“On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord … we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics … the time has come to set aside childish things.” — President Barack Obama, Jan. 20, 2009 (First Obama Inaugural Speech)
[TexasLynn: These were some of the first weasel words spoken by President Barack Obama. He didn't mean them then, and he won't mean them now. Like all the left, Obama's definition of "compromise" is actually "capitulation".]
[Republicans] will not collect a ransom in exchange for not trashing America’s economy. — President Barack Obama, Jan. 2013
[Republicans are using the debt ceiling as] a gun at the head of the American people. — President Barack Obama, Jan. 2013
[TexasLynn: The Republicans are indeed trying to use the debt limit as a weapon; but rather on behalf of the American people to get a modicum of spending cuts from the President. But Obama and the Democrats do not think we have a spending problem (despite their lip service to the contrary). They are on track to increase the national debt to $20 trillion before Obama leaves office.]
“If congressional Republicans refuse to pay Americans’ bills on time, Social Security checks and veterans benefits will be delayed… we might not be able to pay our troops, or honor our contracts with small business owners… Food inspectors, air-traffic controllers, specialists who track down loose nuclear materials, wouldn’t get their pay checks.” — President Barack Obama, Jan. 2013
[TexasLynn: Notice the President used the weasel words "might not" to cover his ass. Of course if we do "default" on our debt it will be up to the President to decide which bills get paid and which don't. Money from tax revenues would still be coming in at about 60%; which could easily cover the essentials listed. Thus, this is just a scare tactic (or possibly a threat) by the President. Unfortunately, experience tells us that it is highly unlikely the Republicans have the balls to actually call his bluff.]
[Republicans] are suspicious about government’s commitments, for example, to make sure that senior citizens have decent health-care as they get older… They have suspicions about Social Security. They have suspicions about whether government should make sure that kids in poverty are getting enough to eat or whether we should be spending money on medical research.” — President Barack Obama, Jan. 2013
[TexasLynn: This type of divisive speech which is passed on as fact by the Main Stream Media, will be the norm as Obama immediately re-enters campaign mode after his inauguration. He's not interested in finding common ground; he is only interested in damaging his opponent and forcing them to surrender. He will simply be a bully until the Republicans find the courage to stand up to him. And the sooner the better.]
I don’t take this as weasel-words, as much as positioning. The key mistake the President made in his first term was starting out with the compromise position he would settle for. Now he’s getting smarter — start out with something the opposition will never go for, make it offensive, even. Then when you settle for what you’d actually want, the other side can feel they’ve accomplished something. That was something he’d have learned if he’d had a business background.
As for only being interested in damaging his opponent and forcing surrender — well, he learned that from the GOP. As you yourself have said, the right’s impression of middle ground is jogging to Hell rather than running, so there is no “common ground.” There is Dem “socialism” vs GOP “fascism” (neither of which is true, but it sounds better on Fox or MSNBC). Calling one side’s rep a “bully” in the rancorous atmosphere created by both sides is silly. 21st century politiics is a boxing match, not a big kid picking on a little kid at recess. Romney and company got knocked out in the 12th round. Whining that Obama is dancing around the ring like a winner is just sour grapes. The GOP would have done the same if it had won.
What I *did* take as weasely was Romney and Bush not attending the inauguration. I know Romney isn’t in office and has no official role, and Bush’s dad is sick, but they still could and should have attended. Bush Sr has been sick for weeks; W could have hopped a plane for half a day in DC. Very, very bad form. Last loser to no-show was Dukakis — not a guy anyone wants to be compared to. Makes it look like the GOP only cares about the people and their government when their side wins. Petty, silly.
That said, I think Boehner’s current approach to budget reform is smart. Disarms the Dems daily use of “fiscal cliff” and “hostage” language, and puts the ball back in the Dems’ court. I don’t think too many Congressmen or Senators depend on their gov’t paychecks, but it’s at least a symbolic move in the right direction.
>> As you yourself have said, the right’s impression of middle ground is jogging to Hell rather than running, so there is no “common ground.”
No… if you look back at when I use that expression, it’s my description of how and where the GOP is taking us. I’ve never used it to describe the “common ground”. That would be too generous. By definition, “common ground” is simply when the GOP completely capitulates to the left.
>> There is Dem “socialism” vs GOP “fascism”
I always find it absurd that the GOP is associated with fascism when the best example of fascism was the socialist party of Germany whose philosophy and policies more closely mirror that of the current American Democrats. I’m not talking about the atrocities. But gun control, government regulation of industry and people, the propaganda… Socialism and Fascism are kindred evil spirits.
>> Calling one side’s rep a “bully” in the rancorous atmosphere created by both sides is silly.
Looking at Obama’s actions on the fiscal cliff… the description is appropriate.
Boehner: “I put $800 billion [in tax revenue] on the table. What do I get for that?”
Obama: “You get nothing! I get that for free!”… “And give me your lunch money!”
>> Romney and company got knocked out in the 12th round. Whining that Obama is dancing around the ring like a winner is just sour grapes. The GOP would have done the same if it had won.
Fair enough… Hopefully we’ll see what the GOP will do.
BIDEN 2016!
>> What I *did* take as weasely was Romney and Bush not attending the inauguration.
A snooze fest… Uggg… I would hate to attend a Republican inauguration. A Democratic one… can I just have a stick in the eye instead…
>> That said, I think Boehner’s current approach to budget reform is smart.
Brilliant… Disarm the Dems before you… surrender unconditionally… GO TEAM!
>By definition, “common ground” is simply when the GOP completely capitulates to the left.
Exactly. So if there is no common ground, why criticise a man for not looking for it for another four years?
>I always find it absurd that the GOP is associated with fascism
Fascism is just a term for “government we don’t like.” There is no clear definition, as Goldberg and other political writers have shown. That also means you can’t turn around and call the left “fascist.” But, I agree, the right is not fasict (and the left is not socialist). These are branding attempts by opposition parties. If the Dems were socialist, they would not have given the banks or auto industry back.
>BIDEN 2016!
Oh Lord, I hope not. We’ll have to ban finger-guns.
>A snooze fest
Congress is a snooze fest. That’s not the point. Not showing up for the winner’s inaugeration is pouting. It’s just not done. Romney showed his ass on that one.
>Brilliant… Disarm the Dems before you… surrender unconditionally… GO TEAM!
OK, you basically have no faith in anyone in government. So… what are you ranting about, exactly? That they all live up to your expectations?
I agree that fascism is a bit nebulous; but I know it when I see it.
In my opinion the key components of fascism are:
- authoritarianism
- centralized power
- opposition to individualism
- massive bureaucracy
- disdain for rule of law
And as you said… all things I hate and consider evil.
>> That also means you can’t turn around and call the left “fascist.”
Look at my check-list above. Check, Check, Check, Check, and Check…
>> But, I agree, the right is not fascistic (and the left is not socialist)
I agree with you that the right is not fascist….
>> If the Dems were socialist, they would not have given the banks or auto industry back.
They are socialists, and they didn’t want to. They are smart enough to know what they can and cannot get away with right now. They know how fast they can boil this frog.
And on the auto industry, they did steal it from private investors and hand it over to the unions. Basically the Dems just moved the unions ahead of the debt collecting line. Once the unions got theirs, there was nothing left.
FYI… I read an interesting article the other day concerning municipal bonds. The unions are trying to basically pull the same stunt; where they get their money before anybody else. Even they see the writing on the wall concerning bankruptcy of cities and states… writing they practically penned themselves.
>> That’s not the point. Not showing up for the winner’s inauguration is pouting.
It’s just a non-issue to me. Until you mentioned it, I had no idea who showed up to whose party this week, last year, or over the past few decades. It sounds like a high school popularity thing. We have real problems…
Didn’t Ryan get booed at this little shin-dig… So he shows the “class” you want to see just to be harassed by ingrates.
>> So… what are you ranting about, exactly?
That we can’t have faith in anyone in government. Democrats are socialist, destroying this once great nation and the only opposition are the Republicans and they’re a bunch of pussies. Sounds like a good, spot-on rant to me.
I agree that Ryan should not have been booed. After looking into it, it appears a former ACLU-lawyer, now with the DoJ, started it.
Given the scorched-earth, we’re here to destroy the Obama administration approach of the GOP for the last four years — and given that Ryan is one of the three key leaders of that group — can you blame an ardent liberal for booing? I’m surprised he wasn’t egged.
I’m all for rigorous debate, and beleive there should be liberal and conservative parties duking it out. i think that’s best for the country. But what the GOP has devolved into since Obama is just an embarassment. This isn’t opponents who respect each other, entering the ring. This is just bad reality TV, 24/7.
Authoritarianism? Try telling half the population “you can’t decide what to do with your own body or your own adult, consenting relationships.”
Centralized power? Try the Fatherland — pardon me, the Patriot Act.
Opposition to individualism? The GOP doesn’t give two sh*ts about individuals unless they’re very, very rich. What it cares about is corporations… oh, wait. “Corporations are people, my friend.” Give me a break! Sure, corporations are people… sociopathic people with no sense of social contract, mutual responsibility, care for the young and old, or long-term thinking.
Massive bureaucracy? Again, the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Administration — the largest gov’t power grab coupled with the largest gov’t agency in American history — not to mention $3 trillion dumped pounding sand in Iraq.
Disdain for rule of law? I’m sure we can both cherry-pick examples, but how about “We don’t give a crap that Roe v Wade has been the law of the land for 40 years; we’re going to stack the court until we overturn it.” That’s not an aside for them, it was part of Romney’s platform — of course, after spending his entire political career strongly defending Roe v Wade.
I agree that the Dems aren’t about fully about freedom, either. They’re mostly about safety and protection — basically, they’re Mom, and the GOP is supposed to be Dad. Lately, they’ve been crazy, drunken, screaming-at-TV Dad.
The GOP, as envisioned today, is an oppressive, out-of-touch collection of plutocrats and imperialists who do not deserve to manage this nation. I hope they are replaced by the libertarians, in spirit if not in brand-name.
>> I agree that Ryan should not have been booed. After looking into it, it appears a former ACLU-lawyer, now with the DoJ, started it.
A DoJ position that is supposed to be a non-political job, but Obama has filled all these non-political jobs with his political hacks. The guy should have been fired; instead they probably threw him a party.
So we’re not going to be treated with respect; but we should show up anyway out of respect for your guy and precedence/history? Congratulations, you have convinced me that Romney and Bush made the right decision.
>> Given the scorched-earth, we’re here to destroy the Obama administration approach of the GOP for the last four years…
Everything you have just said, I agree with… If you just flip the Democrats/Obama for Republicans/Ryan. We have the same opinion of the opposition parties.
>> Authoritarianism? Try telling half the population “you can’t decide what to do with your own body or your own adult, consenting relationships.”
*&^%#! Not the gay crap again (though I guess this also includes abortion)… Every post gets back this this (gay) issue… [Exasperated groan!] I haven’t figured out your deep seeded embrace of homosexuality; but I’m sure it will eventually come to light.
>> (Everything else concerning the Republicans being authoritarian… as apposed to the Democrats)
*&^%#! Don’t know where to begin, so I won’t!
>A DoJ position that is supposed to be a non-political job, but Obama has filled all these non-political jobs with his political hacks
Right. Nepotism never happens on the right side of the aisle.
>So we’re not going to be treated with respect; but we should show up anyway out of respect for your guy and precedence/history?
No, I agree that Ryan should not have been booed. Yes, you should follow protocol if you don’t want to look like sore losers.
>*&^%#! Not the gay crap again
I was talking about women’s rights and gay rights, but really just as examples of universal freedoms all adults should have in a free society. The GOP hates freedom. It makes them itch. What they want is freedom to live in a society where conservative Christian values are the bedrock of everything, which is better than a society where conservative Muslim values are the bedrock of everything, but not as good as a society where *adutls actually get to decide for themselves.*
I don’t give a crap about gay rights. I care about human rights, in toto. No exceptions. Gay rights are just the flavor that turns your face sour, so I keep throwing that back at you.
>Everything else concerning the Republicans being authoritarian… as apposed to the Democrats
Settle down. Replace the blown fuse.
I didn’t say Republicans were authoritarian and Democrats weren’t. I said Republicans are authoritarian, too. They absolutely want to weild the club of government force to shape society in their image, so just get over it. If you believed in freedom — which *has* to include the freedom to choose badly — you’d be a libertarian.
Otherwise, all we’re debating is “Which color straight-jacket would you prefer? Red or blue?”
>> Right. Nepotism never happens on the right side of the aisle.
Finally, We agree on something… My pig can do Mr. Clean commercials…
>> I don’t give a crap about gay rights. I care about human rights, in toto.
No. There is something personal about this issue. Eventually you will tell me or it will come out some other way. If you want it to be private, I can understand and respect that.
Personal… Hmm. I’m not gay. I have gay friends, but that’s not it. I think it’s because it’s an obvious injustice to deny them the same freedoms as other men and women. I just can’t fathom a concept of a free and honorable country that treats them otherwise, whether the excuse is fear of gays or gods.
It’s no different than founding a nation based on liberty, while owning slaves. Hypocracy. We overcame that, with struggle. We’ll overcome this the same way.