aimorris what the shit are you talking about? Did you not see my quote a couple of paces up this very thread?

Quote :

"Nevertheless, it's some stumbling out of the gate. He'll have a cushion for bad PR for a while, but he better get his ass in gear on this stimulus bill because that's what really fucking matters. The economy is make or break right now."

Your loathing hate of Obama supporters is really something. Not everyone is on the guy's jock so chill out.

2/3/2009 11:56:28 PM

I never said you directly... you cannot tell me there aren't Obama supporters out there touting everything he's done as brilliant just as much as there are those hating on every thing he does. I personally haven't made a big deal out of his cabinet appointments, other than the fact they're all tax cheats and nobody seems to give a shit about it.

2/4/2009 8:26:04 AM

Yes there are those types, no doubt.

But there's just as many types that rode on Bush's jock rodeo-style during some of the biggest periods of bullshit that he did....what's your point? All corners and constituencies have those people that aren't mentally agile or honest enough to take on the political figure they support. It's exhausting mentally because it makes you rethink all that you stood behind so passionately. And then depressing because not a damn soul in Washington gives you reliable hope that there's a different way....only degrees close or away from something acceptable.

But to say this is some new phenomena isolated to an Obama fandemonium isn't entirely fair to everyone.

2/4/2009 2:02:34 PM

Quote :

"what's your point?"

I never said it was some new phenomena isolated to an Obama fandemonium, I was responding to

Quote :

"I love how all of you are writing history books in his 3rd fucking week."

You will complain, we can complain. That's the way politics work.

2/4/2009 2:16:21 PM

Well I at least had the decency to wait until well after Bush's 3rd week to make commentary.

2/4/2009 3:15:31 PM

NCSU alum & CAT CEO to lead independant economic advisory team along with Paul Volcker:

http://tinyurl.com/ajaupm




[Edited on February 6, 2009 at 11:18 AM. Reason : ]

2/6/2009 11:11:46 AM

and another withdrawal . . .

Gregg withdraws from consideration for Commerce post

Quote :

"Republican Sen. Judd Gregg withdrew his nomination as President Barack Obama's commerce secretary Thursday, citing "irresolvable conflicts" over the administration's stimulus bill and the upcoming 2010 census. "We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy," Gregg said in a statement announcing the decision. "Obviously, the president requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives." Gregg would have been the third Republican to join the Democratic administration, following Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. The third-term Republican and leading fiscal conservative once voted to abolish the Commerce Department. "I want to thank the president for nominating me to serve in his Cabinet as secretary of commerce. This was a great honor, and I had felt that I could bring some views and ideas that would assist him in governing during this difficult time. I especially admire his willingness to reach across the aisle," he said in a statement. "However, it has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the census there are irresolvable conflicts for me," he wrote. "Prior to accepting this post, we had discussed these and other potential differences, but unfortunately we did not adequately focus on these concerns. We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy.""

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/12/gregg.nomination/index.html


I'm not sure what to think of this. I think part of it is symbolic of his being relatively green at DC politics and part of it is obviously the nature of politics right now. Either way, it seems like it is becoming apparent to the new President that campaigning is far different from governing, and I think his recent town hall meetings are partly something he is doing out of comfort.

2/12/2009 5:38:11 PM

Unfortunately, this reminds me a lot of GW Bush in 2000. He spoke a good game about "compassionate conservatism", about reaching across the aisle and building consensus, etc. But when it came down to it, his ideals were so far to the right that there was very little common ground to work with the Dems on. And because he had a solid majority to work with in congress, he didn't have to comprimise his platform, so he didn't. It became apparent right from the start of his tenure that things were going to be done his way, and the only bipartisan bills would be those in which Dems jumped onboard the conservative platform, since he had no incentive or inclination to move to the left.

The reality is that Obama is pretty liberal, and he's got a huge congressional majority. He does more than just play lip service to bipartisanship, he really WANTS some kind of new, post-partisan political atmosphere. He wants to lead by consensus and rally everyone behind his ideas, democrats and republicans alike. But his ideology is fundamentally different from the conservatives when it comes to the economy, the environment, and the role of government. He is facing the harsh reality that the opposition party will oppose most of what he stands for, and he is getting frustrated. Senator Gregg is a fiscal conservative. He is not going to jump on board with a stimulus package that contains hundreds of billions of dollars in spending not related to stimulating the economy. Unfortunately for Obama, partisanship is alive and well in Washington and about the only way he will build bipartisan consensus is by pulling a Clinton and claiming initiatives from the republican platform as his own.

