Obama: Can he bridge the partisan gap? - Subscriber Only - THE WEEK »
Posted By Goppy 11 months ago in Political NewsBill Clinton urged an end to “acrimony and division” and ended up being impeached. George W. Bush vowed to “change the tone” in Washington and bitterly divided the country ... The new president shouldn’t expect any cooperation from the GOP, said Alan Wolfe in The New Republic Online.
Read Full Story at theweek.com »
1082 Views Share Story 162 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Goppy
I'm back from my tenure at Politics Daily!
For several months, I was blogging in the comments section of Politics Daily. First as Goppy ...
Other Related Articles: All »
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 162 (view all)
-
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not sure if the link will work for non-subscribers ... but there were some good points in the article.
Reply
One - as to why Obama won't elicit support from Republicans:
"In Congress, Republican centrists have either lost their seats to Democrats or been driven out of the party, leaving “hard-right activists not especially interested in bipartisanship, policy, or responsibility.” They opposed the federal bailout of the banking and auto industries, and are convinced that all government programs and taxes are inherently evil. As an embattled minority, it costs them nothing to cause “as much mischief as they are capable of imagining.” Obama can expect nothing but trouble from the GOP."
.-
100%
gamahuche11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I'm not sure if the link will work for non-subscribers ... but there were some good points in the article."
Reply
No problem in the Czech Republic with Opera! I suppose that's not much guidance re Peoria on whatever that other one is called.. -
23%
Endoscopy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROTFLMAO
Reply
The following is pure liberal drivel so I didn't bother to read any farther.
"George W. Bush vowed to “change the tone” in Washington and bitterly divided the country."
The way he divided the country was to win the election. Right after the election the liberals ranted and raved about how he stole the election, how stupid he was, etc. It only slowed down after 9/11 for a while then slowly cranked up again. This is very stupid to say he divided the country when the liberals did it all by themselves. Democrats in congress attacked for more spending and taxes etc. Then the liberals blame the spending on Bush. Remember the first two years the Senate was 50 50.
Goppy does it again. More liberal drivel. About all he can do I guess. -
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user13 Replies
-
-
100%
memestryker11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Both major parties have become so extreme that no one can find the center. And what is considered "center" isn't even something anyone can agree about. I notice that my own opinions run the gamut of democratic/republican platform issues and other, and those I don't consider extreme at all are some that actually set the extremists on the opposite side off.
Reply
I've had to laugh (out loud) numerous times when someone accused me of being a "leftie" or "rightie!" And depending on my remakr, those negging me are from one polar end of the spectrum and sometimes from the opposite pole!
Sometimes I have to wonder how many other people examine the issues for themselves and don't jump on a political bandwagon that's scripted by a given political party. -
100%
memestryker11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Goppy, the right and left extremists all are up to creating mischief. Nothing has changed much with people who have been elected on these issues, and who see themselves as representing a certain base. And, they actually believe it down in their bones. They "know" they are right, and have painted anyone opposing their pet positions as uncaring, evil, ignorant, or what have you.
Reply
Anyone of any party can expect nothing but trouble from the opposing party on hot-button issues that relate to culture, wealth, or power. And I doubt anyone completely agrees on what is right, left, or center on any given issue. I generally disagree with both Ann Coulter and Al Sharpton on the issues of greatest importance to them, and they arguably represent the far right and far left viewpoints on a lot of major issues. (I think they may be twins separated at birth.)
Good article.
-
-
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Also from the article:
Reply
"And what can Republicans expect of him? said Jonah Goldberg in National Review Online. Obama claims to have transcended ideology, but his economic plan would require Republicans to unconditionally support nearly $1 trillion in government “stimulus” spending."
NOTE: Johah Goldberg is one of the most radically extreme political pundits in America today. He's actually written a book that claims Democrats are Fascists. ... That's like saying Republicans are Socialists ... But nevertheless ... he's made the rounds on Mainstream Media hawking this book ... all the while claiming Mainstream Media is Biased to the Left! LOL!!!
. -
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Once more from the article ... again ... in case readers cannot access the story ....
Reply
..... David Brooks in The New York Times: "Obama is truly our first postmodern president. The administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush represented the culmination of the slash-and-burn politics that both major parties have been waging since the cultural divide of the 1960s."
But for Obama, “politics is not personal.” He doesn’t want revenge for previous Democratic defeats or to win the culture war for the Left. His goal is to create a new climate of personal responsibility, open-mindedness, and civic spirit—to create a new consensus, so he and the nation can get things done. It’s astonishingly audacious, and whether or not you believe Obama will succeed, it’s truly what he has set out to do."
