Capitol Hill Blue Forums Capitol Hill Blue Opinions CHB Columnists Let's face it: Obama is a failure

Excellent points.

Now if someone could just show me how this is all tied to Obama being a failure? I mean.. assuming that you also read the excellent piece on the "system" that you pointed me to which I agreed was an excellent piece.... and assuming that you agree with the piece that the whole system is set up to let money influence the system.... what exactly is it that Obama has done or not done that relegates him to being a failure in the context of the systemic problems that we are now discussing?

For the purpose of discussion, let us assume that Jefferson is completely correct. How does that change today's situation? Can we set the clock back? Is not the horse now out of the barn? It is unclear what is the efficacy of expressing nostalgia for warnings that the barn door should be closed BEFORE the horse gets out. Are we saying that closing the doors now will be a satisfactory homage to warning that the doors should have been closed from the beginning? Has anyone proposed some feasible manner for the recapture of the hores?

But, I think there is an even more fundamental question. Any sort of change to the system that would modify corporate rights would run smack dab into the supreme court and their interpretation of the constitution. And the current supreme court is not going to allow corporations to be politically emasculated. In short, the current court is of the opinion that the horse has a natural right to roam freely and that barn doors should never be closed even when the horse is inside.

Which leads us to yet a further question.... does the supreme court matter in any meaningful way? Does it matter who is confirmed and sitting on the court? Are Scalia and Thomas interchangeable cogs with Ginsberg et al?

I ask this question because I have been assure numerous times on this forum that the supreme court is irrelevant... and that it does not matter who is nominated to sit there. And so... again... whether we have Obama nominating Soitomayer... or Bush nominating Harriet Meyers... there is no difference whatsoever.... because Obama and Bush are really just the same. (just ask Doug)


So, let me re-phrase the dilemma that I pose in explicit terms.

Does the supreme court matter?

If you say yes... then I say that Obama has made a difference on this issue and is therefore not a failure.

If you say no... then I show how the supreme court is central to the issues surrounding corporate influence that you have claimed to be central to our problems.

I was planning to write - and still am - a lengthy post regarding the cynicism that permeates our culture, and the root of that cynicism in the administrations of Richard Nixon and importantly Ronald Reagan's. The Obama Campaign was based on a difference in concept than has existed in any campaign in my lifetime - not just hope, but a principled approach to governance that has been lacking for at least three decades. I have read his book, Audacity of Hope, and watched his campaign from an early time. My opinion of him has not changed. He is trying to bring a different approach to the position of the Presidency, but we, as a polity, are impatient and unrealistic in our expectations. Consider ANY policy position that the administration is getting flack on - any one - and tell me realistically that it could be resolved in 270 days. I'd like just one. Many of the complaints, including Doug's are based upon false - and unpromised - expectations, and now when those unrealistic and cynical expectations are not achieved we complain about the only one in the process trying to change our approach. There is a very long way to go, and proclaiming "failure" is not just unfair, unrealistic, hyperbolic, and misguided, it is, in my opinion, unAmerican: not because "he's our President, right or wrong," but because it is attacking the foundations of change.

Lighten up, get realistic, and try to be less reactionarily negative. Give change a chance and try not to fall back into cynical excuse-making. Frankly, I am sick of it.

God, what a bunch of nabobs.

Obama is just another politician who has proven the peter principle to be true. His promises, the majors ones, have not been accomplished and they have very little realistic chance of being accomplished. His two major issues, healthcare and middle class taxes are so opposed to each other that he cannot accomplish one without violating the other.

I am sure he is a well meaning guy who really never thought he would be elected, but sometimes actions have consequences. I am reminded of the movie The Candidate, when at the end Redford is in a panic and asked "What happens now". Obama has another two years before lame duck status sets in and every day he will ask that very question.

Mr. Ponderer, do you now, or have you ever been employed by either the Obama Administration or the DNC?

It is so simple as to defy reason. The Republican party has, as NWP points out, been the protector of the reactionary view of America since the Nixon campaing of '68. Since November, that party has had three choices: sit on the sidelines and watch things unfold (yeah, right!), roll up their sleeves and work with the Democrats to forge solutions that a) will work and b) are politically viable (oh, sure!), or get ready for the next election by pointing out what a failure Obama is.

Was there ever any doubt which approach they would take?

(Historical footnote: read up on the GOP's behavior following World War II, within weeks, actually. The parallels between the crap they heaped on the Truman administration and the crap they are heaping on the Obama administration are so similar as to suggest that they are using the same mimeograph templates 60 years later!)

And no, Ma, I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the Democrat (or any other) political party. And my time in government was during the Nixon, Ford, and Reagan administrations (with the slight detour of the Carter administration).

Thanks again, Ma, for proving my point. There are so many that are so in thrall to the GOP single-focus "gotta beat Dems" viewpoint that they refuse to acknowledge either the forest or the trees. My position never has been "rah rah" any party, but I am GREATLY in favor of progress and thoughtful governance. When have we EVER seen that in the GOP? Oh, ok, there was was Teddy Roosevelt.... "Your GOP, a Century of Inaction."

you guys is teaching me. keeping it up.

2wins...
I understand that you are part of the media industrial complex.... therefore you are by definition part of the system which isself the problem... you have allowed yourself to become totally co-opted by your corporate masters. This is proved by the fact that you have worked in media for low these many years and you have not only not fixed all of the problems in your industry, they have gotten much worse.
... face it... you are a failure. (ironic sarcasm smiley)