BS: Obama disappoints again

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 12:21 PM

Thank you for your valuable input LH!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: pdq
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 12:36 PM

Not one of the cars on that list comes close to the new Obama's EPA decree of fleet average of 35 mpg.

It would take an array of vehicles with mpg ratings from 25-45, evenly distributed, to get the fleet average of 35 mpg.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 12:40 PM

Well, Don, I don't know what the answer is to your question. There are plenty of things I'm not cynical about...but US politics isn't one of them.

I think, like Sawzaw, that Obama probably means well, but that he is very much hobbled by the massive special interests and the usual partisan BS that has your government crippled in Washington.

I think that Americans are misled by their old loyalties into simply cheering when their partisan "team" wins...but not understanding that both of those teams sold out long ago, and neither one of them any longer represents the public that elects them.

What can you really do when you only have those 2 parties to vote for, and neither one of them really represents you? I don't know.

The situation is quite similar in Canada, and I think it's also quite similar in the UK...only we have a more complex situation, more than 2 parties to vote for...but they've likewise sold out to special interests and don't really represent the public.

You wouldn't believe how cynical people are in this country (Canada) about their politicians now. Well, maybe you would. ;-) Everyone has noticed by now that no matter who you elect...things get worse. Jobs get scarcer. Your income gets leaner. Social services decline. And we get involved in foreign wars that aren't in our interest.

Does that sound familiar?

It makes no sense, Don, to demonize someone like Sawzaw just because you have been offended by something he has said, and have decided therefore that he must ALWAYS be on the other side of everything from you, and therefore must ALWAYS be your political enemy.

That's not thinking, it's just dealing in stereotypes. I disagree totally with some things Sawzaw has said in the past...from time to time...but I agree with other things he's said. If you read his post of 04 Apr 10 - 02:28 AM .....I agree with virtually everythign he says in it.

People have to get past this thing of instantly mentally identifying "the enemy" in their mind on some preconceived partisan notion....making false assumptions about that supposed enemy, assumptions that he believes in EVERYTHING they don't believe in...because those assumptions are probably false...and actually listen to what he says without prior prejudice.

I'm not interested in belonging to a cozy little political "gang" here who get together every day to hurl dirt at their favorite "enemies" just because it makes them feel good and satisfies some emotional need they have to vent and express hostility.

And when I see that, I object to it...usually in a sort of satirical fashion. It's lazy thinking.

I've seen only 2 politicians in your Congress who have the guts to serve the people honestly and tell the unvarnished truth about what's happening...each in his own way, according to his own honest beliefs. Those 2 are Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. Other than that, it's a wasteland of special interests and posturing.

Now...Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul don't agree about everything. Their political philosophies are quite different in some respects. But at least they're honest. And I admire them both for that.

I would not want Obama's job...I hope he manages well with it, as well as can be expected, considering the pressures he's under, and I wish him well.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 12:44 PM

>>>Not one of the cars on that list comes close to the new Obama's EPA decree of fleet average of 35 mpg.

It would take an array of vehicles with mpg ratings from 25-45, evenly distributed, to get the fleet average of 35 mpg.<<<

True enough and the poor man's car will get 25-35 mpg and won't cost much and the rich man's expensive, exotic, hybrids and electrics will get 25-45 mpg and will cost a lot more.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 01:05 PM

come to think of it, the electrics will get infinite mpg the way the epa estimates it today.

added to today's fleets it wouldn't take many to bring the fleet average to 35.5

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: artbrooks
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 01:26 PM

It should work fairly well if there are fewer of the suburban behemoths on the road - I can hardly find my Suburu Forester (29 MPG) in a typical parking lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 01:36 PM

Wow!

We only got 22 in our Forrester.

They must have improved a lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Amos
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 01:44 PM

Sawz:

Your discussion about tribalism is correct, and well observed, but it is not complete. The tribal aspect of politics is its most boring and inefficient aspect. In addition to that, though, there are real decisions and individuals who do well or ill, regardless of right their tribe is doing. There are some who deal with realpolitik, not the ass-kissers and cheerleaders.

Obama has always gravitated to the center. The energy move may have been a political manuver to help get his cap and trade pociies more easily adopted, I don't know.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 01:58 PM

Those who acknowledge "tribalism" as being at the root of the problem are on the right track, in my opinion. It's an issue that doesn't get enough coverage.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: pdq
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:03 PM

This summer a friend of mine replaced his 22 mpg (real world number) Suburu Forrester with a 32 mpg (again, in the real world) Mini Cooper.

