REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Michele Bachman: Ol' Crazy Eyes Makes the Cover of Newsweek

POSTED BY: KWICKO
UPDATED: Saturday, August 13, 2011 02:33
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3123
PAGE 2 of 2

Friday, August 12, 2011 1:11 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Quote:

I just wish journalists would take their credibility back and move back to reporting news and away from sensationalizing or spinning news. Let the candidates crash and burn on their own merits.
Huzzah...and I would like journalists to become JOURNALISTS once again, not produce "infotainment".




Would part of that "taking their credibility back" involve NOT using posed photos of candidates, but just catching them candidly and realistically? Wouldn't that be more credible?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 13, 2011 2:33 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
But you're neither left nor right, isn't that what you say? So of course the Republicans had nothing to do with healthcare not being "Medicare for all" or a public option,


Of course they had something to do with it, but not that much. In 2009 the Democrats were close to having filibuster-proof majorities in both the House and Senate, and could have found a couple of centerist Republicans to go along with them. They should have been able to put through most anything they wanted. They squabbled internally and squandered their chance.

Quote:

Of course; it's all the Dems fault--no, wait, it's all OBAMA's fault--Republicans had nothing to do with it. Yeah, sure.


A lot of Democrats, and a lot of Independents, see it as the Party's fault that in the 111th Congress, with large majorities in both houses, the Democrats couldn't get themselves together enough to accomplish much in the face of the Republican minority's opposition. A lot of these folks didn't vote in 2010.

These folks also see Pres. Obama's handling of the deby crisis as weak. Here's an op-ed from the Washington Post.


Quote:

Why the center-left is fed up with Obama

By Matt Miller, Published: August 10

Here’s the thing. I know Tea Party Republicans were behind the debt-ceiling standoff that wreaked needless damage on confidence in the United States. I wrote weeks ago of Standard & Poor’s outrageous nerve in threatening a downgrade when America’s ability to pay its debts can’t possibly be in doubt. In short, I know who the real villains are at this volatile moment.

So why am I so mad at Barack Obama?

I know I’m not alone. In conversations with folks across the center-left in recent days, everyone’s basically had it with the president. I’ve had policy frustrations before: Obama’s never aimed high enough on school reform and he’s failed miserably to advance a real jobs agenda, to name just two. I’ve said repeatedly that we need a third party to shake things up. But at the same time a part of me has always cut the president some slack — after all, look at the mess the man walked into! Yet somehow the debt-ceiling fiasco and the downgrade, punctuated by these horrific jobs numbers and stock market gyrations, has made something in me (and, I suspect, millions of others) snap.

It’s the sound of confidence in Obama’s leadership breaking.

Yes, other forces may be “responsible” for the bad news. But in the end a president has the most power to shape the debate. How could Obama have let the entirely foreseeable debt-ceiling standoff turn into a hostage drama? Why didn’t he have the spine to say “send me a clean debt limit increase or I’ll raise it myself and see you in court”? How could he leave us in a position where every future debt-limit hike now becomes an occasion for blackmail? And where Chinese officials can blithely say that “the U.S. government has to come to terms with the painful fact that the good old days when it could just borrow its way out of messes of its own making are finally gone”?

Events keep screaming that the president is weak, weak, weak. That this can happen so soon after his gutsy call to take down Osama Bin Laden is striking. First the president gets rolled on the debt limit. Then S&P lowers the boom. Then China piles on. Then the White House rushes out word that Tim Geithner is staying put. Can anyone explain exactly who that news was meant to reassure? It can’t be that we’ll all now breathe easier because Geithner-crafted policy has been such a smashing success. So is this move a function of Obama’s fear of not being able to get a new Treasury nominee confirmed — or his inability to attract someone of stature for what could be an unpleasant one-year stint? Either way, it smells weak.




http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-im-mad-at-obama/2011/08/10/
gIQAhEPi6I_story.html

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL