comment #1

George Prager says ...

If Hillary had won, we would've had more Republicans win house seats and the Senate would've been lost to the Republicans. Loathsome characters like Howard Wolfson and Lanny Davis would've been in the administration. And Evan Bayh would be the VP.

comment #2

Kakihara says ...

George: We already *had* more Republicans win House seats. And the Senate was already lost to Blue Dogs, anyway.

comment #3

dayXexists says ...

Yep. I so wish Hillary had won. She actually has a set of balls and she knows that you can't "reason" with these far right wing morons. She was damn right with her 3AM phone ad but the delusional liberal media just called her a racist and put all their stock in the "hopey changey" thing. It's a disgrace what the left and the media did to Hillary in 2008. This is what you get for it.

comment #4

PastePotPete says ...

It will be interesting to hear what's really going on behind the scenes in the current White House when the insiders start writing their books in a few years. Does Obama realize he's a bad negotiator? How can he not? Is there no one he can turn to that can push back? There are more kinds of Democrats than the milquetoast Adlai Stevenson kind Obama represents. Where are their pitbulls?

comment #5

George Prager says ...

You don't win with balls, you win with votes.

Francesco Quinn R.I.P.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/08/actor-francesco-quinn-son-of-anthony-quinn-dies-in-malibu.html

comment #6

Abbey Normal says ...

Holy shit, Jeff. You were such an anti-Hillary maniac back in '08...you spewed out so many cruel, half-true, sometimes-entirely-false statements about her, and blew so much sunshine up Obama's ass...SO MANY POSTS about it. If I cared enough to go back into your archive, I could cut and paste a massive trove of damning assertions with which to beat you over the head.

Here's a thought: Since we're still not done with this saga and Obama could still very well end up doing a lot of great things--or at least preventing a lot of terrible things--maybe you could muster the balls and actually stand by your words, instead of meekly following along with the latest liberal pundit du jour whose panties are in a twist. But I guess it's easier just to flip and twist around like a goddamn fish gasping for air.

You may think you're doing some kind of wise Whitman-esque mea culpa here, but really you're just a flake. Have you no shame?

comment #7

Alex Stroup says ...

The path untaken can always be envisioned as greener.

But considering that much of the chain of events has been predominately controlled by a vocal fringe and a series of economic and political pitfalls that would have been the same regardless of which Democrat was in office (of course, this assumes that had Clinton been nominated she still would have won).

When playing chicken with someone not afraid to die, you can't really find any opponent who will get them to swerve sooner, you can only find someone else not afraid to die. Which might feel good from a sense of moral righteousness but doesn't really produce a better result.

comment #8

Rashad says ...

Hillary never would have won if she was the nominee. Was the media biased? Of course it was. It was biased against McCain too. The media wanted Obama more than anything. But Obama won because of the narrative of being outside the norm, and he was black. What was Hillary going to have over McCain?

comment #9

George Prager says ...

HIllary would've won over McCain. No question about it.She would've nailed all of the Gore states and New Hampshire. The debates would'e been a joke. Anyway. All of this reverie is ridiculous. Her campaign was in constant chaos, she had scumbags like Mark Penn running it. Would've been a shitty President.

comment #10

Markj74 says ...

Fast forward to next year when some dipshit Republican, that thinks the Earth is 5000 years old, wins the Presidency and all anyone will be saying is "Come back Barry! All is forgiven!"

comment #11

elzilcho says ...

Anybody who believes they would have gotten something substantially different had Hillary been elected is as gullible as any teabagger. To reduce these issues to the temperament and personality of this or that politician is to miss the big picture. The entire ruling class,Republican AND Democrat, is committed to making working people pay for the excesses of the financial aristocracy.
This is not a national issue. It is an international issue. In Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East working class people are entering into struggle against their own ruling classes. If you believe that all you need is a tougher Democrat to solve these problems you are in for a rude awakening.

comment #12

The Criterion Guy says ...

Don't look at me, I didn't vote for Barry.

comment #13

Robert Cashill says ...

A vote for Obama was a vote against dynastic politics. Bush, Clinton, so tedious I never liked her (personal distaste) and I'm sure at the end of the day she would have lost as much as she won. At least with Obama we're spared stories about how chunky the president is getting.

comment #14

A Pop Calypso says ...

