BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 May 10 - 06:44 PM

It is kind of typical of this kind of anger-mongering reactionary writer takes an opinion from an earlier article in the same paper--not a fact but an opinion-- that "Obama appeared not to know she had resigned"--and turns it from an opinion into a fact, and then proceeds to build a huge opinionated diatribe on top of it. It is shameful to see column inches being given to such shallow thinking.

I would also remark that Obama's attitude and conduct concerning the oil spill sure beats "Heckuva Job, Brownie" by a country mile.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 27 May 10 - 06:43 PM

Word on the street is that if the procedure that BP is doing now doesn't work that Obama is going to suit up in diving gear and take a big plug down there and plug the well himself... That's the way I heard it, anyway...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 May 10 - 05:27 PM

"Obama accepts ownership of BP oil spill

Obama didn't take control of the effort to cap and clean up BP's Deepwater Horizon oil spill at today's news conference. He took ownership.

Despite what you might have heard, the president insisted, he's always been in charge: "This notion that the federal government has been sitting on the sidelines and for the last three or four or five weeks, we've just been letting BP make a whole bunch of the decisions, it's simply not true."

While certain members of his administration have tried to rhetorically separate themselves from BP, saying that the government might push BP out of the way, whatever that would mean, Obama refused to indulge in BP bashing. He consistently used the word "we" when describing the government and BP's joint effort. He explained that the government is, by law, in command. But, by law and by necessity, it must rely on BP to provide technological expertise and to stanch the flow of oil. It must have been hard to both accept blame and admit his limitations.

The government has a greater capability to protect sensitive coastline than it does to cap the well, however. So from here on out, this is the president's show. And he admits it. "My job is to get this fixed.... I take responsibility. It is my job to make sure that everything is done."
"
WashPo,
By Stephen Stromberg | May 27, 2010; 2:35 PM ET

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 May 10 - 05:26 PM

WashPo, By Jonathan Capehart | May 27, 2010; 2:30 PM ET

"Obama didn't know MMS chief resigned?!

Let me get this straight. President Obama didn't known whether Elizabeth Birnbaum, the once invisible and now former head of the Minerals Management Service, was fired or whether she resigned? The news broke she was leaving an hour or so before he strode into the East Room of the White House. When a disaster such as the BP explosion happens and the subsequent catastrophe ensues, folks want to see heads roll and want to know the president wielded the ax. That's why Obama's admission that he was clueless on this question was shocking.

Perhaps he was being polite. Not wanting to draw attention to the sacking of an individual the American people didn't realize was even there. But by not proactively announcing Birnbaum's departure and then being caught flat-footed on what happened to her, Obama will fuel the narrative that he is a cool chief executive who is not only aloof but also unaware of the machinations of his own administration.

"The federal government is fully engaged," the president said at the conclusion of the press conference. "I am fully engaged." His ignorance of what happened to the MMS chief undercuts that assertion. "

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:25 PM

This is unfortunately a false dichotomy, Bruce. I am not your justification for your own bad conduct. Suck it up, man. Own what you are doing and stop pretending it is someone else's fault. It's puerile, and you know it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 May 10 - 10:47 PM

Where IS this street you keep talkin' about, Bobert?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 26 May 10 - 05:47 PM

Yeah, it can't be argued anyother way but to say that the Dems are "responsible" for the mess that Bush left for them to clean up... That goes with the the territory of being the party in power... Yes, you are "responsible"...

However, there is a major difference between "responsible" and "responsible for...

BTW, word on the street is that the Repubs are lookin' for some issues to stand for in the Noevmeber elections and have set up a website to try to get some ideas??? Hmmmmm??? If they don't have any now then exactly why is it that they want to govern again???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 26 May 10 - 04:36 PM

How do you know what I believe?

Because you told me.

I am saying that if it ok for Amops, I reserve the right to do the samne as he did.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 10 - 03:13 PM

" Furthermore there is a big difference in the kinds of articles I mostly collected ..."

They were by Liberal blowhards rather than by Conservative ones?

Hardly a reason to give them greater credence.

You are embarassing yourself trying to justify your own postings in light of your complaints about mine.

Either BOTH are appropriate, or NEITHER. You get no other choices.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 May 10 - 02:40 PM

Bruce, knock it off. You are embarassing yourself. Furthermore there is a big difference in the kinds of articles I mostly collected on Bush's various malfeasances and thekind of crap being put out by people like Charles Krautsucker.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 10 - 02:38 PM

"I said YOU believe that Amos was wrong, and YOU believe it's okay to do what he did because he did it. "

How do you know what I believe?



