Why WTF Has Obama Done So Far Isn't Helping Obama by canttakesky

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Why WTF Has Obama Done So Far Isn't Helping Obama

POSTED BY: CANTTAKESKY
UPDATED: Sunday, November 21, 2010 17:40
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 686
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, November 20, 2010 3:48 PM

Interesting political commentary from the Internet's Only Humor and Video Site (Cracked.com)

http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-wtf-has-obama-done-so-far.com-isnt-hel
ping-obama/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=blog+gladstone112010

Any reactions?

Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

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

Saturday, November 20, 2010 5:56 PM

DREAMTROVE

WTF is a site filled with talking points to put positive spin on bad policy, without asking people to think. This is what the American left has been doing for decades. That, and its failure as a tactic, is what lost me as a member.

The fact is that nothing I saw on the site really delivered a message that said "your life is better under Obama" it sort of said "here's what Obama is doing for his big corporate friends, but here's what you can call it to make it look good." Actually, health benefits are steadily declining for everyone I know, taxes skyrocketing, and this, oh this...

is Goolsbee lying his ass off.

He plays a clever trick by showing the 2000 market crash and subsequent bear as being part of GM flawed policy, or maybe US flawed policy, which is more Blame Bush from the Obama Admin. The fact is, Bush was a terrible president, and GM was run in a very corrupt fashion, but was run as such as a govt. ally which it always has been, it's hardly an independent company.

Also, Dinsosaur? Please. Skipping all the defense work they do for you dinosaurs in govt., they built a state of the art automated factory only to tear it down a couple years later. WTF?

Liquidation was the only other option? Really? Why did you guys not okay the sale of GM? You okay'ed the sale of Chrysler, and virtually everything else. Yes, it has to be liquidated if you ninnies won't okay the sale. Maybe you're afraid that some foreign power will gain national security secrets in military tech that you entrusted to GM, because you just outsource everything to your own pet companies in sweet contracts to your friends? Kinda like this big bailout you just gave them? Maybe that's why you leveled the factory, afraid that some Japanese company might buy it?

He fails to mention the eensy weensy detail that GM did not lose money selling cars poorly. They lost it all in derivatives on mortgage contracts, which they gambled with because they knew uncle Sam had their back.

Goolsbee, you even say in your own statement that you gave them $50 billion and now they are worth an amazing $50 billion! Wow. What logic.

Also, you have disciplined that crooked Waggoner that made those stupid decisions, intentionally shelved plans for alt. energy vehicles to help his oil buddies, bilked the shareholders, and gambled it all away on mortgage derivatives and bankrupted the company?

Let's look at how you disciplined him:

You gave him

a $22 million pension fund
around 20 million in stock that he gets to keep despite bakruptcy
another 28.8 million in stock options
And, three different pensions which total $3 million a year for the rest of his life.

That's discipline. Maybe the rest of us could be disciplined, if we could only fuck up as badly as Waggoner.

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

Saturday, November 20, 2010 6:56 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:

WTF is a site filled with talking points to put positive spin on bad policy, without asking people to think. This is what the American left has been doing for decades.

See, DT, you try to claim that you're "reasonable", and then you come across with some bullshit like this, as if ONLY "the left" is capable of such crap. I mean, really... "Patriot Act"? "Operation Iraqi Freedom"? Talk about positive spin on disastrously bad policies!

"Trickle-down", anyone? It really should be called "tinkle-on" economic theory, because it boils down to the idea that we all get free beer at the kegger, but you just have to wait a bit while yours filters through my liver.

Please don't waste your breath, or our time, trying to convince anyone that you aren't partisan. It's insulting to our intelligence, and it's so blatant when you make asinine statements like the one quoted above.

Mike

This Space For Rent!