.-
100%
GWHayduke11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That next-to-last sentence from the article is the essence of why Obama won the election.
Reply
Personal responsibility and change from within to do what is necessary to rebuild from the ashes of the W administration is critical.
Its funny, too, that personal responsibility and a culture of care-taking is so foreign to the many who have gotten us into this calamity.
He wasnt my initial choice, but he has proven to me that he's the right person at the right time and has my full support. -
100%
Goppy11 months ago
-
18%
Endoscopy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROTFLMAO
Reply
"But for Obama, “politics is not personal.” He doesn’t want revenge for previous Democratic defeats or to win the culture war for the Left. His goal is to create a new climate of personal responsibility, open-mindedness, and civic spirit—to create a new consensus, so he and the nation can get things done. "
Yep. In two different meetings when the Republicans were discussing things with him he just said "I won." And you publish this drivel.
-
-
95%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The link works for me, and I don't subscribe.
Reply
I'm sure many will disagree, but as Brooks and Dionne say in the article, Obama has already made more attempts to bridge the gap than Clinton or W. (Or the elder Bush and Reagan before him, for that matter, not that those two even paid lip service to it.)
Unfortunately, Alan Wolfe and Fred Barnes each also have it half right: Neither side in Congress appears to have much interest in bipartisanship. They've seen how the propaganda of the preceding 25 years has been so effective in manipulating voters into believing only the half of the stories they lean toward to begin with, and would prefer to obstruct any constructive ideas from the opposition.
One can already hear Republicans saying we can't "borrow and spend our way to prosperity," (as in a few stories posted here yesterday) when that's exactly what those same people have been saying we can do over the past eight years--the truth is, they don't want constituents to enjoy any tax cuts provided by opposition. (I believe those cuts are only a short-term patch for the lower and middle classes and a meaningless giveaway to businesses--whose current paradigm is to cut costs to boost profits no matter how well their bottom lines are doing anyway--and won't provide a long-term boost to the economy regardless of who they go to.) At the same time, despite rhetoric to the contrary from Pelosi and Reid, we haven't seen much effort to truly listen to any Republican suggestions either.
Obama can--and has already begun to--restore executive branch power to an equal level to the legislative and judicial branches, while reforming federal agencies under his control to do a better job performing the missions for which they were created. But he has his work cut out for him in retraining members of Congress. Representatives in the House must run every two years, and they've discovered one of the easiest ways to win is to continue disseminating the easily grasped propaganda and mischaracterization of their opponents' positions that works so well on a polarized public. And fundraisers do best when using scare tactics on those who donate. It'll be a nearly impossible task to create a new way to raise money and to win elections.
Serious campaign finance reform (beginning with overturning the Supreme Court ruling that equates campaign spending with free speech and allows loopholes for organizations to provide unlimited campaign funds), true ethics regulation on money and gifts from lobbyists, and restructuring of election law to make it easier for those not backed by the two major parties to have even a slight chance at winning would go a long way toward making government less divided. That's hard enough. Add to that educating the public on how to discern the facts from the propaganda in what it's told by media and partisan organizations, I'm just not that optimistic that bipartisanship can be achieved, even in two terms of an Obama administration.-
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Extraordinarily well said ... as usual Beau78890.
Reply
I believe for intelligent dialogue to occur, insane rhetoric has to be extirpated.
Yes, I've now seen the rhetoric from Republicans claiming ... astonishingly ... "We can't borrow and spend our way to prosperity."
This pronouncement would surely elicit insane laughter if it appeared in an SNL skit ... because ALL America knows that this is exactly what those who are saying this have been doing for the past eight years.
.
It's just that, for the past eight years ... we've been spending VAST amounts on Military Contractors ..... ..... ..... Increasing the size of Government by 30% ..... ..... ..... and borrowing VAST amounts from the Chinese.
.
. -
25%
Endoscopy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Then there is this $ trillion dollar deficit when the liberals were all over Bush for his $400 billion one. This $800 billion plus spending package to "shore up the economy" has only about $200 to 300 billion that would go for relief within 18 months. A lot of it is wasteful spending like resodding the White House lawn etc. Barney has his bank in his home town getting a big slice of the pie. Etc. etc. etc. Over half of it would be spent in 2011. That is too far distance to fix the economy immediately. But of course since this comes from the Congressional Budget Office it must be wrong. I bet Pelosie and Reid are going to rant and rave at them and have them come up with something different. Any bets?