If Amos tells me it is ok, then I have to defer to his judgement- and will complain any time he THEN tells me that what HE did is not allowed by anyone who disagrees with him.

Capish?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 26 May 10 - 12:42 PM

So Amos WAS wrong???

You didn't read what I said. I said YOU believe that Amos was wrong, and YOU believe it's okay to do what he did because he did it. Therefore YOU believe two wrongs make a right.

This is like pulling fully impacted teeth without tools.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:46 AM

But the DemiCraps own it now- and have to take responsibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:39 AM

I suppose that there are some people- out of delusion, ignorance or sheer bloody-mindedness- that are simply unable to admit to themselves or others that the economic, social, and international shithole the U.S.is currently in in was created by the BuShites (the foundation being laid by Ron Reagan, of course)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:36 AM

You assume there islying going on in the Obama administration. Why does this seem more probable to you than that Sestak himself is lying?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:14 AM

Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

'It's Valerie Plame, only bigger, a high crime and misdemeanor'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: May 25, 2010
8:45 pm Eastern


By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily



If a Democratic member of Congress is to be believed, there's someone in the Obama administration who has committed a crime – and if the president knew about it, analysts say it could be grounds for impeachment.

"This scandal could be enormous," said Dick Morris, a former White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, on the Fox News Sean Hannity show last night. "It's Valerie Plame only 10 times bigger, because it's illegal and Joe Sestak is either lying or the White House committed a crime.

"Obviously, the offer of a significant job in the White House could not be made unless it was by Rahm Emanuel or cleared with Rahm Emanuel," he said. If the job offer was high enough that it also had Obama's apppoval, "that is a high crime and misdemeanor."

"In other words, an impeachable offense?" Hannity asked.

Aaron Klein's exposé of Barack Obama's notorious connections with extremists and America-haters is scorching the best-seller lists. Order your autographed copy of "The Manchurian President" today.

"Absolutely," said Morris.

The controversy revolves around an oft-repeated statement by Rep. Sestak, D-Pa., that he had been offered a job by the Obama administration in exchange for dropping out of the senatorial primary against Obama supporter Sen. Arlen Specter.

Sestak said he refused the offer. He continued in the Senate primary and defeated Specter for the Democratic nomination.

But Karl Rove, longtime White House adviser to President George W. Bush, said the charge is explosive because of federal law.

"This is a pretty extraordinary charge: 'They tried to bribe me out of the race by offering me a job,'" he said on Greta Van Susteran's "On the Record" program on the Fox News Channel. "Look, that's a violation of the federal code: 18 USC 600 says that a federal official cannot promise employment, a job in the federal government, in return for a political act.

"Somebody violated the law. If Sestak is telling the truth, somebody violated the law," Rove said. "Section 18 USC 211 says you cannot accept anything of value in return for hiring somebody. Well, arguably, providing a clear path to the nomination for a fellow Democrat is something of value.

He continued, citing a third law passage: "18 USC 595, which prohibits a federal official from interfering with the nomination or election for office. ... 'If you'll get out, we'll appoint you to a federal office,' – that's a violation of the law."

Staffers with Sestak's congressional office did not respond to WND requests for comment. But the congressman repeatedly confirmed that he was offered the position and refused and that any further comments would have to come from someone else.

"I've said all I'm going to say on the matter. … Others need to explain whatever their role might be," Sestak said on CNN this week. "I have a personal accountability; I should have for my role in the matter, which I talked about. Beyond that, I'll let others talk about their role."

That's not fulfilling his responsibilities, Rove said. He said Sestak needs to be forthcoming with the full story so "the American people can figure out whether or not he's participating in a criminal cover-up along with federal officials."

The Obama White House has tried to minimize the issue.

"Lawyers in the White House and others have looked into conversations that were had with Congressman Sestak, and nothing inappropriate happened," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has stated.

Gibbs told the White House press corps, "Whatever conversations have been had are not problematic."

And on CBS' "Face the Nation" he said, "I'm not going to get further into what the conversations were. People who looked into them assure me they weren't inappropriate in any way."

But the administration also is taking no chances on what might be discovered.

According to Politico, the Justice Department has rejected a request from Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., for a special counsel to investigate and reveal the truth of the controversy.

The report said Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich confirmed no special counsel would be needed. But the report said Weich also gave no indication that the Justice Department actually was looking into the claims by Sestak.

