Change We Can Believe In

Share:

I am sure this will get me into a lot of hot water with those on the left. But so far so good with Barack Obama. I am not going to argue he’s not going to make a good deal of mistakes along the way. What I am going to say is I like his governing philosophy so far. He is bringing in high profile people, who he doesn’t necessarily agree with on everything, people with stature, experience, people who can challenge his assumptions. The biggest flaw of the Bush administration is that Bush never allowed his core assumptions to be challenged.

I will grant anyone that on paper his foreign policy team should have been able to do that–Powell, Rumsfeld, and Rice should have been formidable. However, Powell was marginalized from the beginning, and everyone fell into dangerous group-think. Under other conditions, Rice might have been more effective. So naming a strong team on paper is no guarantee. However, that’s where the mentality of the leader comes into play. Bush never had a day of intellectual curiosity or philosophical doubt in his life. Obama from all accounts likes to be challenged, likes to consider opposing viewpoints, and I think that mindset will serve him well as long as he remains true to it. We can talk about the Hillary Clinton pick all day, and go back and forth on it. To me it is a high risk-high reward endeavor. It hearkens back I think to the popular punditry prior to the democratic convention. The question was whether the Clintons could bury the personal hatchet with Obama and support him. I really was not concerned about that because the Clintons are political professionals first and foremost. For the same reason, Hillary is not going to go off on her own as a Secretary of State because that would undermine her own self-interest. She needs to succeed in this job if she wants a future. That’s a powerful agent and motivation for checking herself.

In the meantime she brings a number of positives to the Obama team. She is well-regarded through out the world. She is smart and tough. I think the tough part appeals to Obama. A lot of people suggested that John Kerry would have been a good pick, but Kerry has a strong wimp side to him. He has strong principles and he’s smart, but he could just as easily cave on things. One thing you know about Hillary is that she will not back down. What she lacks in pure experience in diplomacy and international relations, she makes up for in a lot of other ways.

The downside here is the Clinton drama factor and her own ego, but I think self-interest will check those problems. It was a powerful statement for Obama. The media has overplayed the team of rivals theme, what Obama has really done here is suggest that he is self-confident and not a person threatened by the stature and success of others in administration.

Let’s face it, we have as tough a task ahead on the foreign policy stage as we do with the economy. Since 2003, I think the Bush administration has not paid a single bit of attention to the foreign stage other than Iraq. We have allowed our relationships with our allies to become strained and weakened with the one exception of Britain. We have allowed our relationships with friendly and somewhat unfriendly rivals to become distanced–I am thinking Russian and China as prime examples. We have lost a lot of standing with the conduct of the Iraq war, with Guantanimo, our acceptance of less than stellar human rights policy, our scorn of international institutions and diplomacy, and the perception around the world of arrogance and a cowboy mentality.

The irony is that on September 11, 2001, we really had the sympathy of the world and a strong mandate to do real change and in most real ways we squandered it, regardless of whether or not we might succeed in Iraq, which I think despite security gains is still very dicey at best. Meanwhile Afghanistan has backslid quite a ways, Pakistan is vulnerable at best, the rest of the Middle East is perilously close to far worse.

Shifting gears though, I want to talk about Lieberman. The internet-left as some are going it has universally deplored the stay of execution granted to Lieberman. For me it was the right move for a lot of reasons.

Let me start by suggesting that there are few who dislike Lieberman more than me. And few who have disliked him longer than I have. My dislike goes back to the mid-1990s when I worked for People for the American Way. One of my projects was to help save the National Endowment for the Arts. At that time, Republicans were trying to cut as many government programs as possible and the NEA went on the chopping block.

At issue were a few examples of federal funding going to objectionable materials. However, research done by myself and others, showed much of the objectionable material was quite dated by 1997 and there were already guidelines in place to prevent that type of material from being funded. Even if a few objectionable art materials had been funded, it was a tiny percentage of the overall budget. But the hard right seized on these examples to attempt to kill the NEA.

The heroes of this story were a couple of New England moderate to liberal Republican Senators–Jim Jeffords who would eventually become an independent before he retired and John Chaffee. One of the villains in the story was another New England moderate Joe Lieberman, who supported the stripping of the program. Long before Senator Lieberman was a hawk supporting Iraq and an independent supporting McCain and Senator Norm Coleman, he was a crusading moralist opposing questionable rock lyrics, violence in movies and television, and an opponent of questionable art.