He feels like he should be nominated for sainthood, except, alas, he is a practicing Buddhist.

He did get rid of a stick shift in favor of a 6-speed automatic which was a major motivating factor. Still, the new car cost $26K and still is 3 mpg south of the magic number decreed by the Obama EPA.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:17 PM

I also agree with Sawzaw's comments about "tribalism". It's a huge problem in both domestic and international politics.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:24 PM

Pdq, What I am saying is not that hard to grasp

Say a car company has fleet mileage of 22 mpg across its fleet now.
They ad a plug in electric which gets 90 mpg
They ad a full electric that gets say 140 mpg.

Do the math
That adds up to 35.8333 mpg.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:26 PM

>>I also agree with Sawzaw's comments about "tribalism". It's a huge problem in both domestic and international politics.

I do not agree. I think that all of the large political problems on this planet boil down to greed and ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: artbrooks
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:28 PM

My Forester gets (really) 29 MPG on the freeway, at 70 MPH, with the cruise control on. Lower in town, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:30 PM

That is awesome Art. We never got better than 25 MPG highway.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: pdq
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:35 PM

"...What I am saying is not that hard to grasp..." ~ Jack

Only if you have a prehensile mind (ask Chongo about it).

Claiming that fully-electric cars should be included in the fuel economy standards of vehicles with internal combustion engines is just plain silly.

Besides, half of all electricity produced in the U.S. comes from coal-powered generating plants and the Obama EPA has declared war on them too.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 02:48 PM

Of course the electrics are included. They are cars too. They do what cars do. They just do it without burning gas.

Obama is talking about replacing coal plants with conservation and renewables.

Even if that were not true, there is still the half of the electricity that does not come from coal. Half is obviously better than all.

Even if that were not the case the price of driving would decrease as well as our dependence on foreign oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 03:39 PM

Sure, Jack, greed and ignorance have a great deal to do with it. Ignorance produces tribalism... ;-)

Anyway, let's not speak in absolute terms when discussing the world's political problems. It would be a mistake to hold up any one thing and say: "THIS is what's responsible for all the trouble!"

It isn't just one thing. It isn't just two things. It isn't just three things. It's a large number of different things working together in combination that result in the difficulties we are all facing.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: DougR
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 05:36 PM

"Obama disappoints again..." Let me count the ways.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 05:43 PM

Look...if I started a thread called "BS: Chongo disappoints again"....

THEN you'd have something to talk about!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 05:53 PM

Just one great big disappointment after the next!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 05:57 PM

Yeah, but that's not the way he tells it... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Peter T.
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 06:24 PM

I don't agree that Canadian politics is like Little Hawk sketches. We have one significant difference from our neighbours to the south and that is that people without money can enter politics and do reasonably well at the federal and provincial levels. Not only that, but we have access to politicians that people down south would die for.   With a few days notice I can get a fairly substantial meeting with both my federal and provincial representatives. For a variety of accidental (and probably temporary) reasons, we have pretty serious restrictions on campaign financing, which is the major source of the corruption in the United States. I despise the current Canadian government, but I don't believe it is beholden to special interests: alas, it is full of true (not very bright) believers.   They actually believe this nonsense, and reflect the dopes who voted for them. The big generic problem is that special interests run the society, not that they run the government (e.g. fossil fuel companies, car companies, drug companies, etc., etc.).

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 06:30 PM

Current disappointment with Obama's performance says less about Obama's capabilities than it does about the unrealistic expectations of those whose preferred politicians have spent the last year working very hard to ensure that he is prevented from doing anything at all.

Bottom line?.....If you are setting up multiple road blocks, you have no right to complain about not getting your mail, or your milk delivery.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 07:32 PM

Little Hawk:(yo-ho).."Look...if I started a thread called "BS: Chongo disappoints again"....

Chongo never disappoints!

At least he isn't hiding the fact he's a chimp!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 09:11 PM

If it were only Islamic, "disappointment" would be Obama's middle name.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 11:13 PM

"Love means never having to say you're disappointed!" ;-)

Peter and Don T. - I posted something agreeing with both of you (in your last posts here). I checked half an hour later and found that my post had vanished into thin air. That happens a lot around here, and boy, is it ever annoying!

I can't be bothered dredging it all out of memory right now... (sigh)...

But I will check and see if THIS one got through.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: mousethief
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 11:30 PM

Riginslinger says: 'If it were only Islamic, "disappointment" would be Obama's middle name.'