Reply
-
-
87%
k9kssr11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We have a local political show on Sunday mornings called Flash Point consisting of two retired individuals who held high level state and/or national positions. One is a democrat and one is a republican. They were discussing this very thing this morning.
Reply
The democrat has raised huge amounts of money for the DNC and supposedly had a "front row seat" at the inaugural functions. He told a story, which I haven't seen on TV or in the prnt media, about Joe Biden making a smart a$$ remark when being sworn in about SC Justice Roberts, a republican appointee, gaffing the swearing in of Obama. Obama supposedly reached out and touched Biden on the arm and almost imperceptably shook his head "no". The point being, as both these
individuals, on different sides of the aisle, agreed.....there can be no bi-partisanship until each side quits taking potshots at the other side. As seen here on propeller on a daily basis.
What I got out of it.....as long as the left keeps bashing Bush and the republicans, the right will continue to bash Obama and the left and so on and so forth and so on.....you cannot expect cooperation when each side is sniping the other.
Pretty simple thinking, but we've been called simple minded in my state by certain factions.-
Beau7890Comment removed: Spam
-
100%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I get comments removed when I post more than one link per comment...I've seen others do it successfully. I guess I'll have to split this.
Reply
The Biden comment and Obama's response to it have been reported both on TV and in print. Here's one link to a Washington Times article:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/22/biden-... -
100%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And here's the other, from Time and CNN:
Reply
http://thepage.time.com/2009/01/21/biden-razzes-ro...
Incidentally, Biden was definitely not my first choice for VP, though I don't think he'll have nearly the influence in this administration that Cheney had under W. -
95%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Honestly, k9kssr ... (by the way ... do you love dogs) ... any 'so called bashing' done to GeeDub was brought upon by his own ineptitude.
Reply
As I've said on various occasions, I have no personal animosity with George W. Bush. In fact, I think he's incredibly funny. A bit too flip for my taste ... especially in a President ... but it's obvious that he is a good person ... a well intentioned person.
You also have to admit that there was NO "so called Bush Bashing" immediately after 911. GW's approval ratings were among the highest in history.
It's what George did subsequent to 911 that elicited angst and frustration from America ... and not just Liberals ... but many who saw something amiss with pushing for war in Iraq.
Do you honestly believe that George W. Bush is a poor innocent victim?
Shouldn't a person be held accountable for their actions?
If you owned a company, and you had an employee who created havoc, bankrupted your company with a combination of lavish spending and cutting your company income ... and picking fights throughout the industry ... and ignored the CFO as he looted the company ... wouldn't you have had a few choice words for that employee?
. -
90%
Justice4All11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Those who don't remember the past are condemned to repeat it"
Reply
This is why we will never stop in our quest to highlight Bush's crimes. If you want both parties to cooperate then it's time for the Republicans to admit that Bush is a war criminal. It's not bashing, it's justice. -
100%
mesodude11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"What I got out of it.....as long as the left keeps bashing Bush and the republicans, the right will continue to bash Obama and the left and so on and so forth and so on.....you cannot expect cooperation when each side is sniping the other."
Reply
--This makes sense in theory but I think the problem is much deeper than that. From my perspective it's clear from your statements and those of others here on the right that some people can't even agree on what it means to cooperate.
I can see from your arguments that, like many other posters from the right here, you lack perspective and your attitude is always that the other guy must blink first. To me, that's part of the problem. It also doesn't help that those of you on the right seem to forget that Bush left office with a 22% approval rating and that, in order for that to occur, LOTS more Americans than those from the left had to have been unhappy with him.
Right wingers want to slam Obama as payback for criticizing Bush for 8 years. The problem is that you assume that Bush was treated unfairly--despite the fact that the Bush administration has been pretty much UNIVERSALLY condemned and despite the state our country is in (vs what it was 8 years ago).
In spite of the very different circumstances under which Bush and Obama were elected, you somehow think you're justified in p*ssing and moaning about the "unfairness" of Obama's decisive win while acting as if those of us on the left were unreasonable for being upset about the outcome of 2000. That's called a lack of perspective.
-
-
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To what comment are you replying to?
Reply
Are you replying to my comment in which I give the hypothetical example of the incompetent employee?
I hate to assume that is what you are referring to ... but if it is ... are you still of a mind that ANY criticism of Bush is unwarranted ... and possibly offensive ... to you?
Are you of a mind that Presidents should not be criticized for their actions? Not be held accountable?