"We assure you that the Department of Justice takes very seriously allegations of criminal conduct by public officials. All such matters are reviewed carefully by career prosecutors and law enforcement agents, and appropriate action, if warranted, is taken," Weich wrote in the letter.

Issa had suggested that the alleged job offer may run afoul of federal bribery statutes.

He said in a statement to Politico, "The attorney general's refusal to take action in the face of such felonious allegations undermines any claim to transparency and integrity that this administration asserts."

He's also made a decision to raise the profile of his concerns.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:14 AM

So Amos WAS wrong???

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 25 May 10 - 10:46 PM

Amos claimed it was ok for him- so therefore to claim it otherwise, argue with him.

And you claim it's wrong, and you think it's okay for you because it's okay for Amos.

In other words, two wrongs make a right.

This is like pulling teeth.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 May 10 - 10:14 PM

Bruce,

I really do want to apologize if my collection of quotes about Bush upset you or seemed biased. I allow as how your support of him upset me, likewise.

But please stop blaming your bad behavior on me.

It isn't true. You know that.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 09:33 PM

Amos claimed it was ok for him- so therefore to claim it otherwise, argue with him.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 25 May 10 - 09:06 PM

No, I am saying that if it ok for Amops, I reserve the right to do the samne as he did.

Or, in short, two wrongs make a right. Just clarifying.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 07:40 PM

I have NEVER claimed to be a great typist..

Sorry you can't get into town this Sat. Should be a good evening...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 25 May 10 - 07:37 PM

I think polls should be banned from Mudcat... They waste bandwidth, 'er whatever this stuff is???

And, bb, I loved the Amos typo, "Amops"...

Yo, Amops... Whaddyathink??? I think it's kinda cool...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 07:06 PM

You obviously set the correct example, with Bush-( according to all you have said) SO WHY CAN'T YOU apply the same rules to Obama? Do you really think him so incompetant that he cannot be judged by the same critical view that YOU used on Bush???


If BUSH was doing what OBAMA is now, YOU would be screaming. Why does Obama get such tender treatment, unless you think him lesser and incapable???

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 May 10 - 06:58 PM

Date        Sample        Approve        Disapprove        Spread
RCP Average        5/6 - 5/24        --        47.6        46.4         +1.2

This is the average of eight major polls including your cherry picked one.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 May 10 - 06:52 PM

I dunno, Bruce. Maybe there are important differences between the two cases, and your insistence they are just the same is specious rationalization on your part.

Bush's legacy was utterly destructive, with a few minor exceptions.

Obama's not so much.

If you think I set such a bad example, why are you so bitterly determined to emulate it?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 06:48 PM

Oh, now I see. If it is anti-Bush, it is ok- when it is criutical of Obama, it is not allowed.

I guess we can call this affirmative action, and not hold Obama to the standards we would hold Bush to...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 06:33 PM

Mousecrook,

No, I am saying that if it ok for Amops, I reserve the right to do the samne as he did.


NOBODY complained ( save me) when Amos did it, so it must be OK.


Amos,

After you- you have a few years on me, so I will follow your sterling example(s).

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 May 10 - 06:20 PM

Bruce:

Please grow up, man.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 25 May 10 - 05:09 PM

Bruce

So you're saying two wrongs make a right? WTF?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 04:23 PM

Amos,

"When you know perfectly well that Rasmussen's poll is one among a dozen, and consistently the most negative one as regards Obama, it is disingeuous to keep referring to it as if it were a fair cross section."


Yet YOU insisted on posting only NYT articles,and anti-bush polls, and pretended they represented more than a biased, anti-Bush view. So I see that you have no room to complain, nor do you deserve to have your wishes respected.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 May 10 - 04:03 PM

Bruce:

When you know perfectly well that Rasmussen's poll is one among a dozen, and consistently the most negative one as regards Obama, it is disingeuous to keep referring to it as if it were a fair cross section.

Real Clear Politics provides the average of all major pollsa, and is a more reliable indication of where things stand.

Why pretend?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 May 10 - 02:56 PM

You should see Chongo's daily popularity tracking poll, BB. "Up and down like a whore's panties on payday" would be the expression that best sums it up. One day he's "king of the world". The next day he's in the doghouse.

It keeps his life from getting dull, though. ;=)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 02:33 PM

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 10 - 02:32 PM

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-four percent (44%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -20 (see trends).

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.

Overall, 42% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance. That is the lowest level of approval yet measured for this president. Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove of his performance.

Forty-four percent (44%) say the president is doing a good or excellent job on national security issues while 39% give him such positive marks on the economy. See other measures of the president's performance at Obama By the Numbers. Thirty-four percent (34%) say the president is doing a good job handling the Gulf oil spill while 33% give him poor grades on that topic.