2/12/2009 6:35:38 PM

Quote :

"he really WANTS some kind of new, post-partisan political atmosphere. He wants to lead by consensus and rally everyone behind his ideas, democrats and republicans alike."

I think that is pretty accurate. By most accounts, Obama was something of a lightweight as a Senator. Nothing in his past shows that he particularly enjoys confrontation. Through most of the primary (which was far more contested than the general election) Obama maintained his discipline and stuck to his core message. Only when he started engaging HRC in serious competition did he start losing primaries.

Unfortunately for him, his ability to sway large crowds of sympathetic voters with his rhetoric counts for little when it comes down to old-school dirty Washington politics.

This could get entertaining for political junkies . . . but in a tragic comedy sort of way.

2/12/2009 7:10:15 PM

Quote :

"Unfortunately, this reminds me a lot of GW Bush in 2000."

except gwb never reached out to anyone in the congress at all.

to be honest this sen. gregg kerfuffle looks worse for gregg than obama. the guy seems pretty scummy to get on board with obama and then bail days later. it's not like much has changed since then (except maybe pressure from his republican friends). unless of course something came up in the vetting process. didn't he have some tenuous madoff connections? maybe there was more to that.

[Edited on February 12, 2009 at 7:22 PM. Reason : .]

2/12/2009 7:21:53 PM

Quote :

"to be honest this sen. gregg kerfuffle looks worse for gregg than obama."

Meh. Maybe. But, being the President, Obama will take the blame. It is his responsibility (granted it is his staff's job) to select, vet, and promote his cabinet selections. If the President of the United States cannot sway you to stay on his cabinet, that says something. The fact that he is having so much trouble, with a sympathetic congress, and a supportive public says something.

I'm just not sure what it says yet. This isn't saying that his whole presidency needs to be written off, but this isn't a promising start.

2/12/2009 7:28:06 PM

Quote :

"If the President of the United States cannot sway you to stay on his cabinet, that says something. "

oh jeez, it's unfortunate, but people need to quit making it more than it is.

how many presidents even ATTEMPT to put prominent member of the opposite party into a high-level cabinet position in the first place??

I cant even recall a time when a republican pres even entertained the notion of putting a dem into their cabinet ... or vice versa.

a few false starts notwithstanding, obama's cabinet vetting process is doing pretty well overall. its not like every other president didnt have some hiccups along the way.

2/13/2009 11:02:38 AM

Who needs a cabinet anyways? Brain Trust ftw!

2/13/2009 11:10:39 AM

^^ What? Obama's vetting team sucks. I do like his appointments for the most part, but the mere fact that so many high-profile appointees have had to withdraw and/or face embarrassing revalations AFTER being selected reflects poorly on his vetting team.

I don't think this Judd Gregg flap is embarrassing for Obama or Gregg. I just think it illustrates that reality is setting in, and for all his attempts at reaching across the aisle and rhetoric about working together with republicans, he won't be able to bring many republicans on board with an economic plan that stresses spending and government expansion.

2/13/2009 11:25:59 AM

Quote :

"he won't be able to bring many republicans on board with an economic plan that stresses spending and government expansion."

which is kind of asinine since Republicans were all about government expansion and spending when it was their expansion and spending, but at least one of the parties is paying lip service to smaller government again.

2/15/2009 2:00:08 PM

Quote :

" Republicans were all about government expansion and spending when it was their expansion and spending"

precisely.

Quote :

"but at least one of the parties is paying lip service to smaller government again."

wait... what? you'd rather be governed by liars?

2/16/2009 4:56:22 PM

They're all liars.

At least one of the parties is lending the voice to fiscal conservatism once again.

Even if that voice is hollow and lacking in any kind of weight or credibility...

2/16/2009 11:23:19 PM

they're only "lending the voice" to that to be contrarian, though. they have no intention on following up with it.
Except, you know...... to cut taxes. because that's all it means to be a fiscal conservative now'a'days.

2/16/2009 11:39:52 PM

Obama's appointee for the head of the National Intelligence Council is an Israeli basher and Chinese sympathizer. Awesome.

Chas Freeman Jr. will be responsible for producing National Intelligence Estimates. Its not a cabinent position, but still a very important position with lots of influence and pull.

2/25/2009 8:24:22 AM

examples of "Israel bashing"?

2/25/2009 9:35:28 AM

Quote :

"Its not a cabinent position"

DAT

190%

CABNIT




must be made or from here

2/25/2009 10:21:29 AM