.-
100%
memestryker11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's one reason I didn't support Biden as VP. He is aggressive and juvenile in his dealings with people. Rahm Emanuel also fits this mold. Both are heavy-hitters, though, so they've gotten passes from politicos because they are viewed as people who are ruthless enough to "get it done" and not worry about ruffling feathers.
Reply
We the people elect pit bulls to represent us--maybe because they are more likely to fight for our own interests. -
100%
dunkirk11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Weren't the REPUBLICANS the party of accountability or did that mean they could blame everything on Clinton? It seems when you claim the left continually bashed Bush it seemed to be focused on his latest gaffe. Have you missed the last 8 years? During Mccain campaign he really hadnt nothing he could push forward as accomplishments for the GOP over the lat 8 years and his campaign always took a bash Obama turn because of it.
Reply
-
-
67%
k9kssr11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So Goopy, to continue the pattern of bashing, it would be my turn to bring up all the trash I can think of on the democrats.(And I really AM registered as a democrat since the age of 18.) Then you, in turn, could respond with your cuts.....and so on and so forth and so on......
Reply
I have a choice here, what to do, what to do? Hmmmm.-
70%
k9kssr11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Absolutely not Goopy. It would be irresponsible not to criticize presidential actions and/or policies., congress for that matter :>) But, hopefully, those criticisms are constructive. For instance, I have very strong views on abortion and will continue to voice those opinions.
Reply
BUT, I see a lot on propeller that is what I would call, and we call on my e-mail lists, "flaming". Just getting a rise out of people and being a bit obnoxious and writing things you know will cause rants and negs. It's fun. I've done it and I'm sure you do, too. (Some people never "flame".) It might be fun and a way to blow off steam at the "other side", but it's not constructive.
Anyway, while it may be okay for prop members to flame each other, I expect better from those who have been elected to run this country. They should disagree but not be disagreeable. I'm probably naive but I wish we had elected officials that we could look up to.
-
-
71%
TheRealizer11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Goppy..You can safely bet your last bundle of Enron stock that the finalists were thouroughly vetted and no serious Boat Rocking will occur. A gazillion dollare (borrowed from China) will be shifted to Wall Street and lots of rhetoric on how much help the working class will get.
Reply-
100%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It may be true that there will be more bailout money given to Wall St. firms. I honestly don't have a problem with that--provided Congress and/or the Treasury puts restrictions on how that money can be spent. (The problem with the first $350 billion given to those firms is that there were absolutely no restrictions and no oversight as to what they could do with the money, enabling banks and financiers to continue giving themselves bonuses and spending irresponsibly while limiting their lending to others, which gives no help to the economy.
Reply
The unfortunate truth is that the banking industry (as opposed to other industries that would like to receive bailout money) is that banks lend to business. Sadly, Wall St. has largely stopped lending to anyone--even individuals and businesses with good credit--though they've received government money meant to keep the economy running by stimulating lending. Without businesses being able to borrow money--responsibly, of course, with the ability to eventually pay it back--the economy will come to a total standstill and we'll be in far deeper trouble than we are now. Higher unemployment, less spending by consumers and more failing businesses unable to meet their expenses will cause the markets to crash, confidence in the U.S. economy to erode even further, and the dollar to deflate...and no one wants to see that.
-
-
93%
hyperbola11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Frankly I think neither side has yet realized that there is no way to continue as America has been for the past 30 years. This whole discussion is far too provincial since it ignores what the rest of the world may do. We had a brief period after WWII when (because of the destruction of other advanced countries) we accounted for 50% of the financial and industrial capital of the world, but those days are long over. Unfortunately we have been living and spending as though that were still true and have now dug such an enormous hole for ourselves that it is unlikely that ANY plan to continue in this fashion will be successful. The most immediate and helpful thing we could do is give up the idea of "ruling" the world and cut the Pentagon in half.
Reply
The World Won't Buy Unlimited U.S. Debt
We're asking others to sacrifice for our 'stimulus.'
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123266988914308217...-
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think you bring up some valid points.
Reply
I'm interested in seeing how Obama's World View will translate to international relations.
But it is so good ... so joyous ... to have a President that is respected by the international community.
.. -
100%
CaptainLucid11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You make a significant point about the difference between the great depression and the current depression. Neocons think war is a cure for the economy. The reality is if we destroy another country and then take their resources and manufacture them to rebuild their country at their expense some companies will make money at the expense of humanity. This was part of the "sell" of iraq. We "liberate" them and they give us free oil. This had all the credibility of a late night no money down real estate infomercial and the same results. The average American gets fleeced and the salesmen get big bucks. I think the first priority is start producing things like our own energy to keep the wealth home and stop spending money to blow stuff up in iraq and then spend more to build it again.