Let's put it this way, in 2012, I would vote for Hillary if she ran against Obama in the primaries, and I used to say I never would vote for her. Shows how much Obama disappoints. Hugely! At least I think she's actually liberal and whatever he is, God only knows.

comment #15

dayXexists says ...

Hillary was and still is the best person for the job. Obama is a pathetic joke.

comment #16

The Criterion Guy says ...

A vote for Obama was a vote for more bullshit.
A vote for McCain was a vote for more bullshit.

See the pattern?

comment #17

THE MovieBob says ...

Obama is president because, once it became apparent that ANY Democrat was going to win after Bush, liberal voters realized they could actually pick the "dream" candidate who seemed to embody Modern Left idealism rather than Hillary, who is many things but not a "dream" of any kind because she's been "tarnished" by having to do real-world nitty-gritty politics.

In effect, Democrats picked Obama over Hillary for the same basic reason Republicans picked Bush over McCain: Because they liked what they represented as "characters" (re: Republicans love the image of an aw-shucks born-again cowboys the same way Democrats love the image of a biracial Ivy League "citizen of the world.")

What Obama has proven, not entirely by his own fault, is that any hope of a more liberal/left economic approach taking hold in America is still aways off. "The folks" have completely and utterly bought into the notion that unchecked corporate-style capitalism is both comparable and inseperable for THEIR basic rights, for good or ill. On the plus side, this MIGHT help sway him to be more proactive on social issues, given that the only card he has left to play re: getting young activist liberals invested again is reminding them that abortion, gay marriage etc. are in serious peril if Romney and whichever Teabagger he insurance-taps for VP take power.

comment #18

Tristan Eldritch2 says ...

"The entire ruling class,Republican AND Democrat, is committed to making working people pay for the excesses of the financial aristocracy.
This is not a national issue. It is an international issue. In Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East working class people are entering into struggle against their own ruling classes. If you believe that all you need is a tougher Democrat to solve these problems you are in for a rude awakening."

Yes. Speaking as a European, I think you've hit the nail on the head. We're all being lead into what is essentially a form of debt serfdom, wherein we'll be earning less, paying more taxes, getting worse health and educational infrastructures, all in order to pay off debts we had nothing to do with accruing in the first place. Like you say, its a class struggle between working/ middle class and elites, rather than any traditional left/right political divide.

comment #19

dharth presley says ...

"hillary should have won" but she didn't. We got what we got - is he the greatest wow your socks off president? No. But he's not a total embarrassment. He knows his shit and what's the best thing to do - the issue he has is in executing it, very weak inexperienced executive. looks for a compromise and win/win when one isn't necessary. looks for smooth sailing in an abusive relationship - ain't happening. So now we see what happens when a legislator with only a few years of experience takes office. compare and contrast to other modern presidents - especially clinton of arkansas. lesson learned. but it'll take a hell of a dem candidate to surface for obama to lose my vote.

comment #20

plainview says ...

If Hillary would have won, then we would be sitting here wishing Obama would have won every time shit hit the fan and the president did something that disappointed his or her base.

I'm just as pissed off with Obama as most people are, but to imagine a utopian world in which Hillary the flawless human-like-the-rest-of-us politician would make every decision right that Obama made wrong is fruitless and implies a weakness that is the inability to admit even out precious Democrat politicians are going to fuck a few things up, albeit some (much?) more than others.

The mistake wasn't the deal he made recently, that was a desperate act, full of horrible consequences, that simply had to be done. Keep it mind it happened THE DAY BEFORE default, so what would you have done? The mistake was not anticipating the cold blooded willingness of Republicans to appeal to ignorant, self-destructive, and just plain STUPID ideas that were generated by an ignorant, self-destructive, and just plain STUPID voter base.

Democrats should have raised the debt ceiling long before they lost the ability to do so decisively and on their own terms (i.e. before the reactionary dipshits and no-showers of America decided to hand the keys right back over to to the people who made this mess a mere TWO YEARS after they were taken away)

This isn't a farfetched idea either, check out the clip shown on the Daily Show last week of a reporter suggesting this idea to Obama who said basically "I don't think Republicans would do something as insane as prevent a debt ceiling increase."

WOOPS! I guess the mediator really does believe everybody is in this together at the end of the day! At least he believes his ideas, however painfully naive they may be.

Although it's worth noting that we, the-anything-but-Republican base, never pushed our leaders on this either. Why? Because much like all the dumb Tea Party fellaters and free market cultists, we don't know how this shit works either.

comment #21

coxcable says ...

