal spending and while the dollar amounts don't seem that large, the 1924 dollar was worth 80 2011 dollars.

Roosevelt followed Hoover's lead and his policies in his first term were Hoover's. He didn't say so, of course.

edutcher said...

That "fundamentally different path" is called down.

This guy is definitely getting the Kool-Aid IV push.

PS Looks like SeeingRed is going to be the stand-in for America's Politico until the K Street types stop sounding like all the SS officers in the Fuhrerbunker.

Mick said...

Delusional Lefty still trying to push the "Obama is Reagan", or Obama is just like any other POTUS nonsense. Obama is a Usurper (born British, not natural born), and all his minions and Propagandists are aiding in treason.

Chip S. said...

RCook,

If you're referring to the extension of the tax cuts, that happened a month after the '10 elections, with their clear message.

If you're talking about not closing Gitmo, that's because he's still not been able to figure out what to do with terrorists except kill rather than capture.

Both cases are examples of what I'm talking about.

Seven Machos said...

The cat was out of the bag with Obama when he talked about saving gas by putting more air in tires.

I didn't see it then, but that was the clue. See, Obama and his lackeys are the kind of people who sit around telling each other that everybody is stupid except them and there are all these really easy, simple ways to improve and perfect society. If only people would listen to them, the philosopher kings.

The poster above who talked about how Obama is seeing all his simple solutions around the edges turn into a festering shit heap nailed it.

Shouting Thomas said...

... all his minions and Propagandists are aiding in treason.

What in the hell do minions look like?

Fortunately, the internet answers all questions. Here are Despicable Minions. Pretty damned scary. Probably foreigners, too.

mesquito said...

What in the hell do minions look like?

I don't know, but I hate it when they and their ilk spew forth.

Seven Machos said...

But Chip, Obama is not like Clinton because Clinton was a quick study. he realized quickly what he needed to do and changed course quickly and effectively.

In addition, Even the 1993 version of Clinton was quite conservative economically -- pro-free trade, pro-growth. Obama is not and doesn't seem capable to being so.

Finally, things are truly terrible right now. Clinton had the benefit of dealing with an essentially wonderful economy, pre 9/11.

Joe said...

This article is bonkers. He lost me with "most agree that Obama is a brilliant, Harvard-trained lawyer who understands how to wield political power."

Except he isn't brilliant or even smart. He has no idea how to wield any power, let alone political power. The man is a clueless buffoon; a genuine fool. As Virginia Postrel points out, he's not even charismatic; he was glamorous. In her words:

What's the difference? Charisma moves the audience to share a leader's vision. Glamour, on the other hand, inspires the audience to project its own desires onto the leader (or movie star or tropical resort or new car): to see in the glamorous object a symbol of escape and transformation that makes the ideal feel attainable. The meaning of glamour, in other words, lies entirely in the audience's mind.

Amusing how that glamor thing keeps on ticking.

Hockey Bum said...

David Sirota is a journalist, radio host and author living in Denver, CO.

Must be something in the water.

Seeing Red said...

SS officers in the Fuhrerbunker.



I miss those vids.


I was crying I laughed so hard.


STUPID DIRECTOR!

Seeing Red said...

I finally figured cookie out.

He's stuck in the 50s.


Well, at least he's moved up a couple of decades.


But we're in the 2nd decade of the 21st century.

Pubbies became the party of the middle class at least 10 years ago.

Seeing Red said...

Chip S.

Continuing the Bush policies is hardly "push(ing) a leftist agenda hard...."



He certainly owns "cash for clunkers."

Hockey Bum said...

"Obama isn't .. a liberal"

This is like saying the Soviet Union wasn't really communist. Rather than admit the philosophy is flawed, insist that what passes for liberalism these days has never really been tried.

BJM said...

Man, is the Obama spin machine set on the heavy duty, stain release, double rinse and extra fluffy dry cycle this weekend or what?

MayBee said...

I'm trying to think of the last time I heard Obama say he was building a new foundation for America. The foundation that wasn't going to be subject to bubbles and stuff.
I wonder how he thinks the foundation is going, and why he doesn't update us about it.

Seeing Red said...

The foundation wasn't shovel-ready?

AllenS said...

Stop this Hillary! nonsense. She lost all of her street cred (tough bitch) with her fiasco Libya operation. Quadfucky is still in charge, and we don't have any of his oil. It's no wonder why even Bill doesn't want to fuck the woman. She ain't got it. What a miserable fool.

WV: deecon

Yeah, spray some of that on Hillary!

Synova said...

"Got that, wingers?"

Help us, Zombie Reagan. You are our only hope.

