Yes, Obama "won." I put that in quotes because common wisdom says that beyond having their children returned to them in body bags, Americans are pretty much divorced from what is happening in the rest of the world, and debates on foreign policy are, unfortunately, not that important to them. Unless there are body bags involved. This isolationist posture is extremely problematic because in this global economy financial crises in Europe will always impinge on America's economic health, and yet most Americans seem oblivious to this. I have yet to see any candidate say, yes, our economy is shit, however, it's much better currently than most economies, and, frankly, it's not going to get a whole hell of a lot better until Greece, Spain, Italy, and Portugal get their frigging acts together. No one says that. But from everything I've read, that seems to be the low down. If you have a third of your trading partners in the financial crapper, then who are you going to sell to? The trade deficit is held hostage by the financial meltdown overseas, and no matter how much wand waving Romney et al. can do, there is only so MUCH they can do. Except move money around, which is what they love to do anyway. Sigh. Anyway, Americans tend to only care about Americans. What happens in those other countries, pfft!
Regarding Romney's performance? Sadly, I think this is the real Romney. And equally sadly this is the Romney that we rarely have seen in the entire year he's been on the campaign trail. Romney could have saved himself a whole lot of trouble by just using his two minutes to say, "Me, too!" Which is not a bad thing. His political career has been characterized by a general middle-of-the-road approach to most issues, and we probably would have seen a lot more of this Mitt had his party not been hijacked by extremists.
This does bring up the issue of integrity. And how he felt he had to sell his soul temporarily to the extreme wing of his party. And how Obama's constant hammering of him on his flip-flops actually does have some merit. I don't know if there is a real Romney. It's hard to tell at this point. I think this was the real Romney last night, but then again, he has shown that he is extremely vulnerable to machination of politics. Does this mean that he will constantly cave to the extreme wing of his party in order to get their cooperation as he has done this entire campaign? The man who has touted his ability to work with Democrats in his state, doesn't he realize that the people he might not be able to work with are from his OWN party. That he will, in essence, be in the same position that John Boehner has been in for the last two years? And what will he do in that situation, should he become president? Will he cave to them like he has done in the last two years of his campaign?
I'm truly curious.
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Debates and the Role of the Moderator
I'm not going to comment on President Obama's debate performance last night other than to congratulate him on a job well done. Personally, I think that Mr. Romney's weaknesses were highlighted (and, yes, the women/binders thing will haunt him), and that President Obama did a good job of highlighting those weaknesses, much as Mr. Romney did in the last debate in highlighting Mr. Obama's weaknesses. They are both coming into this election with some real soft spots that only need a little poking to go viral. At this point we all know that Obama's weakness is the economy, and we also know that Romney's weakness is that he has no concept of how the majority of Americans live.
Mr. Romney seems to be in a time warp, largely I think out of naivete rather than malice--as opposed to someone like Rush Limbaugh. I think that fact that he believes that he was elected and THEN (in his words, which have been debunked by the organization that provided him with those now-infamous binders) he went searching for women to fill various positions is damning enough. That this wasn't on his radar. That he didn't ALREADY have women working in his campaign and shaping his policies. If you think about these comments and not even question the veracity of his statements, it was only in the aftermath of his win that he thought, "Gee, maybe I need some women in my government." Now it turns out that the number of women appointees actually fell during his administration.
Anyway, the point of this post is to comment on the conservative backlash against Candy Crowley for having the temerity to call the candidates on their lies. Let's just call them lies because that's what they are. Given that the GOP has, for the last fifteen years made the "lie" an acceptable form of discourse, I, for one, am glad to see that someone, ANYONE, has started to say, Ahem, no.
This isn't restricted to just Republicans. If anyone is running for office and lies about something, I think they should be nailed on it. This is not party-specific. People are cynical and dispirited and hate Congress for a reason. They don't want to be lied to. They might want jobs and security and gas at $1.86 a gallon, but they also don't want to be lied to. STOP LYING. Everyone. Conservatives have dominated the discussion for the last fifteen years because they have no compunction about lying. Or omission, they are good at that too. Remember poor Fox News and how absolutely horrified they were that Bin Laden has been killed under Obama's watch? They couldn't even bring themselves to mention Obama's and Bin Laden's name in the same breath because that would actually would/could/might imply that Obama had something to do with it?
There are many, many issues that I think one can nail the Dems on. The problem is that the GOP are so intent on manipulating the message that they have forgotten their message. Or maybe they don't have one. I don't know. There was a time, and it wasn't that long ago, when the Republicans had a philosophy that wasn't based on lies. We have to go back a ways, like possibly pre Ollie North, and, oh, possibly pre-Watergate, where the issues weren't that we were, oh, lying or doing something illegal, the bad part was that we got caught. This is what makes people cynical and angry. Stop lying. Stop justifying reprehensible behavior. Stop being racists. The country isn't white anymore, and your tactics of subtle and not-so-subtle race-baiting are going to marginalize you further and further until you are totally irrelevant. Except for, perhaps, rich white guys.