In the end, the NEA won the day and Lieberman lost. My glowing moment coming in the fall of 1997 when I was back in Davis, there was Senator Tom Harkin from Iowa reading my research into the Congressional Record, essentially debunking the Republican arguments about objectionable art. The NEA was re-authorized and still exists today.

So yes, I have long disliked Senator Lieberman to the point it was difficult for me to accept him as the Vice Presidential candidate in 2000. His outspoken support for Iraq was unconscionable in my view. His attacking Barack Obama was repugnant. Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.

Or were they?

For some reason, I think back to the movie Schindler’s List. There was an exchange between the hero Oskar Schindler and the Nazi Concentration Camp Commander Amos Goeth. They were having a discussion about power. Schindler was trying to manipulate Goeth who was power hungry and maniacal.

He argued that true power was actually mercy. “Power is when we have every justification to kill, and we don’t.” In the movie at least, it works for about half a second as Goeth pardons the first person he encounters when he has the opportunity to kill, but then resumes his murderous and barbaric rampage.

But Schindler was right. True power really is the power of mercy. Execution is actually the demonstration of force, rather than power. A subtle but real distinction. But mercy not only demonstrates power more effectively, it also elevates he or she who provides mercy.

The Democrats had every right and every authority to strip Lieberman of his position as chair. But to what end? Governance in the Senate requires compromise. It requires going across the aisle and getting on controversial matters, 60 Senators to go along with something. The Democrats even if they got to 60 votes (which would have to include Lieberman) would still need to convince more moderate Senators to go along with them. They cannot afford to alienate a potential ally. They cannot afford to drive Lieberman into the Republican camp.

They have put Lieberman on notice that he could lose his chairmanship down the line if he bucks them. That may be the most control over him they can exercise. Leading the way to give mercy was Barack Obama, the subject of the attack. He was able to show magnanimity and above all mercy. Revenge and retribution are empty gestures that show weakness rather than strength. Obama has elevated himself above pettiness, above revenge, and has bestowed mercy on a former adversary.

Let us not dismiss the gravity of disloyalty. If we are going to be philosophic, it is instructive to note that in Dante’s depiction of hell, the lowest of the low, the worst spot in hell was reserved for Judas Iscariot, whose crime was betraying God. Of all the sins to be punished, the crime of betrayal was viewed by the ancients as the worst.

Obama and Senate Democrats did the right thing here by not exacting retribution against Lieberman for disloyalty. Lieberman may believe he is a maverick, but disloyalty is one of the gravest indiscretions you can commit. He forgot that. He is very fortunate not to have been stripped of his chair, but he also has to recognize that next time, the Democrats may not be as forgiving.

This was a step Obama had to take if he is serious about moving beyond simple and petty partisanship. It would have been difficult to argue that he was going to change the tone of the Washington discourse if he proceeded to watch over the execution of Lieberman for his crime of being a traitor.

At this point, Obama has been held up so high by so many. It is difficult to imagine he can fulfill expectations. And let us not discount how daunting the task really is. The United States has really had no political leadership for four years. In most ways, the Bush administration checked out after being reelected. If we look back, what is the major accomplishment of the second Bush term? Perhaps the surge–I cannot think of anything else.

Here we are in economic crisis and Bush has almost completely abdicated his authority. The bailout has become a fiasco, moving sideways. It is clear that there were not enough safeguards put into place. Any bailout of the auto industry will be done with the leadership of Congress, not President Bush. It is hard to imagine a more irresponsible administration. The only thing that may redeem Bush’s Presidency would be success in Iraq, which is fragile at best and perhaps worse than that at this point. To many it looks more like a house of cards than a solid foundation.

To many in this country, the next sixty days cannot pay fast enough.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

172 thoughts on “Change We Can Believe In”

  1. Anonymous

    Joe Lieberman was thrown out of the Democratic party. Why should he warm to a party that throws him out?

    Second, Joe Lieberman is a patriotic individual. He supports democratic ideas, but he is not willing to support the idea his own country should lose a war. Obama could take a lesson.

    “His outspoken support for Iraq was unconscionable in my view.”

    Obama’s paling around with multiple unpatriotic figures is unconscionable in my view.

    His attacking Barack Obama was repugnant.