Darleen said...

but Sirota is just stating the obvious: Obama is no liberal.

Of course not, Obama is an illiberal Leftist. Actual (and anti-Left) liberals are now "terrorist" conservatives and "fringe" libertarians.

Tim said...

"Such apologism, of course, allows liberals to avoid the more painful truth that Obama is one of America's strongest presidents ever and is achieving exactly what he wants."

Shorter Sirata: Obama has chosen failure, and is succeeding beyond his wildest imagination.

ddh said...

Mick,

What's the plan?

Synova said...

"Shorter Sirata: Obama has chosen failure, and is succeeding beyond his wildest imagination."

I vote for Tim. Brilliant!

SPImmortal said...

Brace yourselves, folks. We're about to hi the next leg down:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/it-just-went-bad-far-far-worse-germany-says-italy-too-big-efsf-save-refuses-carry-euro-bailout-

PaulV said...

Al Gore is tanned and rested

Quaestor said...

The president has the political muscle to enact a progressive agenda, but he doesn't want to

That's patently false on the evidence. While he had a lock on the Senate and House he had the muscle and he used it to enact his regressive agenda, but those days are done. Maybe Salon's editor added that subtitle, if so David Sirota isn't quite as stupid as his writings would lead one to conclude.

What we're seeing here is the beginning of a sixteen month program of propaganda and Soviet-style revisionism generated by the Left vanguard and aimed at their own rank and file. In order to preserve their self-image as natural aristocrats, infallible elites and masters of the universe it is now imperative that the abject failure called Barack Hussein Obama be discredited and that the people who promoted him, marched for him, sang, perjured, defrauded, vandalized and thieved for him be absolved of the catastrophe we're living through. This is the Internet Age equivalent of Bukharin being airbrushed out of pictures with Stalin. The Left are in the process of purging their collective memory of an inconvenient truth, because if the true history of these interesting times are remembered the Left might actually learn something, and we can't have that now, can we?

Carol_Herman said...

Don't "misunderestimate" him!

Even without his magic dust, the bar for Obama is set low.

Most Americans aren't even invested. They consider their homes "money pits" ... not investment quality resources. And, they haven't been to "market" ... the way you'd want the retail trade to show up ... for more than two years.

You don't want to blame Boehner and McConnell for stupid, penny ante "trades?" See if I care?

Obama knows all he needs to win is a smidgen over 50%. Easy Peazy.

While the stupid party learned nothing from running with McCain. And, now? MORE HAIR. MORE HAIR!

JFK's hair will do it!

HA. HA. HA. (Except that it's painful to laugh.)

Carol_Herman said...

What happened to all the skilled politicians?

Back in the old days, you couldn't pass a bar in DC ... without seeing that inside sat groups of men who could run the country.

Heck, when truman got selected by FDR, FDR's problem was Wallace.

Truman never even went to college. His dad went bankrupt. And, Truman had to return to work the farm.

Truman got his footing in politics with local political jobs. Where he fixed the roads with taxpayer's money. Missouri. Farmers. Excellent results for the toil. And, that's how Truman eventually got to go to the senate. Stubborn. And, of good character. Don't get fooled by the Pendergast machine. Truman wasn't dirty.

FDR probably didn't think he was dying. Even at Yalta ... where the photos show how bad he looked. he didn't know.

Truman wasn't in his loop.

He was the veep.

Usually a job thought of as worth a bucket of spit.

Quayle said...

The reality is that the President had both chambers and they pushed the core of their agenda through, and then they got routed in the next election.

The president led his party to a massive defeat in the next election.

And the only reason that they still hold 1/2 the congress and the presidency is because they weren't up for election.

And they are trying to pretend that didn't happen, and talk about what a success it has all been.

Which is why the major line against democrat congressional candidates in 2012 needs to be "Going down with Obama - Russ Feingold did it. [Fill in name] is ready to do it too."

Ann all this chatter about how Obama's left flank is so upset with him is nothing more than positioning.

They want everyone to think that he's a centrist, when he isn't.

If they're upset with him, it is because he presided over Nancy Pelosi's gavel surrender.

Synova said...

"While he had a lock on the Senate and House he had the muscle and he used it to enact his regressive agenda, but those days are done."

I don't think he's going to be able to get away from that truth, either. No matter that he's going to try his hardest not to take the blame for the credit rating downgrade or any other part of what is going on. The truth of it is that he did have the better part of two years to do what he wanted to do and what he *wanted* to do had nothing to do with taking control of and solving the economy, which he was well aware of.

Did he think that the stimulus solved the problem? He knew he ought to promise to work on creating jobs. He said so.