I think the word you want is "Arabic". "Disappointment" is only all too Islamic these days.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 11:48 PM

Is Hussein Arabic?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 12:01 AM

I think so. It's a very common name in the Middle East.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 12:06 AM

Here you go:

"Husein, Hussein, Husain, Hussain, Husayin, Hussayin, Huseyin, Husseyin, Huseyn, Husseyn (Arabic: ÍÓیä Ḥussayn), is an Arabic name which is the diminutive of Hassan, meaning "good" or "handsome" or "beautiful". It is commonly given as a male given name among Muslims, in honor of Husayn ibn Ali (626-680 AD), although the name is so common it is also given to persons of secular backgrounds. In some Persian sources the forms Ḥosayn, Hosayn, or Hossein is used [1]. The Turkish form is Hüseyin. On the Indian sub-continent, the form used is "Husein"

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 07:01 AM

I think he ought to swap it for the Indian sub-continent version. It'd be easier to spell.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Stringsinger
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 12:58 PM

The most disappointing thing about Obama is that he continues Bush's policies.
This will be his undoing.

He is not FDR. Maybe we can look forward to his being more like that in his next term.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 01:06 PM

My god! Do you think he'll get another term?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:21 PM

That's hard to say. In fact, it's impossible to say with any certainty. Anything can happen between now and 2012.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:26 PM

Perhaps Hillary will run, and Chongo can replace her as Secretary of Bananas

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:37 PM

""Perhaps Hillary will run, and Chongo can replace her as Secretary of Bananas ""

Naah!   Chongo's overqualified for a political post, and Hillary is underqualified for...........most everything.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:40 PM

If Obama doesn't run in 2012 for some reason, I expect Hillary will. They've played the game of "elect a Black man and you'll see REAL change" once now, and they can't play it again like that, but that leaves them open to play the game of "elect a woman and you'll see REAL change" next time.

Following that...it'll be "elect a chimp and you'll see REAL change!"

And that is when Chongo will make his move. And that is when the bananas will hit the fan!

If it doesn't work out...hard as that is to imagine...there will still be the following possible gambits left:


1. Elect a Native American and you'll see REAL change!

2. Elect a gay Hispanic hairdresser who is also born again and you'll see REAL change!

3. Elect a physically handicapped pair of Asian Siamese Twins president and you'll see REAL change!

4. Elect a mentally challenged Texan who can't speak coherently and...oh, no, wait...that one's already been tried, hasn't it?

5. Okay...ummmm...I know! Elect a Unarian minister from El Cajon who is the product of a liason between a space alien and a hardworking social worker from San Diego, and....

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:52 PM

""The most disappointing thing about Obama is that he continues Bush's policies.
This will be his undoing.""

If the Bush policy to which you refer is the Afghan conflict, you should be aware that four top Afghan leaders visited Britain last week, and were gobsmacked to find British Muslims owning businesses, driving cars, and worshipping in the many mosques which have been built.

They had been told that British Muslims were confined in Ghettos and were forced to worship in secret.

To say they were impressed would be a wild understatement.

Their leader said very clearly, in an interview with the BBC, that the Afghan people (with the obvious exception of the Taliban) do not want the Coalition Troops withdrawn until a) They have established stability, and b) Afghan Police and Military are capable of maintaining that stability. Then, and only then, would the they wish to bid the the Troops farewell.

Straight from the horses mouth.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:55 PM

OOOOOOPPPPSSS!

Typos everywhere, but you get the picture?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:59 PM

One hears a great many things about it, Don. Certainly most people there would want stability. Most ordinary people in any country always want stability, so they can get on with normal life and not fear violence.

I was never in favor of that war in the first place, though, so I see no reason to support Obama's committment to continue fighting it. Have you read any of Eric Margolis' extensive writings on the war in that region?

Another Bush policy he has concurred with was the huge bank bailout. I didnt' favor that either.

He has made noises about closing Guantanamo...but he hasn't closed it.

As for the offshore drilling...I don't really know enough about the ramifications of that to have any strong opinion about it at this point.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 03:47 PM

You expect Obama to tell the truth about anything?

"Some note, however, when the future President Barack Obama was asked in February 2007 if he would serve his full six-year term in the Senate (due to expire in 2010), he responded: "If you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things." When asked directly if he would run for the White House in 2008, he said flatly: "I will not." "


He will continue to follow Bush's lead in a number of areas, since that is what is best for the pcountry- At least, that is what HE thinks.

Since it was wrong for Bush, to say it is ok for Obama is to say that it is not the action, but the person that ddoes it that matters.

