It takes a Thief....

[Adrian II]

Yes, this Administration is really bringing Change to Washington. Of course all you Obama Jock Sniffers will do your best to defend your Messiah.

He won. Get over it.

I miss Louis.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I miss you too, Adrian! But I wouldn't dare post in another Obama thread after the last one. The mods gave me a spanking so severe it made my poor, perfectly shaped arse ache even more than it did after I spend a weekend at Dave's.

[Gregoshi]

The mods gave me a spanking so severe it made my poor, perfectly shaped arse ache even more than it did after I spend a weekend at Dave's.

Was that one of Dave's famous "Happy Endings" weekends?


On topic, I tend to agree with Dave's point in that Obama's appointments (or attempted appointments) are not giving me the warm and fuzzies. They aren't going to get much done if they spend most of their time in front of hearing committees defending a laundry list of actual or imaginary wrong-doings. However, it is beginning to look like the latest stimulus bill could be fully funded if administration officials just paid their taxes.

[Adrian II]

I miss you too, Adrian! But I wouldn't dare post in another Obama thread after the last one. The mods gave me a spanking so severe it made my poor, perfectly shaped arse ache even more than it did after I spend a weekend at Dave's.

Louis my dear, it's our Europinko sense of humour humor what did us in. Never has the truth been so niggardly dealt with as in that thread.

[KukriKhan]

He won. Get over it.

We hear that a lot lately over here. Even from The Man himself. Sorta like: "Our team won more seats, so sit down, shut up, and watch." which infuriates the oppostition (who also won their seats).

It's still too early for me to tell whether The Amazing Mr. O is:

1) a well-intentioned amateur, who learns quickly
2) a run-of-the-mill average politician with good speech-delivery
3) a commie 'plant' bent on wrecking the country

I should be able to decide by this summer. Meanwhile, despite his obsession with the public wallet, as long as the Constitution stays in place, he can't do any worse than the guys before him. I think.

[Whacker]

I should be able to decide by this summer. Meanwhile, despite his obsession with the public wallet, as long as the Constitution stays in place, he can't do any worse than the guys before him. I think.

Or he could just ignore it, or blatantly flaunt it, like the last yay-hoo did. Time will tell I guess. I'm still undecided.

[Gregoshi]

I should be able to decide by this summer. Meanwhile, despite his obsession with the public wallet, as long as the Constitution stays in place, he can't do any worse than the guys before him. I think.

As the late, great Slim Pikens said in Blazing Saddles "Ditto!"

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

We hear that a lot lately over here. Even from The Man himself. Sorta like: "Our team won more seats, so sit down, shut up, and watch." which infuriates the oppostition (who also won their seats).

It's still too early for me to tell whether The Amazing Mr. O is:

1) a well-intentioned amateur, who learns quickly
2) a run-of-the-mill average politician with good speech-delivery
3) a commie 'plant' bent on wrecking the country

I should be able to decide by this summer. Meanwhile, despite his obsession with the public wallet, as long as the Constitution stays in place, he can't do any worse than the guys before him. I think.

There's always option four:

A Great but tragically principled statesman.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Obama's a very good speaker and he has the personal charm that forms a key tool for political power.

Obama is smart, hard-working, and savvy with experience of politics in a rough-and-tumble venue: Chicago, IL.

Obama and the Dems are doing what they usually do -- and what their loyalists expect of them. When you are in power with a good margin of leverage, you push forward YOUR agenda as hard and as effectively as you can by any legal means. This includes responding to a crisis in a fashion that not only seeks to address the crisis but to further less popular elements of your agenda using the crisis as a means to that end.

For the most part, Obama and Pelosi are doing what they said they were going to do if elected -- though probably at a faster pace due to the current economic crisis.

Obama and most of the Dem leadership TRULY BELIEVE that one big central government is the best tool both for their agenda and to accomplish the long-term goals the believe are vital to the country: mostly nationalized healthcare, a robust social welfare safety net, universal college education, and a taxation system that funds these programs while re-desitributing a portion of the wealth garnered by the more economically fortunate. That this will create something of a permanent underclass who are then dependent upon (and supportive of) the government does not bother them, because they deeply believe that those dependents will live demonstrably better lives WITH this government safety net than they could ever hope to do without those programs.

I view the whole thing as a well-intentioned economic ponzi scheme that will prove crippling in the long run -- but do not doubt their intentions.

There is a lesson here for the GOP, and for conservatives (not quite the same thing, at least at present). When you have the power, RULE. Do not placate or suck up to the opposition. Treat them politely and respectfully, do not deny them their voice, but if you have the power, use it. The opposing political "force" will be doing their best to take back that power and will NOT award you "nice guy" points that you can redeem to stop them when they're ruling. Doesn't work that way.

[Whacker]

There is a lesson here for the GOP, and for conservatives (not quite the same thing, at least at present). When you have the power, RULE. Do not placate or suck up to the opposition. Treat them politely and respectfully, do not deny them their voice, but if you have the power, use it. The opposing political "force" will be doing their best to take back that power and will NOT award you "nice guy" points that you can redeem to stop them when they're ruling. Doesn't work that way.

This point right here is a very good one. I am by no means whatsoever an eggspert on how our own government runs (I'm not completely ignorant either), BUT I am convinced that this implicit de-facto two-party method that our current system runs on has long overstayed it's welcome. I keep seeing how other nations have real, effective multiparty systems AND how they account for these variances through their lawmaking processes, and my opinion is that's what we need right now. No one party or group should be able to bulldoze legislation and policy as has been happening now and in the past.

Just my $0.02 USD.

[Pannonian]

There is a lesson here for the GOP, and for conservatives (not quite the same thing, at least at present). When you have the power, RULE. Do not placate or suck up to the opposition. Treat them politely and respectfully, do not deny them their voice, but if you have the power, use it. The opposing political "force" will be doing their best to take back that power and will NOT award you "nice guy" points that you can redeem to stop them when they're ruling. Doesn't work that way.

Would you prefer our parliamentary dictatorship? If a party gets a comfortable enough majority, they can push through just about anything which falls short of causing a revolution. No namby pambying over compromises here, just make sure one doesn't get so unpopular that one loses the next election. Until then, anything goes.

[lars573]

Would you prefer our parliamentary dictatorship? If a party gets a comfortable enough majority, they can push through just about anything which falls short of causing a revolution. No namby pambying over compromises here, just make sure one doesn't get so unpopular that one loses the next election. Until then, anything goes.

I know I do. Considering the alternatives.

[a completely inoffensive name]

...

[KukriKhan]

Three words:

term

lim

its

For every office. And I'm beginning to wonder if we outta elect our Supremes too.

Three more words:

Spend

ing

caps.

For election campaigns. You can raise a gazillion bucks, to prove your popularity, and for citizens to express their preference through their wallets, but...

you can only spend X amount, maximum, however you want. All contributions and expenditures reportable to the FEC (or State or County equivalent), and displayed prominently on the web, updated daily. If we can't eliminate campaign-contribution influence (as we tried to in the 70's), let's at least shine the bright light of publicity on it, so we know who our public employees are beholden to.

[a completely inoffensive name]

...

[Sasaki Kojiro]

If we'd had 4 parties last election the candidates would have been:

richard dawkins
obama
mccaine
rush limbaugh

The two party system is fine...

[a completely inoffensive name]

...