So for six months he's had to deal with a congress that he doesn't own... only six months!

Any primary candidate would be a fool not to concentrate on just how little attention Obama has paid to the economy, and now he complains he can't do it his way so it's not his fault. All his political capital was spent on Obamacare. That was his priority. No one MADE him have that as a priority.

But he seems to have thought that the economy would right itself if he just threw money at it. Like a casserole... from Stoffers... you throw it in the oven frozen, set the timers, and come back in two years and *presto!* you have a tasty dinner.

Fen said...

Monday looks black.

Carol_Herman said...

Point out to me who in Congress does NOT want an inflationary outcome?

And, while you're pointing, point out to me, too, how Boehner and McConnell struck such a grand bargain?

Remember Americans have walked away from the table. You can't earn a living making commission money ... just moving papers around. (Countrywide FOLDED! Lehman Brothers dropped dead.)

And, what have I been saying?

I'm saying you've got open lots where cars used to park. And, retailers who are now dropping like flies.

One reason Obama stays through and wins his re-election? Well, he's already there. And, so many Americans are really, really tired.

Yes. FDR also kept getting re-elected. And, not because Americans felt the recovery ... They were just glad to earn enough to buy milk and bread.

It's the White House! Not vaudeville. There's no manager at the side of the stage with a hook, here.

And? Every one of obama's losses will be blamed on somebody else.

While in Black communities? There's no noticeable difference ... and of all people who will vote, again, for obama ... just the same. You've identified one group.

The Tea Party's been screwed the day after last November's results came in. And, "guess who" walked into the Speaker's Office. You voted for that?

Mike said...

If I were a druggie, I'd sure be wanting some of the same stuff that Sirota is smoking! Hallucinations, delusions of relevance, dreams of competence--they are all there.

Of course there's a two fold underlying message. The Bamster is really all powerful, all seeing, a brilliant Harvard trained lawyer who could do things if he wanted to. That's message one. Message two is "He's just not that into you" you libtards.

Peano said...

Barack Obama is a lot of things -- eloquent, dissembling, conniving, intelligent and, above all, calm. But one thing he is not is weak.

Got it.

Quayle said...

"Monday looks black."

Let's all be clear how we got here

1. The financial gurus at the Fed and Treasury act on the assumption that they can tune and adjust the dials on the economy and make it all hum along like a finely maintained BMW engine.

2. Except that they've been hit with financial shock after financial shock for the past 20 years.

3. And their only recourse each time has been to flood the economy with cash and liquidity. Every time there has been a financial crisis in some part of the world economy that impacted the U.S., they opened the floodgates and flooded the market with cheap credit – with cheap money.

3.a. Oh, and that causes bubbles. Can you say dot.com bubble? Can you say housing bubble? Can you say credit card bubble? Can you say artificial economic stimulation? Our economy has been on meth for the past 20 years and now we look like hell in the mirror.

4. So now all the dials fully open and the economy is still sputtering, and shows signs of even tanking. They can’t give it any more fuel, because the throttle is wide open, and the engine is decelerating. So now what?

5. Well, if you’re a Democrat, you decide that it is the perfect time to pass Obamacare and Dodd-Frank. The Dems decide it would be a great time to introduce a huge degree of uncertainty into the business sector of America. There are still to come, thousands and thousands of pages of regulation under these two bills that haven’t been written, and therefore can’t yet be reduced to their impact on a financial or investment model. Nobody knows how to model a future business decision because they don’t know how much labor is going to cost, and they don’t know how must the regulations on their financing are going to cost. So they all sit and wait.

6. So the Dems have stirred the pot so hard that the whole thing is now gruel. Their tectonic shifts in regulations would have been disruptive in even the best of economic times. But to do it during our biggest economic downturn in 60-80 years was reckless bordering on insane.

7. It is like the horses pulling our cart were all getting sick, and the Dems decided it was a great time to give one a heart transplant, cut the legs off another one, put a bunch of them in the back of the cart, and beat the two remaining horses to death.

8. And now we all wonder why the cart isn’t going?

9. And some dare to still call the Dems a sane and responsible bunch of people?

10. And Obama is somehow this great genius?

Carol_Herman said...

Oh, it takes two to tango.

Complain about obama all you want. You've got nothing, yet, coming up against him!

Oh, and when you go back to FDR ... take a look at the GOP. See what you see there that's worth saving.

Heck, I can remember when McCain got chosen in 2008. So many people who actually identified themselves with the republican party label, said they thought McCain STUNK! But they were willing to hold their noses ... because?