Reply -
100%
cushi11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I gave you a pos first and foremost for not mentioning Israel or the Palestinians for a change! You have a wealth of information and good ideas, but your penchant to obsess over that one issue has caused me to either skim or skip many of your posts.
Reply
I fear what you have said above is the sad and bitter truth! We should have seen the handwriting on the wall and heeded it when Bush was up for re-election, but we did nothing and allowed that abomination to steal another 4 years, and now, our goose may be thoroughly cooked.
-
-
94%
lovemylibs11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
At this point in time, I think that President Obama does have the balls to stand up to the far left and the far right and govern with the center in mind. My sincere hope is that he transcends the vision that the extremists from both sides have of him.
Reply
The biggest problem that he has is that he must legislate with leaders of Congress who are party loyal extremists and that may be a steep hill, even for a climber. Pelosi, Reid and McConnell are not leaders. They are all inept policy makers who strive to elevate their own party while finding only fault with the other party.
President Obama's reaction to Biden's joke about Roberts indicate that he realizes partisanship is not helpful and that now is not a time for divisive fun.-
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, contrary to many on the right ... and actually, many on the left ... Barack Obama clearly hews a middle road.
Reply
His behavior at Harvard was extremely poignant of his propensity to take great pains to give the opposition a clear voice ... sometimes even MORE of a voice than those who may share his political objectives.
Personally, I believe Barack Obama has staked out a moral high ground as compared to Congress ... especially ... and as always ... "Rabble-Rouser-Central" ... the House of Representatives.
I think he can use this moral high ground ... and concomitant popular support ... to negotiate from a place of strength to minimize typical rancor.
And I agree, Obama's reaction to Biden was a clear signal of his consistent, moderate methodology.
. -
-
100%
CaptainLucid11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I take it completely opposite. I think Obama has this crazy idea like bargaining with neocons. He is busy giving the neocons everything they haven't even dreamed they could still pass and then bending over and asking please give it to me harder. Pelosi and reid are W's only apologists on the dem side. Pelosi is no such thing as a liberal. She is a ***** from a family of ****** who stands for only one thing, her reelection. When W was facing impeachment for more crimes than I could type his best republican friend Pelosi said don't worry, I will protect you because I am a ***** and I will never rock the boat because I am number 3 in line and I believe in myself more than justice.
Reply
-
-
100%
GWHayduke11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WOW!
Reply
What a surprisingly positive thread from all members.
In times of eminent peril, we do have the ability to put aside irrational ideological clingings and embrace ideas that can make this country that we love a better place to live.
The only way this can be accomplished is to be thoroughly inclusive and moderate in our actions.-
100%
aceofspades111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"What a surprisingly positive thread from all members."
Reply
That's very true GWH- but there have been 35 comments from only 9 members until now -14 hours after the origional post.
unfortunately that is hardly representive of ALL members> endo seems to be the only die-hard con commentuing here now.
Perhaps the others might have gotten a glimmer of the light of good sense in the last few days.
-
-
100%
Eagle_Eye11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
GWH "n times of eminent peril, we do have the ability to put aside irrational ideological clingings and embrace ideas that can make this country that we love a better place to live.""
Reply
If we can do that here than why can't they do that in Washington?? Really if there is going to be any change then the childish behavior has got to stop.
I agree with what was said earlier that things will never be the way they were in this country, the last 30 years was a party. Well the party is over and it is time to get real but getting real is going to hurt a lot of people that don't have a lot in their life and they are losing every thing. Before any thing gets done it will be to late for them and the American Dream is gone.
Good post Goppy!!!
At some point we have to all set aside our differences and come together as a nation like we did after 9/11 in order for us to work together. Start by letting your Gov. Reps. know you expect adult behavior and no more playing games because your life and livelihood is at stake here in fact the future of the entire country is.-
-
100%
lvrofwolves11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You remember the feeling like almost every American citizen had put America FIRST, right after 9/11???, though 9/11 was so tragic,beyond that, it felt wonderful that everyone seemed to be on the same team, pulling together for America.
Reply
Well then greed and power hunger reared it's ugly foul head again,under many different guises, and the people allowed those in government to divide us again, the damn games were played again, if we all stood together basically, and put America FIRST, I can't imagine anyone being able to tear us apart or weaken us, not those in government, not terrorists, not anybody. Some may still try, but we would over come.