    As if Obama never took shots at his rivals?

    Obama got back some of what he dished out.

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

  2. Anonymous

    Joe Lieberman was thrown out of the Democratic party. Why should he warm to a party that throws him out?

    Second, Joe Lieberman is a patriotic individual. He supports democratic ideas, but he is not willing to support the idea his own country should lose a war. Obama could take a lesson.

    “His outspoken support for Iraq was unconscionable in my view.”

    Obama’s paling around with multiple unpatriotic figures is unconscionable in my view.

    His attacking Barack Obama was repugnant.

    As if Obama never took shots at his rivals?

    Obama got back some of what he dished out.

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

  3. Anonymous

    Joe Lieberman was thrown out of the Democratic party. Why should he warm to a party that throws him out?

    Second, Joe Lieberman is a patriotic individual. He supports democratic ideas, but he is not willing to support the idea his own country should lose a war. Obama could take a lesson.

    “His outspoken support for Iraq was unconscionable in my view.”

    Obama’s paling around with multiple unpatriotic figures is unconscionable in my view.

    His attacking Barack Obama was repugnant.

    As if Obama never took shots at his rivals?

    Obama got back some of what he dished out.

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

  4. Anonymous

    Joe Lieberman was thrown out of the Democratic party. Why should he warm to a party that throws him out?

    Second, Joe Lieberman is a patriotic individual. He supports democratic ideas, but he is not willing to support the idea his own country should lose a war. Obama could take a lesson.

    “His outspoken support for Iraq was unconscionable in my view.”

    Obama’s paling around with multiple unpatriotic figures is unconscionable in my view.

    His attacking Barack Obama was repugnant.

    As if Obama never took shots at his rivals?

    Obama got back some of what he dished out.

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

  5. Dont be naive

    We have allowed our relationships with our allies to become strained and weakened with the one exception of Britain. We have allowed our relationships with friendly and somewhat unfriendly rivals to become distanced–I am thinking Russian and China as prime examples.

    Umm, you have to be careful there. Moscow called up Obama to congratulate him and they were looking forward to working with him and repairing US/Russian relationship. Not more than 24 hours later, they began deploying more missiles in Europe.

    If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?

    You have to question the sincerity of someone when they say they like you. What many have said about Obama is for public consumption. That is not what they necessarily think about him in private.

    Quite frankly, Moscow thinks Obama is a chump, and they can dance all over him because they know he will refuse to use military power to maintain stability in the world.

    Bottom line, look at what someone does, not what they say.

  6. Dont be naive

    We have allowed our relationships with our allies to become strained and weakened with the one exception of Britain. We have allowed our relationships with friendly and somewhat unfriendly rivals to become distanced–I am thinking Russian and China as prime examples.

    Umm, you have to be careful there. Moscow called up Obama to congratulate him and they were looking forward to working with him and repairing US/Russian relationship. Not more than 24 hours later, they began deploying more missiles in Europe.

    If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?

    You have to question the sincerity of someone when they say they like you. What many have said about Obama is for public consumption. That is not what they necessarily think about him in private.

    Quite frankly, Moscow thinks Obama is a chump, and they can dance all over him because they know he will refuse to use military power to maintain stability in the world.

    Bottom line, look at what someone does, not what they say.

  7. Dont be naive

    We have allowed our relationships with our allies to become strained and weakened with the one exception of Britain. We have allowed our relationships with friendly and somewhat unfriendly rivals to become distanced–I am thinking Russian and China as prime examples.

    Umm, you have to be careful there. Moscow called up Obama to congratulate him and they were looking forward to working with him and repairing US/Russian relationship. Not more than 24 hours later, they began deploying more missiles in Europe.

    If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?

    You have to question the sincerity of someone when they say they like you. What many have said about Obama is for public consumption. That is not what they necessarily think about him in private.

    Quite frankly, Moscow thinks Obama is a chump, and they can dance all over him because they know he will refuse to use military power to maintain stability in the world.

    Bottom line, look at what someone does, not what they say.

  8. Dont be naive

    We have allowed our relationships with our allies to become strained and weakened with the one exception of Britain. We have allowed our relationships with friendly and somewhat unfriendly rivals to become distanced–I am thinking Russian and China as prime examples.