Caught Hillary on Charlie Rose a few months ago with Kissinger. Nothing but tired rote responses. The woman is a moderate Republican like her husband. And it would have been a third Bill Clinton term with her. Not to mention that a Bush Clinton Bush Clinton monarchy line is depressingly unAmerican. So don't cry for her, Argentina.

Obama's moderate liberalism will succeed. The evil special interests need it to. Because if it doesn't, real liberalism may sweep in and take all their power.

Making crazies angry is one thing...but making reasonable people angry is bad for business.

And that's why he's going to win next year & win big.

comment #22

The Criterion Guy says ...

God help us all.

comment #23

Rashad says ...

Abortion and gay marriage won't change any time soon, no matter who's in power. It's what the Rs dangle as something to rile up a base. Plus Obama doesn't like gay marriage and will never approach DOMA

comment #24

Super Soul says ...

I was going to comment, but then Prager made me realize how little I care. Instead I'm getting out a beer and my Platoon dvd, and rewatching the Rhah scenes. My favorite performance in the film.

48? What the hell? And in front of his son, too. (Named Max...maybe I'll pop in a little bit of Fearless, too.)

comment #25

bill weber says ...

Get real: HRC is a corporatist tool just like Bam.

comment #26

Kakihara says ...

I feel like I was morally correct in voting in B.O., but I guess sometimes it's more important to play the game well than concern yourself with pre-game formalities. In other words, on one hand, Hillary still owes us an apology for voting for the war; but on the other hand, she would've at least had an interest in ending it, so that she'd shore her rep a responsible legislator. Obama, OTOH, has no damned stake in any of these issues, which is why he doesn't act like it's a biggie when he gives away the farm. I thought Barack was smart about how he dealt with his confrontations, because of his campaign. But in actuality, he doesn't know shit about politicking, and was really just coasting off of anti-Bush sentiment, since there's no way he'd win in a normal election year. Aaron McGruder was unfortunately correct in his assessment of B.O. Christ, at this point, if I knew Lieberman was going to be that petty about the Lamont thing, even though he won, I would've voted for the Gore ticket just to kick him out of the Senate, since he'd be fairly worthless as a Veep.

Abbey: Barry's got 'til spring to turn himself around, and then he's political toast. We gave him three years already, and it's gotten worse since then.

Rashad: "Hillary never would have won if she was the nominee."

Yeah, because McCain would've totally beaten her as easily as he did with the other candidate. Oh, wait!

markj: I'm not going to wish Obama returns if he loses. The guy already wrecked every major gain made by his party and its voters. Why the hell do I want him to wimp out for four more years?

elzilcho: True, at least she would've put on a better game face, for fuck's sakes.

Bob: No one's going to care about abortion or gay rights if they're still unemployed by November 2012. Just like they didn't care about Carter coming up with alternatives to being price-raped by the gas companies as long as he kept looking like a pussy on the Iran hostage thing.

dharth: "but it'll take a hell of a dem candidate to surface for obama to lose my vote."

Gore could do it. He's got more backbone now than he did 11 years ago.

plainview: "If Hillary would have won, then we would be sitting here wishing Obama would have won every time shit hit the fan and the president did something that disappointed his or her base."

Well, no one can fully live up to our expectations. That's just how this goes. But to not even try when you have all the major Aces up your sleeve in the form of a super-majority is negligence, plain and simple.

cox: I said it before, but if you think that Obama has no chance of losing, just because his opposition is a joke, then you forgot about his predecessor.

comment #27

Ray DeRousse says ...

The night of the election I stopped by a buddy's house where several of our friends had gathered to watch the election results. One of my friends CRIED TEARS OF JOY when Obama was finally announced as the winner.

I recently asked him what he thought of his boy after 2.5 years in office. He stared back at me with the kind of hollow gaze you usually only see in pictures of the survivors of Auschwitz.

comment #28

qdpsteve says ...

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/08/sunday-reflection-why-gop-should-give-obama-higher-taxes-he-wants

comment #29

sumo-pop says ...

I'm sorry, but this is a big bag of crystal ball, hindsight-20/20 bullshit. She should have waltzed into the White House. All she needed to do was run a half way decent campaign. Which she could not do. Hirings/Firings and mad drama ruled the day for her. She had very little control over her people. Am I really supposed to believe she would have somehow been better as the president? Give me a fucking break. And BTW, she once had a bite at the health care apple back in '92 with a much more amenable republican opposition. How the fuck did that work out? She's a fine Secretary of State and I have a lot of respect for her. However, anyone who is SOOOOO certain that she would have been any better is lacking one thing in particular to support their argument. It's called evidence.

comment #30

plainview says ...