Well, somehow if you turn politics into a crazy religion. You can get people to think McCain was going to attract Hillary voters!

You ever see a Hillary voter?

I know two. And, they're a lesbian couple. Then? No one who could be described as a Hillary voter.

But there ya go. At the track men spend good money betting numbers. As if horses can be flogged to win.

After the race? You should see what people do! They rip up their tickets! Tickets that cost them anywhere from two-dollars to hundreds of dollars.

It's like watching money being flushed down the toilet.

Now the self-identified republicans ... (which, maybe, there's about 30% across the whole USA) ... they're flogging Mitt or Perry. When a few weeks ago it was "Mittens and Paws."

It's like watching DeSoto trying to find the Fountain of Youth.

Here? I think obama probably wins because the GOP can't stop making errors. Boehner and McConnell? Wow. Did they just pull a doozy!

You were looking for a debt increase? REALLY?

Welcome to CLUB REALITY.

ic said...

"...the Gipper was nothing compared to our current president."

Frankly, even the Gipper and FDR were unable to rake up a trillion deficits in their combined 20+ years in office, fighting a Hot War and a Cold War. You need a brilliant executive to get us an AA+ credit rating, a first in our history. Beat that, Gipper?

Btw, he killed Osama bin Laden with his bare hands.

Michael K said...

The Dems decide it would be a great time to introduce a huge degree of uncertainty into the business sector of America. There are still to come, thousands and thousands of pages of regulation under these two bills that haven’t been written, and therefore can’t yet be reduced to their impact on a financial or investment model. Nobody knows how to model a future business decision because they don’t know how much labor is going to cost, and they don’t know how must the regulations on their financing are going to cost. So they all sit and wait.

This is far more important than the stimulus or even the debt. The economy is paralyzed like it was in the Depression. Nobody wants to invest because they don't know what will happen in 6 months. The EPA and NLRB are totally out of control, run by people who have no idea how economies work.

Fen said...

Agreed. Its the uncertainty thats keeping the lifeblood of the economy (small business sector) from recovering.

Nichevo said...

Btw, he killed Osama bin Laden with his bare hands.


No, but C4 on the other thread may have a point that Obama killed Seal Team Six with his mouth. Which must have hurt to say, because I thought Obama was his boy.

JAL said...

re Hebert Hoover -- there are some strange similarities between some of Obama's policies and Hoover's (<--He raised taxes hugely at one point. Didn't work.)

But ... Mr. Hoover's personal policy throughout his public career was to accept no compensation for any public service, though when he worked for the Government as Secretary of Commerce and President, he was required by law to accept a salary.

In an interview with Charles Scott, editor of the Iola (Kansas) Daily Register in January, 1937, Hoover explained:

"I made up my mind when I entered public life that I would not make it possible for anyone ever to say that I had sought public office for the money there was in it. I therefore kept the money that came to me as salary in a separate account and distributed it where I thought it would do the most good. Part of it went to supplement the salaries of men who worked under me and whom the government paid less than I thought they were worth. Part of it went to charities."


Obama is not very Hooverish in that way.

chrisnavin said...

Robert Cook: On behalf of all the PTA members for the Maybrook Junior High School, we'd like to thank you for coming to our debate at the Ronald J Miller gymnasium and sharing your socialist ideas!

Revenant said...

That was one of the dumber articles I've read in a while.

Paul said...

In the USSR 'comrades' that had bourgeoisies tendencies were forced into psychiatric hospitals for 'evaluation'.

Obama and company seem to go more and more in this direction. Plus, as we have seen with the union thugs threatening newspapers, it harkens to the brownshirts (Hitler's SD.)

So we are seeing a mix of communism and socialism (the Nazis were socialist.)

The closes I can find to that is a dictatorship ran just as Rome was ran 2000 years ago. Funny thing is some people have asked for Obama to have special powers that were delegated to Congress. Just as Julius Caesar was.

Alex said...

Is there any guarantee that if Bush had a 3rd term that he'd intensify Afghanistan? Cash for clunkers? Stimulus to nowhere? Demonizing rich people?

Robert Cook said...

"So we are seeing a mix of communism and socialism (the Nazis were socialist.)"

So few words, so much ignorance and delusion.

Robert Cook said...

"I don't think (Obama's) going to be able to get away from that truth, either. No matter that he's going to try his hardest not to take the blame for the credit rating downgrade or any other part of what is going on."

Obama certainly owns the credit rating downgrade, but he has partners in this outcome, named explicitly by Standard & Poors: the Republicans.


http://www.truth-out.org/mainstream-media-ignores-sp-attack-republicans/1312651460

Sixty Grit said...