Mr. Romney seems to be in a time warp, largely I think out of naivete rather than malice--as opposed to someone like Rush Limbaugh. I think that fact that he believes that he was elected and THEN (in his words, which have been debunked by the organization that provided him with those now-infamous binders) he went searching for women to fill various positions is damning enough. That this wasn't on his radar. That he didn't ALREADY have women working in his campaign and shaping his policies. If you think about these comments and not even question the veracity of his statements, it was only in the aftermath of his win that he thought, "Gee, maybe I need some women in my government." Now it turns out that the number of women appointees actually fell during his administration.
Anyway, the point of this post is to comment on the conservative backlash against Candy Crowley for having the temerity to call the candidates on their lies. Let's just call them lies because that's what they are. Given that the GOP has, for the last fifteen years made the "lie" an acceptable form of discourse, I, for one, am glad to see that someone, ANYONE, has started to say, Ahem, no.
This isn't restricted to just Republicans. If anyone is running for office and lies about something, I think they should be nailed on it. This is not party-specific. People are cynical and dispirited and hate Congress for a reason. They don't want to be lied to. They might want jobs and security and gas at $1.86 a gallon, but they also don't want to be lied to. STOP LYING. Everyone. Conservatives have dominated the discussion for the last fifteen years because they have no compunction about lying. Or omission, they are good at that too. Remember poor Fox News and how absolutely horrified they were that Bin Laden has been killed under Obama's watch? They couldn't even bring themselves to mention Obama's and Bin Laden's name in the same breath because that would actually would/could/might imply that Obama had something to do with it?
There are many, many issues that I think one can nail the Dems on. The problem is that the GOP are so intent on manipulating the message that they have forgotten their message. Or maybe they don't have one. I don't know. There was a time, and it wasn't that long ago, when the Republicans had a philosophy that wasn't based on lies. We have to go back a ways, like possibly pre Ollie North, and, oh, possibly pre-Watergate, where the issues weren't that we were, oh, lying or doing something illegal, the bad part was that we got caught. This is what makes people cynical and angry. Stop lying. Stop justifying reprehensible behavior. Stop being racists. The country isn't white anymore, and your tactics of subtle and not-so-subtle race-baiting are going to marginalize you further and further until you are totally irrelevant. Except for, perhaps, rich white guys.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Eyes on the Prize
We are heading into the final leg of this political race (and those of you who follow this blog for the book end of things, I apologize), and it's looking like Mr. Obama will be re-elected, barring some horrific gaffe or disaster on his part. And it also looks like a number of Tea Party favorites are currently in a position where they are fighting for their political lives.
This is the thing. I'm pretty left. There hasn't been a major candidate that exists that is as left as I am. I acknowledge that my views are not mainstream. I also acknowledge that there will NEVER be a candidate who passes my litmus test. I have made do with all the Democratic candidates that have come along. Probably my favorite has been Bill Clinton. And yet he also deregulated banks so that they could merge their securities departments with their banking functions, which essentially laid the ground work for the financial meltdown you saw in 2008. And he also pushed through NAFTA, which killed the labor movement in the United States. As much as I adore Bill, he's not perfect by a long shot. But basically, he adheres to a general philosophy of that it takes-a-village mentality, and doesn't chastise the poor for being, well, poor, unlike the Republican mantra that equates poverty with sloth and sin.
I acknowledge my otherness. I don't hate the system because it doesn't adhere to my views. I believe that democracy, which is the general will of the people, is a pretty damn fine system, and if I'm outside the bell curve, that's is my problem. The majority of Americans are far too conservative for me, but I recognize that THEY are the majority. I am not.
So Tea Partiers, this is a shout out to you. Accept your otherness, your extreme point of view, much as I have learned to accept mine. Do you know why your Republican candidate is losing? I will tell you why. Because you have bullied and threatened and forced others in the Republican party to adhere to your narrow viewpoint, so much so that you have ensured his defeat. I don't think much of his moral center (indeed, I don't think he has one--ambition thy name is Romney), but he's fairly middle of the road, albeit a little wedded to a leaner, meaner society. You pushed him into extreme positions (that he now finds himself backtracking on) to satisfy your narrow point of view.
Which was so pointless, Republicans! I thought you guys had brains.