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

Saturday, November 20, 2010 8:23 PM

DREAMTROVE

Mike

You see it through a partisan lense

My disdain for democrats is by no means a defense of republicans. You had no problems with my opinions of the GOP for years when they were in power, and I criticized them daily. I dislike the GOP every bit as much as the democrats, it's just that democrats have different flaws from republicans.

To wit:

Democrats are weak. They bend to any pressure applied. They totally lack backbone.

Republicans are bricks. They are completely immovable on any position. They're inflexible.

These do not make them identical, they're two distinctly flawed characters, not necessarily tied to their nominal ideological differences.

My disgust with the left is very well deserved: I worked for a number of causes towards a number of goals to end inequality, prejudice, stop environmental destruction, peace, etc. etc. But you know what? Democrats are fucking ineffective. And here's the result of that: Nothing got done. We might as have cut down the trees and bombed the muslims ourselves for all the efficacy we had as progressive activists.

I mean really. You pour effort into something like this, and you get the sort of effects we got? And what?!? You're not going to be just a little ticked off?!?

Okay, and let me add this to it: It doesn't help when you're fighting something and a bunch of your supposed allies practically get down on their knees to suck Clinton's cock when he's exactly the sort of globalist corporate whore we were fighting!

So, yes, Bush is a piece of garbage. But so was Clinton. And now, the point was made that liberal progressives are once more down on their knees just because a democrat is elected? I mean seriously. I see no resistance at all.

Here's what I see. Morons spending their effort attacking the Tea Party rather than attacking their own, because they're too fucking lilly livered to attack their own govt. when it is doing EXACTLY what they were just fighting for the previous 8 years.

And I mean exactly. There is not one lick of policy difference between Obama and Bush, and yet all that anger that the left hurled at Bush suddenly was whisped away in an effervescent wind of hope and change, the same stupid fucking line that every Dem candidate has used since FDR.

Please, give me a break. You seriously don't recall my daily shredding of Bush as a wastrel war monger torture and just generally degenerate human being? He's a thug, end of story. His party's not much better. Did you see me stand up and defend Mitch McConnell? Jim DeMint? John Boehner? How about Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld?

So, yes, I trash treasury secretary Geitner for being the Architect of the Subprime disaster. Does that make me partisan? What did I post about his predecessor, Bush's Republican Paulson? I think I said he was a subliterate moron who couldn't do simple math let alone accounting and was probably single handedly bankrupting the country.

And, yes, I recall that when I said things like that I got a lot of cheers for the left, but here's a news flash:

I'm not a big sports fan. I'm not going to sit here chanting go team. The republicans had the govt. under total control for 8 years, and they fucked it up as bad as anyone has ever fucked anything up, and I'm not about to let them forget it.

So, yes, I'm ideologically to the right of you, but that doesn't make me on the right, but if I have respect for a political party at the moment, it's the Tories, not the Republicans.

And that said, that's my thought on the tea party: Best case scenario, it can be turned into the Tories. Maybe you still won't vote for it, but I hope you can at least grant that it would be a hell of a lot better than Bush.

Whatever the Tea Party does, I will give them this: The conservatives of the revolution actually did go to their party and demand their heads, and not just fall in line behind their own Dear Leader.

ETA: My attacks on the left are attacks on the left, not defenses of the right.

Also, you might want to check that trickle down. While I completely agree with you on the utter bogosity of the theory, Mr. Obama seems to be a big fan of it, it's what he based his economic policy on.

He said when he ran that he was a Reaganite. And he is. I don't think he's a socialist at all. I think he's a Reaganite. But a Keynesian FDRish sort of Reaganite. It's not working, I'll say that.

And also, when I make statements like that it's because I'm trying to kick the left in the ass and say "Hey, this is what you guys look like when you kao tao to your own leaders while they are sucking so badly, and I don't mean just the President, I mean Pelosi, Reid and the whole fucking cabinet. Okay, most of the cabinet. There are one or two people in there that I still have some respect for, but god there are a lot of losers.