Most Americans have "come to believe that the political system is broken, that most politicians are corrupt, and that neither major political party has the answers," observes Scott Rasmussen. Just 27% believe Congress knows what it's doing when it comes to the economy and 41% say that a group of people randomly selected from the phone book would do a better job than the current Congress. In his new book, Scott adds, "Some of us are ready to give up and some of us are ready to scream a little louder. But all of us believe we can do better."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 May 10 - 11:25 AM

Gentlemen: Ahem! If you could escape from the mental prison of your partisan assumptions...that is, your instinctive loyalties to either the Democrats or the Republicans...and see the political situation without your thoughts colored by prior partisan prejudice...

Ah! If only. It is the only way out of your political impasse.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 May 10 - 10:47 AM

"the dark fetid corner of the dungeon from which our snarly friend ferrets out his worm-eaten information."


So THAT's where Amos has been hiding! the rest of us had no idea...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 24 May 10 - 10:45 AM

Real Clear Politics shows otherwise. It includes the Rasmussen poll which our snarly friend has cherry-picked (or bottom-trawled):

RCP Average 5/6 - 5/23 -- 47.9 46.4 +1.5
Rasmussen Reports 5/21 - 5/23 1500 LV 44 55 -11
Gallup 5/19 - 5/22 1547 A 48 45 +3
FOX News 5/18 - 5/19 900 RV 45 46 -1
Associated Press/GfK 5/7 - 5/11 1002 A 49 50 -1
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 5/6 - 5/10 1000 A 50 44 +6
Pew Research 5/6 - 5/9 994 A 47 42 +5
Ipsos/McClatchy 5/6 - 5/9 1016 A 52 43 +9

This shows the national average is 47.9 approval vs 46.4 disapproval and shows further that the real picture is very different than the dark fetid corner of the dungeon from which our snarly friend ferrets out his worm-eaten information.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 May 10 - 10:40 AM

Published 15:36 24.05.10 Latest update 15:36 24.05.10
Syria: Obama has failed in peace efforts and lost influence in Mideast

Assad's comments come as Obama set to meet with Lebanon PM to raise concerns about alleged Syria-Hezbollah Scud transfer.
By News Agencies

Syrian President Bashar Assad said Monday that the United States has lost its influence in the Middle East due to its failure to contribute to regional peace, in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Repubblica.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 May 10 - 10:38 AM

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Monday, May 24, 2010 Email to a Friend ShareThisAdvertisement
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -18 (see trends).

Following passage of health care, enthusiasm for the president among Democrats soared. Today, however, just 49% of Democrats Strongly Approve of Obama's performance. That's down from a high of 65%. It remains to be seen whether this is a temporary aberration or the beginning of a lasting change.

Sixty-three percent (63%) of voters nationwide favor repeal of the health care law. That's the highest level of support for repeal yet measured.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.

Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance. Fifty-four percent (55%) disapprove. The Rasmussen Reports Media Meter shows that media coverage of the President has been 51% positive over the past week.

Just 27% are even somewhat confident that Congress knows what it's doing when addressing that nation's economic challenges. That figure includes only 6% who are Very Confident that Congress knows what it's doing.

Most Americans have "come to believe that the political system is broken, that most politicians are corrupt, and that neither major political party has the answers," observes Scott Rasmussen. Forty-one percent (41%) of voters say that a group of people randomly selected from the phone book would do a better job than the current Congress. In his new book, Scott adds, "Some of us are ready to give up and some of us are ready to scream a little louder. But all of us believe we can do better." In Search of Self-Governance is available at Rasmussen Reports and Amazon.com.

more at:

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 May 10 - 10:26 AM

"Yes, that is the way out for US... I mean, if we were to have representative government then I could see Congress as something like this:

Dems 30%
Repubs 30%
Tea Party 15%
Green Party 15%
The Wacko Party 5%
The Even Wackier Party 5%"




Now THAT I can agree with! Then we might get fewer "Pass it before we tell you what it says" bills.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 May 10 - 09:33 AM

What we have had in Canada during my lifetime is a 3-Party to 5-Party system with 2 large parties that trade power back and forth between them periodically, a 3rd party that is a significant player, and now and then a 4rth party that is also a significant player. This has led to a number of "minority" governments where the party in power (one of the 2 big ones) had to share power with the smaller parties in what was effectively a coalition.

