We wanted change, right? Well last night we got it! We all became Republicans!
In his State of the Union Address, the President called for the simplification, reorganization and consolidation of our government.
He's worked hard towards these goals.
By moving so freakin' far to the right, he has effectively reduced the number of political parties by 50%.
Way to go, Barack! ::eye roll::
Lets see what other GREAT changes you’ve made, hmmmm????
Ruin the prospects of REAL universal healthcare in our life times? Check
Co-opted the queens running the HRC to “back burner” gay rights? Check
Set tax rates so that the poor continue to get poorer and the rich, richer? Check
End the war in Iraq (by moving it to Afganistan)? Check
Establish bipartisan support (by becoming a DINO)? Check
Was this what you meant by change, Mr. President?
The elimination of all Democratic ideals???
Photo Copyright © 2010 Universal Press Syndicate
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
sagemerlin
Daniel Geery
Eljekar
Man Talk Now
Naithom
OS Readers' Picks
Salon.com
Comments
:D
**Wanders off in search of beer**
Rated with hugs
The Liberal Republican
There were a lot of those around when I was a kid, so much so that I voted for GOP candidates once or twice because my local Congressman was literally more liberal than his Democratic opponent.
He has accomplished some things:
He finally got DADT killed. Took long enough. At least mostly killed.
He took pre-existing conditions off the table in insurance world. (I've got a kid with a disability, so that's a pretty serious issue to me.) It isn't universal insurance but what we have now beats what we had when he started. He also increased the number of people covered by insurance, particularly children.
The government is supporting renewable energy to a much greater extent than it did previously.
Boko (who keeps track of this stuff better than I do) tells me that, while Obama hasn't been particularly good for the middle class, he's been really good for the poor.
Last night he said one thing I don't think I ever expected to hear an American President say: He said it was time to end all subsidies to the oil industry, that they don't need it and it's yesterday's energy.
For what it's worth, he did point out that we can't be serious about deficit reduction while continuing to provide tax relief to millionaires.
He said zero about gun control. Not a word. That was apparently too scary to bring up. Even DADT was safer, which he bragged about.
We knew how he felt about Afghanistan while he was running for office. We just didn't pay attention. Frankly, the best thing he can do in that area (in addition to pulling our people out because no one seems to know what we're accomplishing or even trying to accomplish) is to reduce our dependence on oil. Oil funds Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda is why we went to Afghanistan in the first place. Reducing our dependence on oil is something he actually seems serious about.
All of which might lead you to believe that I'm an Obama apologist. Not really, though I think he's better than having a Republican in office, but perhaps not as good as having Hillary in office would have been. (Actually, who we really needed was John Edwards before he imploded. He at least got the class aspect of all of this better than any other candidate with a prayer of winning.) There are certainly things I think he could have accomplished that he didn't:
I think he could have gotten universal health care through.
I think he could have gotten the tax break for millionaires repealed. I might not get enough about what happened behind the scenes, but I think that one could have been played better.
I don't like his lack of support for gay marriage. That doesn't make any sense to me. He certainly could have made a better case. He may have concluded he couldn't afford the political capital but I don't think civil rights should be viewed in those terms and this is absolutely a civil rights issue.
This guy's not nearly left enough for me but let's not make the Nader mistake, you know, "there's no difference." That mistake got us eight years of W instead of probably eight years of Al Gore. Think about where we'd be now if that election had gone the other way.
A liberal Republican isn't what I want in office, but it still beats a conservative Republican.
He's the reeses pieces of perfection, yet we refuse to see it. The man is a genius. I have republican friends who are now saying..."eh, he's a decent guy at least," which is a huge step forward from "down with darkie."
Either way, the prez made a good speech that represented a beleif not in becoming wishy washy or bending over for the conservatives, but in effecting real change in a split political enviornment.
On the other hand I was only watching to see if Boner cried again.
Must you be so petty and shrill?
r
What a waste....
Rated
I beg to differ with your conclusion. These too are democratic notions both with a small "d" and a large "d".
There comes a time when any organization--corporate, public, even government--must take a good hard look at itself. It must look deep inside de facto and de jure. Sometimes you must figuratively dismantle and rebuild in order to focus on those things which are of highest priority.
And sometimes events (e.g. attacks such as 9/11 or financial meltdowns) force a restructuring and refocusing.
In fact, I would postulate that this is more a democratic thing than a republican thing.
In functional organizations this sort of re-focusing happens quite frequently.
And, sometimes you have to figuratively tear it down in order to build it back up so that it functions in such a way as to be responsive and effective at achieving the mission.
And that's democratic too--with both "d's".
From his campaign onwards nobody has anything but approval for Obama's suggestions. But it seems very apparent that that's as far as it goes. It's a great technique for sweeping up approval from people who are eager for change and maintaining hope in supporters who never seem to grasp how they've been suckered.