Fen, that's racist!

WV: cruil - but true.

Mick said...

Joe said...
"This article is bonkers. He lost me with "most agree that Obama is a brilliant, Harvard-trained lawyer who understands how to wield political power."



All the delusional Lefties start the same way when they lie:

"Most agree"
"In Realty"
"The truth is"
"Most experts say"
"Economists say"
"Nobody believes"
"Everybody says"
"The reality is"

Everything after that is Bullshit.

Fen said...

My fav:

"There is a growing perception that [insert unfounded assertion]"

traditionalguy said...

Reagan was the fore runner of the trick of lowering taxes to erect a stop sign on the runaway social welfare spending highway of a Dem Congress.

It created a stalemate because the inflation fighting Fed also would not let the deficit grow to fast.

Then Bush I said read my lips...until he needed a war resolution in the proposed Sadam I war. Bush then agreed to raise taxes.

That fixated Dems on opposing wars until an exchange for greater social welfare spending could be negotiated with the GOP.

Today the Fed is pro-inflation/deficits to save the stalled economy, meaning the Wall Street investors.

So Obama has used the opportunity to spend everything he can imagine. Anybody want a useless train?

But he has no need to oppose wars to get his deal on increased social spending, so the wars continue.

Therefore Obama can be seen as the Reagan of his day for reversing the built in spending limits in the Reagan scheme, yet with no new taxes...yet.

The next Reagan will probably be Chinese negotiators.

Somebody call Sarah Palin quick. She knows Obama, and she will expose and defeat him.

Phil 3:14 said...

It's not that Obama is so powerful; it's that the left is so weak.

And so to preserve a sense of power & importance the Left must declare BO as REALLY powerful.

Of course it ignores the "just send me anything and I'll call it healthcare reform" Obama and the "not at the debt ceiling talks table" Obama.

Things look different from the "moral high ground"

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Robert Cook said...

Obama certainly owns the credit rating downgrade, but he has partners in this outcome, named explicitly by Standard & Poors: the Republicans.

Wow- S&P noticed that Republicans are part of the government. What deep insight.

But if you wanted people to know what S&P said, why didn't you link to the S&P report? Instead you link to someone who takes one sentence out of context to try to make it sound as if the reason the debt issue won't be handled is due to Republicans being unwilling to raise taxes. That's not what the report actually says.

Also note that the real issue, as explained in the report, is the long-term debt. So if the Democrats had gotten what they wanted, a clean debt-ceiling increase, the US rating would still have been downgraded.

Big Mike said...

Reagan was a truly strong executive -- but the Gipper was nothing compared to our current president.

Oh really? My take is that everybody rolls this president. Starting with Reid and Pelosi, continuing through his cabinet, and now including McConnell and Boehner.

Not mention the analysts at Standard & Poors.

Seeing Red said...

There is a great rant linked on Breitbart.

Talking about the biz climate.


Small Businesswoman’s Epic Rant Against Obama’s Disastrous Economic Policies

Robert Cook said...

Ignorance is Bliss, the S & P report lists a variety of reasons why they downgraded America's credit rating, including, of course, our long term debt, but they also point to the lack of revenue raising provisions in the debt ceiling agreement just passed and the "political brinksmanship" that bedevils any discussion or passage of policy in Washington.

In other words, the Republicans are as responsible, in their view, as are the Democrats or the President.

It didn't say they were solely responsible, and neither did I. However, in reading through the comment threads from the usual gang of idiots here, one sees the shared delusional blame casting that our financial problems are a result entirely of Obama's "leftist" (sic), "commie" (sic), "socialist" (sic) economic schemes. Why, one is even asked to accept--if one were to believe the regulars here--that we lived in a golden age of prosperity until Obama assumed office, at which time was wrought upon our land immediate economic devastation.

I'm just pointing out that, as you phrased it, "Republicans are part of government."

Chip S. said...

RCook--You seem stuck in some early-20th-century mindset about what constitutes a leftish (as I wrote above), or even leftist, agenda today. Nobody this side of Hugo Chavez thinks it necessarily entails state ownership of the primary means of production. Instead, it means a combination of a vast welfare state along with social and economic planning implemented through regulation. Are you really prepared to claim that this doesn't describe Obama's economic goals in his first two years?

As for tax increases, you may be surprised to find that I don't disagree with you. In fact, I would be delighted to return to Clintonian tax rates in exchange for a complete structural change in entitlements. A prime stumbling block is that the Democrats lack all credibility when it comes to any tradeoff of tax hikes now in exchange for spending reform later. A lack of trust is a pretty common reason for any negotiating impasse.