A coalition means that more points of view are considered than just one, and it has almost always resulted in more progressive legislation and better government.

Majority governments, on the other hand, are positioned to act as virtual dictatorships until the next election, and that's exactly what they tend to do, because no one can prevent them from doing so. A majority government is an arrogant structure that does whatever the hell it wants to, but a coalition government (minority rule) must share power and decision-making.

What I would prefer to see would be an abolition of political parties altogether, all candidates to represent only themselves and their own point of view, but not beholden to any party structure. A government of such independent individuals, once elected, would form a national legislature. They would sit as a united body, not be divided up into pre-arranged power blocs that are set against each other. They would have to discuss issues as individuals not as members of a party (political gang). Each individual would have his or her own opinion, and express it.

If necessary, a chief executive could be chosen by vote from among those seated members...or by a runoff election by the public. Whichever.

At any rate, I think it would result in a far more sensible government than one that is divided up by competing political parties.

And one last thing: to pass, a piece of legislation would require a 2/3 vote of approval, NOT a bare majority of over 50%.

It would be a lot harder for vested interests to control the politicians in such a legislature than it is in the present party-dominated system...because they wouldn't have ruling party structures in place to control the seated members. They'd have to work on each legislator as a free-thinking individual who represents no one but himself and his constituents.

And if you think about it, that's what the USA had as a government when it began in the revolutionary era. They began without any political parties, and had a legislature of free individuals....and it worked. As it naturally does. The evolution of powerful political parties has, in my opinion, virtually destroyed the democratic form of government, and it has ruined the republic.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 24 May 10 - 07:13 AM

Yeah, mouse... A true third party would shake things up and get folks workin' on a fix... I liked the genenarl idea of the LibDems and Conservative in the UK forging a coilition... If I understand it correctly, what the LibDem wanted and may get is representation equal to their share of the votes... What a novel concept!!! You know, representative government...

Yes, that is the way out for US... I mean, if we were to have representative government then I could see Congress as something like this:

Dems 30%
Repubs 30%
Tea Party 15%
Green Party 15%
The Wacko Party 5%
The Even Wackier Party 5%

Hey, now ***that*** would be a Congress where some compromises would have to be made... And the first on I would like would be abolishing the undemocratic fillibuster rule and the "secret hold"...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 23 May 10 - 11:34 PM

Sadly, given our system and the way it's set up, short of actual revolution (avert!) we're stuck with one or the other of them in power. Our best bet is to have a mixed government, with one party in the white house and the other in control of congress, or better yet one party controlling the Senate and the other the House.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 May 10 - 11:01 PM

Well, yes, I am terribly cynical about the two deeply corrupt political parties that dominate your country, Amos. But that doesn't mean I see no difference between them. I think the Republicans are generally the worse of the two by a fairly significant margin.

Still, it's like having to choose between Al Capone and Albert Anastasia or Dutch Schulz and Lucky Luciano. Not a very pleasant situation no matter what you do. ;-)

It's sort of like that in Canada too...but on a much milder and less dangerous level, thankfully. (Our political parties are all phony baloney too.)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 23 May 10 - 10:20 PM

That too, Rigs... I can't deny that he does trend more toward nukin' Arabs and Moslims...

Yo, mouse... You hit it on the head... The Repubs do run to be "the government" on an anti-government platform???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 May 10 - 10:15 PM

"Charles Krauthammer's stuff for years and also seen him on TV and what is evodent is that he is a very paranoid person... He is also very arrogant... Charles has a very narrow view of the world and sees people as inherently evil..."

             It seems to me like Krauthammer judges the merits of everything on the basis of what is, or what is not good for Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 May 10 - 10:07 PM

Your number is good, but your cynicism is a jade too far, LH.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 May 10 - 09:45 PM

That's just superficial bla-bla to entice naive conservative voters into going to the polls and voting Republican. It bears utterly no resemblance to what will actually occur when the people who utter that nonsense get elected.

The Democrats have their own set of superficial bla-bla too, of course, but it's a bit different. ;-) They pretend that they will help out minority groups and poor people, end unpopular wars, close prison camps, end torture, and other stuff like that. Why? Oh, to entice naive "liberal" voters into going to the polls and voting Democratic, of course...most of which bears utterly no resemblance to what will actually occur when they get elected.

And they BOTH pretend that they will lower taxes for most Americans.

Two rotten parties. Two sets of lies and propaganda. One bought government.

Oh, by the way.... 2000!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 23 May 10 - 09:14 PM

Republican mantra: "Government is the problem, not the solution. Put us in charge of it."