I will say this for Obama, at least he got rid of Larry Summers. I think he could have a good solid round of firing:

Hillary Clinton
Hell, Bill too
Gibbs
Gates
Salazar
Geitner
Bernanke
Pelosi
Reid

I mean, I may thrash democrats, but you have better people than this. MUCH better people.

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 7:47 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

DT, the problem I have with

Quote:
This is what the American left has been doing for decades.

is that it IS a partisan statement, or partisan blindness. You're in essence saying Republicans don't do the same, which is disingenuous. It's like "voter fraud". Both sides do it, the only difference I see is that Republicans scream about it more, and use it to their political advantage (as in what happened under Bush). Mike made a good point.

Both sides do the same thing as this, it's not just the Democrats. In fact, if you look at it objectively, both sides do pretty much the same things in every way, just some do it more than the other, some do it more/less publicly/obviously than the other, etc.

From my reading, you seem to point out stuff like this and attribute negative actions/thinking to Democrats far more than you do Republicans. That you say you're not partisan and point out the idiocy of both parties is one thing, but you do seem to focus on negative remarks about Democrats.

As to

Quote:
And here's the result of that: Nothing got done.

I disagree wholeheartedly. Given the Democrats were forced to come up with cloture on virtually ANYTHING of any substance, how exactly were they suposed to get anything done when the Republicans stated from the start they were going to be the "Party of No', and followed through with it quite effectively? Nothing can be accomplished in our system of government without compromise and both parties being willing to work together in an effort to improve the country.

Again, many things the Republicans proposed, backed, CO-SPONSORED, etc., became things they abhorred suddenly when Obama got in office. Yes, the Dems are sans cojones (pardon the mix of languages), and I hate it to and complain about it, and your generalizations of each party are accurate to a degree. But blaming the Dems for nothing having gotten done is wrong, as I see it.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 8:53 AM

DREAMTROVE

Nah, It's an anti-partisan statement.

The left and the right both have flaws in their strategies, and I'm going to call them on it.

Mike's mistake is that he takes a criticism of the tactics of the left and takes it as an accolade for the right, which it isn't.

My comment was in response to CTS's remark that this was a flawed tactic: i.e. the handing out of talking points to citizens for argument. It's a sucky tactic.

The right uses talking points too, sure. Generally they hand them out to pundits and political leaders who are on TV. The garbage you hear loyal republicans spew often comes from Glenn Beck and co. and their radio and TV shows. It's filled with premade positions. It's a marginally more effective tactic, but it still sucks.

But here's my point: We were told to chant talking points at peace protests. No effect. To corporations in our environmental protests. No effect. How long is going to take before you just admit something is a sucky tactic?

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 12:36 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Then why do you seem to never call the Republicans on the flaws in their strategy?

Like I've said here and elsewhere: What is your alternative? "Second-Amendment solution?"

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 1:40 PM

CANTTAKESKY

I don't see any duplicity on DT's part re his partisanship. He states very plainly where he stands, that he dislikes socialism, dislikes corporatism, favors small government, favors civil freedom, and favors private sector solutions. On certain issues, he shares more common ground with the right, and on other issues, he shares more common ground with the left.

Unlike me, who sees both sides fucking up in the same way, DT seems to see unique fuck-up patterns for each side. So sure, when he criticizes the unique fuck-ups of the left, they aren't going to apply to the right. But he also criticizes the unique fuck-ups of the right.

So I don't see the biased "partisanship" you guys are accusing him of.

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 2:13 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I haven't seen him write extensively about things he disagrees with on the right; I've seen him say "yes, I don't like that either", but his posts lately seem to be largely lectures aimed at the left.

That's where my belief comes from.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 2:21 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
but his posts lately seem to be largely lectures aimed at the left.

We have a liberal president. So when he is criticizing the president and current policies, it is going to look left-heavy.

The question is, do you remember his lectures being aimed at the right when Bush was president?

I do.