America first! If we all took some personal responsibility, followed our constitution,we'd hardly need to be governed, the power would be back in our hands, not those in government, and they work for us period, WE are the employers, they are our employees.
-
-
100%
orndorffter11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well I Was going to give a long comment, but now I do not have to. GWHayduck and Eagle_Eye both did a good job of saying mostly what I wanted. We well and we can,have the American Dream once again, Its there and always has been, just don't give up on the American Dreams or then we well have nothing to look foward to. Americas wounds well heal and so well the people, we must not let anything or anybody do or say anything to make us fall, we have to to let our President know that we are behind him and knowing that hes going to give his all to bandage up America and make her well agan so that we have our Dreams. Both of you gave avery good and wise comments for everyone to read. Be proud of yourselfs and our country, and more so our President Obama who well make it possible. good post Goppy.
Reply -
-
-
100%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It appears you are still bitter from the election.
Reply
This is exactly what America is trying to move away from.
You know, after 911 ... ALL America set aside partisan politics and gave support to George W. Bush ... I get the sense from your tone that if a Democrat had been president at the time ... you would have laughed and mocked him ... unable to put aside your extremist stereotypes ... and show some patriotism towards our nation.
This is what America has to get past ... for the good of the nation.
In essence ... your attitude is one of the gravest threats to America.
.
-
-
0%
Hhussk11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In essence ... your attitude is one of the gravest threats to America
Reply
Any attitude, whether for the betterment or detriment of our country, is a representation of our "Freedom of Speech". The reason it is "free" is because it can and will be interpreted by bias.
For example, Goppy, a conservative reader could just as easily interpret your writings, comments, and attitude as a grave threat to America.
And therefore, in essence, a person's attitude is the greatest freedom and contribution we have in this free society. Certainly, by no means, is it a grave threat.
It becomes a grave threat when we no longer allow comments and attitudes to be freely expressed. -
-
100%
Poulenc11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bipartisanship--that would mean disavowing Washington's p*ssing-contest mentality in favor of a higher good.
Reply
As long as the name of the game is getting reelected, pols will do all they can to represent their perceived constituency, which is to say, kowtow to lowest common denominator opinion.
Also, people tend to forget that one's politics are a function of one's personality; to "capitulate" to the other side is to risk one's sense of the way the world should work, to risk discomfort or threat to one's "integrity."
But O.happily and appropriately looks neither to the left nor right (double meaning, etc.) and forges ahead.-
20%
Hhussk11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bipartisanship--that would mean disavowing Washington's p*ssing-contest mentality in favor of a higher good.
Reply
Once again, the term "good" is invoked. "Greater" good, "higher" good, and "what's good for the country".
I would suggest for anyone commenting on the politics of the United States, that they actually read our Constitution and the documents leading to its creation. It was forged on the basis that we need to be critical of our government. It was based on the preconceived notion that government should not get in the way. It even eludes to the fact that larger government creates greater corruption.
Suggesting that this is merely a "p*ssing-contest" and favoring the disavowal of opposition for a "higher good" can be attributed to Adolf Hitler's philosophy of nazism. -
100%
mesodude11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"As long as the name of the game is getting reelected, pols will do all they can to represent their perceived constituency, which is to say, kowtow to lowest common denominator opinion."
Reply
--The thing is, that's apparently what a lot of people want. How else do you explain why posters from the right who are still slapping Bush on the back because he ignored all of his critics for 8 years now insisting that it's time to start piling onto Obama--just because? How do you explain Mitch McConnell and other Bushies returning to Congress time and time again? Clearly some Americans enjoy getting smacked down at the polls because they keep electing the same Bush loyalists. -
100%
memestryker11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"O.happily and appropriately looks neither to the left nor right"
Reply
Except when he does. Read his website. Yes, there are some generalities that allow people to use their imaginations, and yes, he's gone center or even right on some issues. And he's remained left or even far left on others. He's definitely looking.
I certainly wouldn't give him or any politician blanket support .
-
-
-
NefausComment removed: Spam
More News
Fox News Politics
Extending Federal Benefits to Same-Sex Couples Will Cost $898M, CBO Says
Gay Marriage Opponents Push to Let Voters Decide
Lawmakers to Tackle Concerns Over Cost, Abortion in Health Care Negotiations
Congress to Probe Attempted Airline Attack, Consider Added Security Precautions
Both Parties to Highlight Bill in Bid to Win Over 2010 Voters
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.