    Umm, you have to be careful there. Moscow called up Obama to congratulate him and they were looking forward to working with him and repairing US/Russian relationship. Not more than 24 hours later, they began deploying more missiles in Europe.

    If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?

    You have to question the sincerity of someone when they say they like you. What many have said about Obama is for public consumption. That is not what they necessarily think about him in private.

    Quite frankly, Moscow thinks Obama is a chump, and they can dance all over him because they know he will refuse to use military power to maintain stability in the world.

    Bottom line, look at what someone does, not what they say.

  9. David M. Greenwald

    Lieberman was not thrown out of the Democratic Party. He lost the Democratic primary and then ran as an independent and won. He has since caucused with the Democratic Caucus and retained his chairmanship.

  10. David M. Greenwald

    Lieberman was not thrown out of the Democratic Party. He lost the Democratic primary and then ran as an independent and won. He has since caucused with the Democratic Caucus and retained his chairmanship.

  11. David M. Greenwald

    Lieberman was not thrown out of the Democratic Party. He lost the Democratic primary and then ran as an independent and won. He has since caucused with the Democratic Caucus and retained his chairmanship.

  12. David M. Greenwald

    Lieberman was not thrown out of the Democratic Party. He lost the Democratic primary and then ran as an independent and won. He has since caucused with the Democratic Caucus and retained his chairmanship.

  13. David M. Greenwald

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Yes I believe he support capitalism. Certainly his financial/ fiscal team appointments bear that out in addition to stated views.

  14. David M. Greenwald

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Yes I believe he support capitalism. Certainly his financial/ fiscal team appointments bear that out in addition to stated views.

  15. David M. Greenwald

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Yes I believe he support capitalism. Certainly his financial/ fiscal team appointments bear that out in addition to stated views.

  16. David M. Greenwald

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Yes I believe he support capitalism. Certainly his financial/ fiscal team appointments bear that out in addition to stated views.

  17. David M. Greenwald

    “If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?”

    I never made a comment on whether or not Russia believes Obama is wonderful. I think we have a lot of work to do with our relationship with the Russians. It may in fact be beyond repair, but hostilities would serve neither side’s best interest.

  18. David M. Greenwald

    “If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?”

    I never made a comment on whether or not Russia believes Obama is wonderful. I think we have a lot of work to do with our relationship with the Russians. It may in fact be beyond repair, but hostilities would serve neither side’s best interest.

  19. David M. Greenwald

    “If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?”

    I never made a comment on whether or not Russia believes Obama is wonderful. I think we have a lot of work to do with our relationship with the Russians. It may in fact be beyond repair, but hostilities would serve neither side’s best interest.

  20. David M. Greenwald

    “If they really thought Obama was so wonderful, why ratchet up tensions between the US/Russia?”

    I never made a comment on whether or not Russia believes Obama is wonderful. I think we have a lot of work to do with our relationship with the Russians. It may in fact be beyond repair, but hostilities would serve neither side’s best interest.

  21. ...

    ” this point, Obama has been held up so high by so many. It is difficult to imagine he can fulfill expectations. And let us not discount how daunting the task really is. “

    What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?

    Not so cocky are you?

    Ever since Obama got elected, suddenly his supporters everywhere are saying “don’t expect much!”

    Wow! now that’s inspirational? Where is that hope and change crap we keep hearing about! Obama is going to be our dream! He’s going to repair relationships, fix the economy, get our troops home and leave two countries better off, and cure aids!

    Now his supporters say, you expect too much! Yes, now that’ll help the stock market!

    In the end, Obama may end up being the lord and savior of the GOP. time will tell.

  22. ...

    ” this point, Obama has been held up so high by so many. It is difficult to imagine he can fulfill expectations. And let us not discount how daunting the task really is. “

    What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?

    Not so cocky are you?

    Ever since Obama got elected, suddenly his supporters everywhere are saying “don’t expect much!”

    Wow! now that’s inspirational? Where is that hope and change crap we keep hearing about! Obama is going to be our dream! He’s going to repair relationships, fix the economy, get our troops home and leave two countries better off, and cure aids!

    Now his supporters say, you expect too much! Yes, now that’ll help the stock market!

    In the end, Obama may end up being the lord and savior of the GOP. time will tell.

  23. ...

    ” this point, Obama has been held up so high by so many. It is difficult to imagine he can fulfill expectations. And let us not discount how daunting the task really is. “

    What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?