@Ray DeRousse

In a couple of years the psychiatric community is going to have to start diagnosing that hollow stare as OWTFH syndrome (Obama-What-The-Fuck-Happened?) due to how common that shit is becoming. Barry has spawned an entirely new generation of cynics. (idealists with some scars better yet)

I remember the streets of Philadelphia the night of the election. Everybody, including myself, were elated and paraded through the streets like we just achieved world peace or some unrealistic shit. And yes, I saw multiple people crying tears of joy.

comment #31

Kakihara says ...

sumo: Oh, I agree that her campaign sucked. But if the election wasn't a general referendum against Dubya's policies, she would've still won. And yeah, she did blow health care reform back in '93. But at least she learned from that experience. Obama, on the other hand, is still stuck in Kevin Bacon Animal House mode. Would Hillary have been better? It's admittedly true that there's no guarante of it, but at least there's a sense of determination in her attitude which is just not happening with B.O.

comment #32

sumo-pop says ...

What is the evidence that she learned from it? She was so good at bringing people together that she couldn't keep her own campaign from imploding? Which is still the largest organization she has ever run. Enjoy your pointless guessing game.

comment #33

Kakihara says ...

plainview: I was already cynical before I even heard of Obama. But at least it felt like I could finally make a difference this time, by voting him in for President. And maybe for a brief time, I actually did make a difference. But it's not me who dropped the ball when it was in my court, so it's not really my problem anymore. This guy achieved the ultimate American Dream, and what the fuck does he do with it, but allow other people to have a shot at being the boss in his place?! If I had known he wasn't that serious about it, I would've definitely voted for Hillary. Because whether or not you like her campaign, at least attaining the office actually *meant* something to her. She didn't just treat it like the equivalent of a winning beauty contest speech.

comment #34

sumo-pop says ...

Yeah, that makes sense. I'm sure you're a real political insider or perhaps a registered psychiatrist.

comment #35

sumo-pop says ...

But maybe you're right. I mean after all, she did cry.

comment #36

plainview says ...

@Kakihara

I have no idea what you mean by the status Hillary achieved "meaning" something to her.

I don't think that Obama's flaw is a lack of appreciation for the position he's in. It's that he thinks he can achieve true bi-partisan support for legislation that blatantly has a partisan divide. Which in a way is as idealistic as the followers that elected him to supposedly save the world.

comment #37

Kakihara says ...

plainview: "I have no idea what you mean by the status Hillary achieved "meaning" something to her."

For her, it was more than just a popularity contest. It was something she fought for, tooth and nail, because she had actually dreamed of the possibility of being POTUS. Obama's just a guy who saw a job opening in '08, applied, and said whatever people wanted to hear, because he knew he could. If it were a regular political contest, he'd be a non-entity. And while I did admittedly vote for Obama to metaphorically spread some kumbaya around to other countries, I didn't expect him to be willing to promote that attitude to the extent that he was willing to push the entire country into Jim Jones territory.

sumo: Oh, and Bush ran better campaigns than Gore and Kerry. That doesn't mean he had any more actual substance to show for those campaigns than Obama, though.

comment #38

sumo-pop says ...

And where is her grand level of substance? Please explain. What really convinces you that she would be better outside of a feeling that is as invisible as oxygen? This is just wish fulfillment fantasy bullshit at it's worst. I'm still waiting for your substantive argument. The only thing you can truly compare them on is health care reform. She failed, he didn't. Her massive cock up cost us nearly 20 years of progress on the issue. Yeah, she would have been so much better. You just know it. You can feel it in your gut, can't you? The last politician to swear by his gut was the shrub. Your argument is no better than his justification for his stupid decisions.

comment #39

Super Soul says ...

Kakihara: "Obama's just a guy who saw a job opening in '08"

I just wanted to make sure that statement wasn't overlooked by anyone.

comment #40

plainview says ...

@Super Soul

Far from it.

To believe that Obama just happened to notice that there was going to be an election in 2008 and decided he "mind as well" apply for the position (suggesting that he's doing so with the same ambivalence that one would apply for a job at a convenience store with a "Help Wanted" sign) is more than just a bit ridiculous.