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 5:14 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Then why do you seem to never call the Republicans on the flaws in their strategy?

Like I've said here and elsewhere: What is your alternative? "Second-Amendment solution?"

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

Niki

You're very late to the party. I railed on the GOP for four years.

Right now, Michael Steele has a pretty good strategy. Still, I attack the GOP for its xenophobia daily on this forum, and have for the whole year and change you've been posting. You just really don't read my posts, I can tell. I've mentioned it about half a dozen to a dozen times, this week, like always. I bashed them on the anti-Mexcian thing, the anti-Islam thing, and I bash both parties on the anti-India and anti-China stances.

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 5:17 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
I don't see any duplicity on DT's part re his partisanship. He states very plainly where he stands, that he dislikes socialism, dislikes corporatism, favors small government, favors civil freedom, and favors private sector solutions. On certain issues, he shares more common ground with the right, and on other issues, he shares more common ground with the left.

Unlike me, who sees both sides fucking up in the same way, DT seems to see unique fuck-up patterns for each side. So sure, when he criticizes the unique fuck-ups of the left, they aren't going to apply to the right. But he also criticizes the unique fuck-ups of the right.

So I don't see the biased "partisanship" you guys are accusing him of.

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

CTS

THANK YOU!

Yes. Each side fucks up in its own unique way.

In one of these posts I said recently:

1) The left has no backbone, it bends with the wind, and that makes them pushovers.

2) The right is all backbone, and that makes them so rigid at to be completely inflexible

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

Sunday, November 21, 2010 5:40 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I haven't seen him write extensively about things he disagrees with on the right; I've seen him say "yes, I don't like that either", but his posts lately seem to be largely lectures aimed at the left.

That's where my belief comes from.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

Niki,

I'm trying to point out things that you might do to win an audience with your own leaders, or any of us.

Two things:

1) CTS is right on again, There's no point in attacking people who are out of power.

2) On tips for how not to FAIL, I offer my humble observations, because people who think of themselves as sane rational people presenting an argument actually come across as abrasive as Kaneman.

You do realize you're doing it right now. And you also realize that you started this tirade against me in response to my rather innocuous comment that feeding voters talking points was a poor strategy.

You know what would be a good strategy? Informing your voters.

You know what meetings like at the democratic party are like? Do you attend any? They refuse to listen to any strategic suggestions that might get them elected. Here are the ones my local group has put forth that have been shot down:

1) Let's have town hall meetings.

Ans: No. We can't do that. The discussion will get off track.

2) Let's take a local issue, like voting machines, or fracking

Ans: The party supports those items and it is not up to debate.

3) Maybe we're annoying people by badgering the same voters over and over again. Perhaps we should let them discuss it

Ans: Campaign strategy is not up to discussion.

4) Maybe we should register people in inner cities. Blacks tend to vote democratic.

Ans: We don't want to change the demographic of the party.

Yes, you heard that right. The official democratic party position is that they don't want blacks actually in the party. You know why? Because then they might reach leadership positions and displace the white elite.

Am I saying that the GOP is better than this? No, I'm not saying anything about the GOP.

Why am I bothering? Because you guys are attacking the people, not the makers of the policy that you dislike. You're not even attacking the party that's out of power, you're attacking the random citizenry.

Loyal Democrats are going to be taken for granted. Forever. Unless you get off your asses and do something about it. I've gotten a lot of flack for saying that the tea party has some potential because even though I disagree with some of their ideas, some of them vehemently, they're actually trying to do something about the power structure of govt.

Right now, what I see is a loyal supporter base that attacks the small out of power poor, and supports the major party and its agenda. This will not make you the anti-war movement of today, it is making you the pro-war movement of today. If you're not happy with that? Don't yell at me, I'm just the messenger. You want to change the image of your party? Do something about it.

I thought I made a lot of good suggestions in one of these threads that probably started with my recommending the Heinlein book.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE