August 16, 2011

"You’ve got to send a message to Washington that it’s time for the games to stop."

"It’s time to put country first."

Paradoxically, that is a move in a game.

But is it ever the case that the person who decries "games" is not himself a game-player?

And speaking of the perception of politics as a game and what it takes to end the game, let me, once again, embed the classic Russ Feingold clip:



"This game is not over until we win."

IN THE COMMENTS: Meade said:
“I know it’s not election season yet, but I just have to mention the debate,” where Republicans said they would not increase taxes under virtually any circumstance, Obama said at a town hall. “Think about that. That’s just not common sense.”

Think about that. Obama common sense says: Increase taxes under virtually any circumstance. 

46 comments:

David said...

Remember that this entire Obama campaign trip is being funded with tax revenues. All of it. A scandal in plain sight, almost universally ignored.

m stone said...

Do you have a "fantasy" tag, Ann?

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I always know that I'm dealing with a person who has a small and ineffective mind when their main complaint against politicians is that they won't get along and compromise, and are too busy "playing games" and wanting to "win".

They get bonus points for extra-stupidity if they talk about politics "these days" in an implication that things in the past were somehow better and kinder.

- Lyssa

Issob Morocco said...

He who smelt it dealt it applies here.

edward irvin said...

Ironically (I suppose) "country first" was the McCain-Palin tag line.

Meade said...

“I know it’s not election season yet, but I just have to mention the debate,” where Republicans said they would not increase taxes under virtually any circumstance, Obama said at a town hall. “Think about that. That’s just not common sense.”

Think about that. Obama common sense says: Increase taxes under virtually any circumstance.

David said...

They are serving Cool Aid and some are drinking.

From the WAPO account of the trip: “I think he’s doing a good job. He inherited a very big deficit,” said Bob Sixta, a financial planner from Rochester. “He and Michelle are the first residents of the White House to be familiar with both organic food and leftovers.”

traditionalguy said...

Obama is playing the Outsider Game.

In every move and word he portrays himself as a crusader that is seeking office so he can clean up the mess in Washington.

How dumb does he think we are??

Don't answer that.

The leak in the Media dyke has begun. With most stories on the economy there is a small leak of a sentence or two admitting that Obama is doing nothing and leading nowhere.

All the while the Fed Regulations are wrapping themselves around the USA's supporting columns like explosives being wired into a building about to be imploded when the switch is thrown.

damikesc said...

So a President who is fond of issuing plenary indulgences to supporters and has no qualms about breaking campaign finance laws...wants others to "not play games"?

Henry said...

“I think he’s doing a good job. He inherited a very big deficit,” said Bob Sixta, a financial planner from Rochester. “He and Michelle are the first residents of the White House to be familiar with both organic food and leftovers.”

First, but for George Washington. Who also inherited a big deficit.

I'm mildly interested in he use of the word "Washington" as synecdoche. Obama is using Washington to represent Congress. But is Obama not Washington as well? Consider the weakness of his gambit: My name is Barack Obama. I'm from Washington and let me tell you, "you've got to send a message to Washington..."

Playing a game about stopping the games, Obama asks for a message that he doesn't plan to receive.

Someone else will get the phone. Not Obama.

chickenlittle said...

"Last guys don't finish nice."
— Saul D. Alinsky

Quayle said...

He inherited a very big deficit....

I think he's doing a good job. He came to a smoldering house and sprayed gasoline on it.

Oh, and did you see that he's organic!

How cool is that!

Jeff in Oklahoma said...

I laugh myself silly (it is way better than crying) at your threads title. The only thing I recall from my, very liberal poly-sci professor: "To understand a politician, you need only to realize that their only goal is re-election." The only saving grace for the current crop, is that there really isn't any way for them to perform more badly, is there? Bueller, Bueller, Bueller?

DADvocate said...

As RNC Chairman said, "He's spending taxpayers' dollars on a bus tour disguised as some kind of economic event for the country when we all know that it's a campaign event paid for by the taxpayers,"

Obama has no plan, leads from behind, and uses taxpayer money to fund his campaign trip. He's so full of shit his eyes are brown.

RonF said...

Um - isn't there an election today in Wisconsin where there's at least one State Senatorial seat legitimately in play?

Curious George said...

Every stop Obama is making on this taxpayer funded jobs tour is an area that he carried by big margins, and where there is better than average performance in regard to unemployment.

What's that tell you.

Scott M said...

Um - isn't there an election today in Wisconsin where there's at least one State Senatorial seat legitimately in play?

Two, or so I thought, but the outcome is moot unless the GOP takes one or both.

Curious George said...

"RonF said...
Um - isn't there an election today in Wisconsin where there's at least one State Senatorial seat legitimately in play?"

Yes, two Dem fleebaggers up for recall. And, no, garage mahal has predicted both will win but large margins.

Calypso Facto said...

Since he has proven he can't actually lead worth a damn, Obama falls back on the one thing he's good at: campaigning.

As to the idiotic statement about organics:

"The Clinton and Bush families dined regularly on organic foods.

The presumptions of Ruth Reichl, Alice Waters and Danny Meyer, that the admirable agenda they espouse is not currently the practice in the White House kitchens, are false."


Walter Scheib
White House Executive Chef
1995-2004

Linda Seebach said...

No, that's not what Obama said. The logical complement to "never" is "sometimes," not "always." Although I would be happy to agree that "always" is what Obama *thinks.*

Hoosier Daddy said...

If Obama wanted to tax the rich so bad why did he extend the Bush tax cuts?

If more taxes are necessary why does he want to extend the payroll tax?

Obviously these are too complex questions to ask his disciples who think the experience of eating organic food and leftovers make for solid presidential qualifications.

Carol_Herman said...

When people are thrown out of work, there goes the mainstay of our taxing system. Factories close. Paychecks (WITH TAXES TAKEN OUT OF THEM), are no longer available.

So, this is the "PINCH" ...

We're supposed to have $14-trillion a year in "INCOMING" ... GDP. That's the number that covers government expenditures.

I think the $14-trillion number, these days, is a bit high.

The other problem? People can't sell homes. (The new rules have it so that you can't "roll-over" profits from one abode to another.) Houses don't sell. HOLE DUG OF MISSING TAX MONEY.

Big song and dance.

Bigger problem.

As to what's ahead. Obama doesn't have to play this card, yet.

He can play it next spring. And, I decided what changes is "how" college education gets paid for. With an assortment of pledges that will SCREW THE MIDDLE CLASS!

It's the poor who can't really repay their school loans. Because even in bankruptcy they don't get discharged.

And, IF Obama got a lift in 2008 ... from people who were sure they'd get free mortgages ... Those disappointments have been drowned, already.

As to the cost of gas? (The more gas costs the more the saud's get to spend. If we can cap gas prices back down to $3 per gallon, the saud's are stiffed.) THIS IS A GOOD THING.

It's not as if when you're president you don't have the means to make big decisions.

"O," however, dithers.

And, this seems to be playing into his hands, if not his strengths.

No one here is gonna be convinced to vote for "O" ... Honest. You hate him. "O" to you is like broccoli to the elder Bush.

And, broccoli is a cabbage. Still sells. So, you hate something else, so what?

It's not how strategy gets designed.

It is, though, a way a lot of people get aggravated. The angrier you get, the bigger the mistakes you can make.

But change the tides? Change out Obama? Not such an easy task.

edutcher said...

Harry Hopkins would be proud.

He's got the "Tax, Tax, Tax" down and wants to move on the the "Spend, Spend, Spend".

It's the "Elect, Elect, Elect" that's going to be a problem.

Right now his approval is 80% among blacks, 40% among women, and 45% approval in NY state.

Shouting Thomas said...

The dumbest trope of the past few weeks: We voters are angry because the Tea Party won't compromise and get things done.

As I understand it, the Tea Party was sent to Washington by the voters to stop those borrow and spend motherfuckers from getting things done.

The Tea Party reps would have been shirking their duty if they had just played along.

I want our reps to slug it out. The last thing in this world that I want is an efficient legislative process.

Jay said...

He inherited a very big deficit,” said Bob Sixta, a financial planner from Rochester.

Actually, he did not.

See, the Democrats took control of federal spending in January 2007.

Obama was part of that crowd.

Thankfully, I'm not one of Bob Sixta's clients.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Why did Obama extend the Bush tax cuts and why is he wanting to extend the payroll tax cuts if we need more 'revenue'?

Any liberals want to answer?

Bueller? Bueller?

Pogo said...

"I think he’s doing a good job. He inherited a very big deficit,” said Bob Sixta, a financial planner from Rochester."

Do you see what kinda loons I gotta live near in Minnesota?
This is how Al Franken got elected.

Just imagine his financial planning advice:
"Well Pogo, I think the best thing you can do is put your cash in a big pile and set it on fire.
Then send whatever's left to Obama, because he's awesome.
"

AllenS said...

obama has to play these games. Otherwise, people will remember that he is The Man.

Hagar said...

Obama is not good with numbers,and his economic theories would earn him a D in a feshman economics class.

Anyway, all this jabber about raising or cutting taxes is mostly smoke and mirrors, hens' teeth, and horse feathers. As screwed up as our economic policies and tax codes are, no one can even tell who is paying what.

Just one f. ex., "tax breaks to 'Big Oil.' This actually is subsidizing oil and gasoline prices to consumers at the pump. Cut the subsidies, and gas prices go up. (And that, of course, is also true for fuels from "Little Oil" and "Medium Oil," etc., as well.)

So, should the subsidies be cut? Well, I think so, because I think that all attempts by government to manipulate the economy just causes distortions that in the end will cause more trouble than any possible benefits that might be derived.
Farm subsidies are a prime example of this. (And "family farms" do not appear to have derived much if any benefits from these programs that ostensibly were enacted specifically to benefit them.)

These issues should be debated, but not with this "tax the rich" populist rhetoric. "The rich" are not the ones who will wind up getting screwed.

Canuck said...

“I know it’s not election season yet, but I just have to mention the debate,” where Republicans said they would not increase taxes under virtually any circumstance, Obama said at a town hall. “Think about that. That’s just not common sense.”

"Think about that. Obama common sense says: Increase taxes under virtually any circumstance."

I'm assuming this is an example of grammatic gamesmanship.

Not increasing taxes under any circumstances and increasing taxes under any circumstances are radically different things.

Of course all politicans play games. They love games and they love to win.

Somebody who doesn't want to play games couldn't stand to be in the political sphere for very long because he/she would want to return to her farm and get away from the nonsense. It's not very often, but occasionally legislators will serve for a few terms and choose to leave politics. Not because they can't win, but because they don't like the games.

Scott M said...

"The rich" are not the ones who will wind up getting screwed.

And here my life-long goal to become rich was because I believed rich guys got screwed more. Well to hell with that then...

avwh said...

Shorter Bob Sixta: "He had me at "arugula".

Carol_Herman said...

Russ Feingold, name recognition and all. Plus, a hand-shaker on deals with McCain. Went flying out the door because the voters got angry at him, IN PARTICULAR!

Sure. Same thing happened to Daschle, when Thune won. But Daschle's now a lobbyist. Earning millions and millions on his old contacts.

While Russ Feingold has none.

He thinks it ain't over?

What's this based on?

bagoh20 said...

Obama is stuck because he has a failed ideology and rightly has no faith in it.

He also knows that things have a good chance of getting worse, and a slim chance of getting better before 2012.

If he wins in congress, he gets the blame for it. If he loses, he looks weak.

If things do get better, which they could, he definitely doesn't want the Republicans to get credit.

When you don't act on sound principle and have little faith in your ideology, you are left rallying against the cruelty of the game, because you don't have a winning strategy and you know it.

Carol_Herman said...

Heck, think of all the money obama and michelle "saved" the taxpayers ... when they wouldn't give Bibi Netanyahu any soup!

And, then, he goes to England. Gets dinner and toasts at the palace. Is up there giving his toast ... when all the guests rise ... And, the band begins serenading the queen. He kept on going. Because he was giving the toast.

Great moments in time.

bagoh20 said...

Obama is such a tea bagger now. He just hates government.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Meade:

I'm all for not raising taxes under, well, virtually any circumstances, but I am not seeing a justification for your parsing of the President's comments.

All I think you can fairly take him to mean is that it's not common-sensical to say "never." Going beyond that to infer he means common sense to mean "always" raise taxes is not fair to what he said.

The Crack Emcee said...

"You’ve got to send a message to Washington that it’s time for the games to stop."

Eat a egg and "meat."

Belial said...

Meade:
“I know it’s not election season yet, but I just have to mention the debate,” where Republicans said they would not increase taxes under virtually any circumstance, Obama said at a town hall. “Think about that. That’s just not common sense.”

Think about that. Obama common sense says: Increase taxes under virtually any circumstance.


Contrary to one or two comments, Meade's reframing is correct (sorry for not being able to get the symbols exactly right):

p: under virtually any circumstance
q: raise taxes

Obama: ~(p -> ~q)
~(~p V ~q)
p ^ q

hawkeyedjb said...

I suspect that all occupants of the White House until at least the early 20th century ate what we call 'organic food.' Maybe even leftovers. But if you're a financial planner from Rochester, out to praise the Obamas, you probably don't want to sully them by association with the likes of Buchanan or Andrew Johnson.

Peter said...

"According to local press accounts, Calvin Coolidge was the last president to come to Cannon Falls. The year was 1928."

And it didn't do much for him, as he chose not to run in 1928.

Still, it must be impressive to say, "I'm walking in Calvin Coolidge's footsteps!" For Coolidge was known as a man of few words. And perhasp the current president would do well to emulate him (at least in that respect).

Johanna Lapp said...

The second greatest craigslist personals headline ever: "'Rules Girl' seeks man who doesn't play games."

(OT) The greatest ever: "Minimalist seeks." Although the "seeks" is kinda redundant.

Peter Hoh said...

We all know that the common sense approach has been to raise spending while cutting taxes.

It's common sense in the respect that this is the kind of fiscal policy that contributes to the high rates of recidivism in Congress.

Pragmatist said...

Faulty logic and rhetoric is the trademark of the demogogue. Proposition: no taxes under any circumstances. Is the opposite of that proposition taxes under all circumstances? How about taxes under some circumstances? Would not that proposition also negate propsotion one? Why assume the "all" instead of the "some"? More convienent to try and score soem cheap, silly political point that Obama is just a tax and spend liberal looking to pick the pockets of poor taxpayers (or rich ones). The same Obama that agreed to extend the Bush Tax Giveaway? The same Obama who bucked his own party to do so? The same Obama who gave tax breaks to the middle classes and who has tried to just roll back some of the cuts for the wealthiest? A plan not new to him but support by many including Buffett? Why should I or anyone care if Billonaire hedge funds "managers" are forced to pay thier fair share of taxes? Lets quit fighting to save the safest amonst us.

Mark said...

"“I know it’s not election season yet, but I just have to mention the debate,” where Republicans said they would not increase taxes under virtually any circumstance, Obama said at a town hall. “Think about that. That’s just not common sense.”

Think about that. Obama common sense says: Increase taxes under virtually any circumstance."


Meade's logic is better than the lefty logic I hear.

"You oppose tax increases so you oppose all taxes."
or
"You oppose this overreaching government program so you oppose all government programs."

bhollis said...

It's like the scene in Singles, when Campbell Scott tries to pretend he's not hitting on Kyra Sedgwick in the nightclub. She responds:

"I think that, a) you have an act, and that, b) not having an act is your act."