The man's entire life was geared towards politics and the pursuit of improving the country. Whether or not he's the best man for the job, you're attacking him from a shallow position to suggest he isn't even trying, and that it's just a "job".

Regardless of carrying many similar features of a typical job, in that it comes with a salary and benefits and what not, it's ridiculous to ignore that anybody who gets to a position to run the country is not merely trying to feed his family, he's trying to influence history.

POTUS isn't a 9-5 position, wake up in the mornin' make that cheddar daily grind. It's a 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days ever year for every 4 that you get elected dance with the devil. And if you fuck it up, god help you because you will be either be ridiculed or hated for the rest of your living days.

Not quite your average position at Walmart.

comment #41

plainview says ...

It's worth amending my previous post to note that even if your presidency is not a total failure, and that your impact was positive as a whole in the long run, you will still be ridiculed and/or hated by millions of people for the rest of your living days.

Another amendment, not just for your living days, but for the living days of every person in the entire lineage of your family's existence.

comment #42

Kakihara says ...

Super Soul: Why? What part of that isn't true?

sumo: "What really convinces you that she would be better outside of a feeling that is as invisible as oxygen? "

I dunno, but right now, I'm still waiting to be convinced how *he's* better. And not just from a "at least he spoke out against the Iraq war" POV. 'Cus Kerry spoke out against Vietnam, and he still came off just as much as a doormat as Obama. Only he chose to be more honest about it upfront.

plainview: "To believe that Obama just happened to notice that there was going to be an election in 2008 and decided he "mind as well" apply for the position (suggesting that he's doing so with the same ambivalence that one would apply for a job at a convenience store with a "Help Wanted" sign) is more than just a bit ridiculous."

Well, he's certainly calling the shots with the same ambivalence, anyway.

"The man's entire life was geared towards politics and the pursuit of improving the country."

No, his life was geared towards being accepted because his dad ran out on him, and politics was his outlet. I should know. I've been in that position where I took willingly took more abuse than I should have, because I was yearning for some ideal which did not exist. Of course, I was in high school when we're all supposed to be insecure, anyway. I'm not sure why he's still acting like that as an adult, though.

"Whether or not he's the best man for the job, you're attacking him from a shallow position to suggest he isn't even trying, and that it's just a "job"."

And? What part of that isn't true?

"it's ridiculous to ignore that anybody who gets to a position to run the country is not merely trying to feed his family, he's trying to influence history. "

And he's doing it quite well with our very first economic downgrade which he could've avoided if he invoked the 14th.

"And if you fuck it up, god help you because you will be either be ridiculed or hated for the rest of your living days."

And he's getting there. If he didn't like the responsibility or inevitable hostility he'd encounter, he didn't have to run for office. But instead, he's acting like *we're* the ones who should feel honored to be tea-bagged, just because he doesn't want to face up to the realities of the office.

comment #43

coxcable says ...

Kakihara: A Republican can win next year. But having one as president will put the economy in even more jeopardy. Big business knows this. The American free market is a conservative V8 engine that needs progressive coolant to prevent from overheating. And as of right now we're still running red.

Obama is the best hope to save the system the corporations have designed to serve them. A Republican 2012 president may help them make short term gains, but eventually another dose of supply side conservatism would run the system into the ground. Replaced by socialist democracy.

His liberal credentials also make him the best hope to save the middle class. He's started the ball rolling pretty well. With the above leverage on big money he could actually (gasp) fix some of the system.

Point is, Obama's reelection is not an option.

comment #44

Zach Heltzel says ...

We can't ignore the war Hillary Clinton waged on violent media and the internet. I'm sure if she were President right now, we would have even harsher things to say about her performance than Obama's. There's still a good reason so many Obama supporters like Jeff considered her to be some kind of monster.

comment #45

sumo-pop says ...

Kakihara:

"No, his life was geared towards being accepted because his dad ran out on him, and politics was his outlet. I should know. I've been in that position where I took willingly took more abuse than I should have, because I was yearning for some ideal which did not exist. Of course, I was in high school when we're all supposed to be insecure, anyway. I'm not sure why he's still acting like that as an adult, though."

Now I get it. You somehow think this is about you don't you?

How narcissistic.

comment #46

Kakihara says ...

cox: If Big Business gave a fuck about progressive legislation, it wouldn't be trying to force blue collar Americans to compete with sweatshop workers by downgrading all the rights and privileges they fought for in the last century. And Obama has had his chance to turn things around for a while now. But all he's doing is speeding up the process, while delaying whatever looks good in his next campaign. I'm tired of being conned on this.

Zach: "We can't ignore the war Hillary Clinton waged on violent media and the internet."

Oh, definitely. Don't vote for a war and then tell me that violent video games are bad for children. But then Obama's not doing much better by allowing media companies to consolidate into even bigger monopolies and looking on the other way on making it illegal for people to video tape animal abuses at slaughter facilities. And again, those are non-issues for people who can't find work.

comment #47

Kakihara says ...

sumo: "How narcissistic."

Bullshit. Everyone who voted for him transferred a part of themselves onto Obama.

comment #48

sumo-pop says ...

Especially junior psychologists, apparently.

comment #49

plainview says ...

@Kakihara

I'm going to appropriate your patented response technique for this one, please don't sue me.

"Well, he's certainly calling the shots with the same ambivalence, anyway."

On the contrary, the man looks like he aged 10 years in the past 3. If that isn't a sign to you that he isn't apathetic, then I would be hard pressed to offer evidence any more obvious.

"No, his life was geared towards being accepted because his dad ran out on him, and politics was his outlet..."

If you see your issues with your father being relevant to Obama's presidency then clearly you need to try and be a bit more objective about the situation.

"And? What part of that isn't true?"

To try and state objectively he isn't "trying" is like trying to objectively that that there is or is no god. There's no evidence to suggest that there IS a god, but there is also no evidence outright to suggest that there ISN'T a god. I'll admit that I think it's safe to assume he's trying because he would be insane not to. And of all things, the man isn't insane. He's more intelligent than most.

"And he's doing it quite well with our very first economic downgrade which he could've avoided if he invoked the 14th."

The 14th amendment has NOTHING to do with an option for the president to override congress when things become difficult in settling debt matters. It merely states that the US has to deal with its debt. Which is a pretty HUGE margin to debate within. So please understand where you're coming from when citing the constitution. The 14th was written during Reconstruction for fucks sake, for reasons completely irrelevant to the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling didn't even EXIST when it was written.

"And he's getting there. If he didn't like the responsibility or inevitable hostility he'd encounter, he didn't have to run for office. But instead, he's acting like *we're* the ones who should feel honored to be tea-bagged, just because he doesn't want to face up to the realities of the office."

Once again, another statement without any basis in reality than can be proven or disproven. It's just silly to believe such a thing. That is all.

comment #50

sumo-pop says ...

What Plainview said.

comment #51

Kakihara says ...

plainview: "On the contrary, the man looks like he aged 10 years in the past 3. "

He's 50 and smokes. Or smoked It's a surprise he didn't age sooner.

"If you see your issues with your father being relevant to Obama's presidency then clearly you need to try and be a bit more objective about the situation."

Uh, they are relevant. He's still trapped in that same web of insecurity he created for himself as I was, and it shows. And don't gimme this speech about how I need to be objective when there are plenty of black adults with the same experience who voted for him because they wanted to vicariously prevail against the system which kept them down, too.

"I'll admit that I think it's safe to assume he's trying because he would be insane not to. And of all things, the man isn't insane. He's more intelligent than most."

You can be intelligent, and still not "get it". I mean, when you're openly saying you don't mind if you lose 2012, you're basically asserting that you don't really care about the importance of your decisions, because you already have yours. And if that's the way you want to go, then fine. But then don't act surprised when your poll numbers continue to drop.

"The 14th amendment has NOTHING to do with an option for the president to override congress when things become difficult in settling debt matters."

That's not what Bill Clinton said.

"The 14th was written during Reconstruction for fucks sake, for reasons completely irrelevant to the debt ceiling. "

Not entirely true, but even if it were the case, it might have come in handy.

"Once again, another statement without any basis in reality than can be proven or disproven."

He's losing just about everyone who voted for him. How is that not based in reality?

comment #52

plainview says ...

I see little purpose in continuing this debate because it seems like we both agree that Obama has proven to be less of a president than we all hope. At this point, this conversation has devolved in to petty specifics regarding his intentions (which are at the end of the day, completely unknown and I don't care what your opinion is otherwise because it doesn't change the facts), and it seems to become a debate between whether Obama sucks and he cares that he sucks or Obama sucks and he doesn't care that he sucks. Such is a topic I care little for. He said/she said is not a proper venue to anything resembling productive discussion. So if it comforts you in any way, you win purely out of your persistence to stand for your beliefs (which I guess is vaguely admirable in the sense that you have conviction, regardless of how misguided I may think that conviction may be), and my inability to give a shit about convincing you to see the things the way I do.

comment #53

Kakihara says ...

plainview: It's not that he sucks. It's that he wants to suck.

comment #54

BobbyLupo says ...

It's funny to realize that there is no comment DZ can make that's so idiotic that it isn't par for the course in an on-line political discussion.

comment #55

zhonguyd says ...

input this URL: ★ http://www.jordanforworld.com ★
The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike, jordan, prada, also including the jeans, shirts, bags, hat and the decorations.

All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment., After the payment, can ship within short time.

3 free shipping

competitive price

any size available

accept the pyapal

==== http://www.jordanforworld.com ===

exquisite watches 75$

90X Extreme Fitness System ONLY ONLY 42 $$$$$$$

jordan shoes $ 32

nike shox $ 32

Christan Audigier bikini $ 23

Ed Hardy Bikini $ 23

Sm ful short_t-shirt_woman $ 15

ed hardy short_tank_woman $ 16

Sandal $ 32

christian louboutin $ 80

Sunglass $ 15

COACH_Necklace $ 27

handbag $ 33

AF tank woman $ 17

puma slipper woman $ 30

90X Extreme Fitness System ONLY ONLY 42 $$$$$$$

Believe you will love it.

we will give you a big discount

Opportunity knocks but once

welcome to: ==== http://www.jordanforworld.com ====

comment #56

Super Soul says ...

Let's all take a second look at these two statements by DZ:

"No, his life was geared towards being accepted because his dad ran out on him, and politics was his outlet. I should know. I've been in that position where I took willingly took more abuse than I should have, because I was yearning for some ideal which did not exist."

"It's not that he sucks. It's that he wants to suck."

This might be the part where Judd Hirsch and Timothy Hutton embrace.

comment #57

bluetide says ...

For the first time ever, I borderline agree with DZ on something. Obama's entire life may have been geared towards politics, but it was never geared towards changing the world. He was a mediocre, inoffensive state senator in Illinois and the same in DC. He never took a stand or did anything other than jump on bandwagon legislation. Now, in 2008, I could accept that. I work in politics and I know the shit you have to do to get elected to higher office but the fact is that Obama has governed the exact same way as president and that's bullshit. Disagreement over troop levels in Afghanistan? We'lll split it down the middle and give them half what they want. Universal coverage difficult to achieve in health care legislation? That's fine; we'll just pass the bill the insurance companies wrote for the GOP in the 90s. Gay marriage? We're waiting for the poll results in Pennsylvania but just so you gay supporters know, we are "evolving" on the issue. Debt ceiling tough to pass? Just give the other side everything they want and it's easy! If you guys want to see just how bad his team is at negotiating, go back and read about the absolute shelacking they received at the climate change conference in Copenhagen a couple years back. That was supposed to be the gigantic comprehensive global treaty on Climate change and it fell apart because the Obama team fumbled the ball in Congress and then again in negotiations with China.

On foreign policy - apart from the transparently political surge decision in Afghanistan - I think O has been fairly imaginative and good for the country. I do believe he's thought long and hard about most of the foreign policy decisions he's made and that he's felt willing to do things that weren't politically expedient if needed (again, apart from Afghanistan which is a huge but perhaps an inevitable exception). But what boggles my mind is that Obama is so willing to use the bully pulpit on the international stage yet scared shitless at home. There is very little question in my mind that 2012 is Mitt Romney's to lose. He may very well lose it, but if he keeps his shit straight he'll get 51-52% of the popular vote and win most of the battleground states. I think that's a tragedy because Mitt Romney is every bit as milquetoast as Obama but with a conservative bent but there you have it. Do not be distracted by Obama administration efforts to elevate Michelle Bachmann and the like to contender status.

comment #58

Movie Watcher says ...

Imagine 2016: Hillary taking the Oath...and Bill as VP.

comment #59

Chicago48 says ...

This makes no sense whatsoever. So all of a sudden, it's throw Obama out with the bath water because he didn't scream and holler and demand that the Republics (the majority) accept his programs? The man is too cool for that. I believe this is a big old chess game, and maybe because he's the President he will get the blame for what's happening in the markets. But in the long-run it's the Republicans who will get the blame, because they got what THEY wanted. The President said it wasn't the plan HE wanted, but he went along with it.
The problem with the Dems is you don't have control over the airways so that your message can get out. The Repubs are at it non-stop everyday on Fox, and everywhere else. Maybe the President should take to the airwaves every day of the week like Rush?

But further, the little guy don't give a damn about the markets and the credit ratings. The credit ratings are like going from a 720 to a 710. Nobody panics about that small amount. So the country went from a Triple AAA to a Double A....big f***ing deal.
There are countries out there that would love that rating!

comment #60

Chicago48 says ...

"dharth presley says ...
"hillary should have won" but she didn't. We got what we got - is he the greatest wow your socks off president? No. But he's not a total embarrassment. He knows his shit and what's the best thing to do -"
I'm with you. I don't know if there's anybody who wants the job. You have to be a multi-tasker and juggle all the wars. Romney? No way...he hasn't governed anything in 4 years....and he's a corporate man. he would be in Wall Street's backpocket in a minute.
Palin? Crazy as hell.
Bachman. Crazy 2.0
Huntsman -- nobody knows him.

We're left with Obama, so everybody STFU! Please and stop acting like little babies. The sky is NOT falling.

comment #61

Los Bostonian says ...

Perhaps lost in this discussion is whether or not Hillary would even have won the general election. McCain never selects Palin as his VP and doesn't get the negative 5+ pt freakout swing intelligent Americans had as Palin made her idiot tour of America. Hillary and McCain go toe to toe in a much closer election, albeit she would still have advantages with the economy crumbling in September. People forget the polarizing effect of Palin's continued media disasters.

comment #62

SaveFarris says ...

If Hillary and Billary run on the same ticket, they'd have to forfeit NY's electoral votes. Unless one of them officially changes their residency to another state. (Quirk in the electoral college)

comment #63

MilkMan says ...

elzilcho and tristaneldritch2 seem to be the only people who understand what is going on. It's class warfare, plain and simple. the rest is just theater to keep you entertained.

comment #64

Kakihara says ...

fugue: " I think that's a tragedy because Mitt Romney is every bit as milquetoast as Obama but with a conservative bent but there you have it. "

Yeah, but one thing I will say about Romney is that he knows how to win in a blue state. He didn't go all Arnold on Massachusetts and turn the place into a third-world ghetto by betting its future on imaginary revenue from a housing bubble. Plus, unlike Perry, he's actually been around black and Latino people in circumstances other than executing them for being black and Latino. And he "got" the whole health care issue light years before anyone in the Democratic party not named Clinton. Unlike Perry and Bachmann, I'd be ok if he were to win. Sort of like how I would've been ok if 2000 McCain won the primaries instead of Bush.

Movie Watcher: Could Bill legally be VP if he was already President? It's not explicitly stated in the Constitution, but...

Chicago: "So all of a sudden, it's throw Obama out with the bath water because he didn't scream and holler and demand that the Republics (the majority) accept his programs? "

Pretty much. You think we can handle waiting another four years for him to grow a spine? If it were a different political and/or economic situation, then Obama would be perfect for the job. But he's clearly in over his head, and doesn't even seem to acknowledge it.

"Romney? No way...he hasn't governed anything in 4 years....and he's a corporate man. he would be in Wall Street's backpocket in a minute."

He acted when his state had a health care problem. He knows he has to win the majority of voters, not just the fringe groups. And even if he gets lazy in office, at least he won' continue to keep vapid douchebags like Geithner on auto-pilot in the process.

"We're left with Obama, so everybody STFU! Please and stop acting like little babies. The sky is NOT falling."

No, but our credit rating is falling.

Farris: Thanks for the info.

comment #65

Kakihara says ...

Also, I have to add that Romney does in fact have a bigger stake in doing a good job than other Republican candidates, since he's in a Kennedy-type situation where Mormons are the new Catholics and Jews in America. [I.E. punching bags for Protestants.]

comment #66

BobbyLupo says ...

"It's not explicitly stated in the Constitution"

It actually is explicitly stated in the Constitution that he couldn't. One of the few Constitutional requirements for being Vice President is that you're eligible to be the president, and Bill Clinton is not eligible to be president, so he couldn't be VP.

comment #67

Kakihara says ...

Lupo: Fair enough.