THAT is what can be read into the present liberal acquiesence to the same orders that they objected to when done by Bush- that "Some ... are more equal than others."

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 04:49 PM

That is how the partisan mind works, BB. It uses a completely different set of mental/emotional filters according to whom it is reacting to. It judges things first by who is doing them and saying them...not nearly so much by what is being done and said.

That happens on this forum a lot too, on a personal level as well as on a partisan level. That is, people carry personal grudges here...so they will jump on something said by one of their favorite "enemies" and immediately take offense at it by interpreting it in the worst way possible...but if one of their friends had said it, then they'd have interpreted it from a far more positive angle...probably even applauded.

And the truth? Well, the truth may lie somewhere between the extremes of reaction and counter-reaction to the habitual trigger points that most people seem to rely upon most of the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 05:32 PM

beardedbruce: When asked directly if he would run for the White House in 2008, he said flatly: "I will not."

How DARE he change his mind! I never do that!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 06:17 PM

Yeah, eh? The NERVE of the man, changing his mind! People like that should all be kicked out of the country. Any country. Why...they should be forcibly ejected from the planet, I say! It should be made ILLEGAL to change your mind! (tongue very much in cheek here)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 06:50 PM

However, speaking of how wonderful the Afghans think the West is, and how desperate they want us to stay, it appears that Chiang Kai-Shek, sorry, Premier Diem, sorry, Mr. Karzai, seems to be enjoying the most recent role of pissing on the people giving their lives for his benefit. Long past time to leave him to it.......

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Sawzaw
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 11:45 PM

I used to have a VW Rabbit hatchback diesel that never got less than 45 MPG and up to 54.

And it had good power untill you get to a big mountain. It would be down to 45 MPH at the top and even the semis would be passing.

But it would go like hell down the other side and make up for lost time. It would coast at 78 MPH.

Middletown Mountain on I-70 just west of Frederick MD is the one I am talking about.

Where did those go to?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Sawzaw
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 12:17 AM

In case anybody here thinks I am one of those tribal thinkers, Here are some of my thoughts.

I was listening to some talk show guy, Chris Plante, in DC this morning. He was bitching about a new tax on shopping bags. The tax money was to be used to clean up the Anacostia river and streets.

I don't see a damned thing wrong with that but he was compliaining money was to be used to clean up the Anacostia river and streets. To me that is an entirely different issue.

Less trash and bags in the land fills, polluting the environment, less oil and trees being used to make bags are all environmental pluses.

People can either reuse the bags or get the reusable ones and they will not have to pay the tax.

Looks like win/win to me but he and the callers went on and on to say if bags are so bad, why not outlaw bags? It is another government intrusion. How about the taxes on cigarettes? That's another intrusion. If tobacco is bad, why not outlaw tobacco?

I can imagine how loud the jerk would be wailing if shopping bags and tobacco were outlawed. Now that would be serious government intrusion to cry and suck snot about.

I can see him suggesting that the taxes collected should go toward something else like education but that should not have any bearing on the tax itself, A stinking nickel per bag.

How about the tax on soda bottles and cans? It is a win/win cause you can get the money back and it insures they will be recycled more often. There ought to be a tax on the bottled water too so the emptys get recycled.

I had to turn they guy off and I considered calling him but it takes so long to get through, you have arrived where you are going.

Like I say, you have to consider each issue separately regardless of the speaker or sponsor and not act like you are part of a tribe like Shia and Sunnis. I'm no expert on Islam but it seems they detest each other while there is not much difference from a broader perspective.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Peter T.
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 09:52 AM

These are the same people who are against government doing anything to interfere with their godgiven rights, except that they have no trouble with government surveillance of everything they do in the name of freedom. It's just delusional, it's not worth trying to make any sense of it.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama disappoints again
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 10:26 AM

""I was never in favor of that war in the first place, though, so I see no reason to support Obama's committment to continue fighting it.""

Nobody outside the Bush/Cheney/Blair/Brown coalition and their toadies was in favour LH.

Nonetheless, it would be a huge mistake to abandon those of the Afghan leadership who are pro Western involvement.

Pulling out now would de-stabilise that already troubled country, and would undoubtedly lead to the extinction of pro Western Afghans.

Remember, that's what happenede in Iraq, and everybody is paying the price right now.

In my estimation, Obama is one hundred percent right in wanting to finish the job, and although a military resolution is impossible per se, a negotiated settlement requires that we continue our efforts until it can happen.

Don T.