How do you combat Obama, a President who inherited a mess of an economy, let's be fair, and who couldn't possibly fix that economy in four years, but why quibble about that. Common sense would say pull that centrist rug out from his compromised economic feet and hijack his stage. Romney would have been an ideal candidate for that. You didn't. You lurched even FARTHER right. Bad call. And Romney, who is basically a centrist, found himself caught in a horrible bind. He was dancing the extreme right mamba when really he was a centrist waltz kind of guy. Which he had to do to appease you people. Which meant that he entered this election with a credibility gap that continues to widen.
I know you wish that most Americans would think like you do. I wish that most Americans thought like I did. But I don't push my admittedly different agenda onto my candidates. I accept that I'm far too left for most Americans, but you have failed to accept that your viewpoint is far too right for most Americans. You have brought this on yourselves. I hope that this elections finally ends the hegemony of the Tea Party because I am sick of you people. I am sick of someone like Sarah Palin who thinks her high school education has given her the credentials to comment on global, political, and economic issues. I am sick of candidates who have benefited greatly from lucrative government contracts and yet see everyone else's use of government funds as handouts. I am sick of your racist, ignorant remarks. I am sick of you debasing, ignoring, and trivializing women.
What is even better is that I think that a huge number of Americans are sick of you, too. You know what? Keep on talking. Keep on exposing your ignorance. Keep on advertising exactly who you are and what you stand for: bigotry, sexism, hatred, racism, and ignorance. Talk your way out of office. Talk your way into political oblivion. Because you've had a little over two years to spread your message and let me tell you, people are getting it. Ask Mitt Romney.
This is the thing. I'm pretty left. There hasn't been a major candidate that exists that is as left as I am. I acknowledge that my views are not mainstream. I also acknowledge that there will NEVER be a candidate who passes my litmus test. I have made do with all the Democratic candidates that have come along. Probably my favorite has been Bill Clinton. And yet he also deregulated banks so that they could merge their securities departments with their banking functions, which essentially laid the ground work for the financial meltdown you saw in 2008. And he also pushed through NAFTA, which killed the labor movement in the United States. As much as I adore Bill, he's not perfect by a long shot. But basically, he adheres to a general philosophy of that it takes-a-village mentality, and doesn't chastise the poor for being, well, poor, unlike the Republican mantra that equates poverty with sloth and sin.
I acknowledge my otherness. I don't hate the system because it doesn't adhere to my views. I believe that democracy, which is the general will of the people, is a pretty damn fine system, and if I'm outside the bell curve, that's is my problem. The majority of Americans are far too conservative for me, but I recognize that THEY are the majority. I am not.
So Tea Partiers, this is a shout out to you. Accept your otherness, your extreme point of view, much as I have learned to accept mine. Do you know why your Republican candidate is losing? I will tell you why. Because you have bullied and threatened and forced others in the Republican party to adhere to your narrow viewpoint, so much so that you have ensured his defeat. I don't think much of his moral center (indeed, I don't think he has one--ambition thy name is Romney), but he's fairly middle of the road, albeit a little wedded to a leaner, meaner society. You pushed him into extreme positions (that he now finds himself backtracking on) to satisfy your narrow point of view.
Which was so pointless, Republicans! I thought you guys had brains.
How do you combat Obama, a President who inherited a mess of an economy, let's be fair, and who couldn't possibly fix that economy in four years, but why quibble about that. Common sense would say pull that centrist rug out from his compromised economic feet and hijack his stage. Romney would have been an ideal candidate for that. You didn't. You lurched even FARTHER right. Bad call. And Romney, who is basically a centrist, found himself caught in a horrible bind. He was dancing the extreme right mamba when really he was a centrist waltz kind of guy. Which he had to do to appease you people. Which meant that he entered this election with a credibility gap that continues to widen.
I know you wish that most Americans would think like you do. I wish that most Americans thought like I did. But I don't push my admittedly different agenda onto my candidates. I accept that I'm far too left for most Americans, but you have failed to accept that your viewpoint is far too right for most Americans. You have brought this on yourselves. I hope that this elections finally ends the hegemony of the Tea Party because I am sick of you people. I am sick of someone like Sarah Palin who thinks her high school education has given her the credentials to comment on global, political, and economic issues. I am sick of candidates who have benefited greatly from lucrative government contracts and yet see everyone else's use of government funds as handouts. I am sick of your racist, ignorant remarks. I am sick of you debasing, ignoring, and trivializing women.
What is even better is that I think that a huge number of Americans are sick of you, too. You know what? Keep on talking. Keep on exposing your ignorance. Keep on advertising exactly who you are and what you stand for: bigotry, sexism, hatred, racism, and ignorance. Talk your way out of office. Talk your way into political oblivion. Because you've had a little over two years to spread your message and let me tell you, people are getting it. Ask Mitt Romney.
Labels:
2012 election,
Barack Obama,
Bill Clinton,
Mitt Romney,
Tea Party
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)