    Not so cocky are you?

    Ever since Obama got elected, suddenly his supporters everywhere are saying “don’t expect much!”

    Wow! now that’s inspirational? Where is that hope and change crap we keep hearing about! Obama is going to be our dream! He’s going to repair relationships, fix the economy, get our troops home and leave two countries better off, and cure aids!

    Now his supporters say, you expect too much! Yes, now that’ll help the stock market!

    In the end, Obama may end up being the lord and savior of the GOP. time will tell.

  24. ...

    ” this point, Obama has been held up so high by so many. It is difficult to imagine he can fulfill expectations. And let us not discount how daunting the task really is. “

    What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?

    Not so cocky are you?

    Ever since Obama got elected, suddenly his supporters everywhere are saying “don’t expect much!”

    Wow! now that’s inspirational? Where is that hope and change crap we keep hearing about! Obama is going to be our dream! He’s going to repair relationships, fix the economy, get our troops home and leave two countries better off, and cure aids!

    Now his supporters say, you expect too much! Yes, now that’ll help the stock market!

    In the end, Obama may end up being the lord and savior of the GOP. time will tell.

  25. wdf

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

    I don’t know of any substance to the charge that Obama is socialist.

    To me that is campaign hyperbole from desperate Republicans.

    It reminds me of some of the wild charges thrown at Bill Clinton in 1992. Economically, the Clinton administration has plenty of good evidence that they did a much better job than GW Bush.

    It seems that Obama will be relying on plenty of Clinton era veterans for advice and administration.

    I hope for responsible and pro-active involvement of the federal government to help the economy. I didn’t see that with Bush.

  26. wdf

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

    I don’t know of any substance to the charge that Obama is socialist.

    To me that is campaign hyperbole from desperate Republicans.

    It reminds me of some of the wild charges thrown at Bill Clinton in 1992. Economically, the Clinton administration has plenty of good evidence that they did a much better job than GW Bush.

    It seems that Obama will be relying on plenty of Clinton era veterans for advice and administration.

    I hope for responsible and pro-active involvement of the federal government to help the economy. I didn’t see that with Bush.

  27. wdf

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

    I don’t know of any substance to the charge that Obama is socialist.

    To me that is campaign hyperbole from desperate Republicans.

    It reminds me of some of the wild charges thrown at Bill Clinton in 1992. Economically, the Clinton administration has plenty of good evidence that they did a much better job than GW Bush.

    It seems that Obama will be relying on plenty of Clinton era veterans for advice and administration.

    I hope for responsible and pro-active involvement of the federal government to help the economy. I didn’t see that with Bush.

  28. wdf

    ” Frankly, I think he could be forgiven for a lot of things including supporting his longtime friend John McCain and even speaking at the convention (though it gets dicey there), but attacking Obama, giving aid and comfort to the socialist charge, and supporting Norm Coleman were the final death knells for him.”

    You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?

    I don’t know of any substance to the charge that Obama is socialist.

    To me that is campaign hyperbole from desperate Republicans.

    It reminds me of some of the wild charges thrown at Bill Clinton in 1992. Economically, the Clinton administration has plenty of good evidence that they did a much better job than GW Bush.

    It seems that Obama will be relying on plenty of Clinton era veterans for advice and administration.

    I hope for responsible and pro-active involvement of the federal government to help the economy. I didn’t see that with Bush.

  29. Anonymous

    “What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?”

    Republicans had their chance. It’s hard to have confidence that they could be counted on to follow through with traditional Republican values — small government, balanced budget, support of individual rights, strong on economic issues.

  30. Anonymous

    “What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?”

    Republicans had their chance. It’s hard to have confidence that they could be counted on to follow through with traditional Republican values — small government, balanced budget, support of individual rights, strong on economic issues.

  31. Anonymous

    “What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?”

    Republicans had their chance. It’s hard to have confidence that they could be counted on to follow through with traditional Republican values — small government, balanced budget, support of individual rights, strong on economic issues.

  32. Anonymous

    “What’s the matter DPD, you don’t have confidence in your lord and savior?”

    Republicans had their chance. It’s hard to have confidence that they could be counted on to follow through with traditional Republican values — small government, balanced budget, support of individual rights, strong on economic issues.

  33. David M. Greenwald

    I supported Obama for President for a variety of reasons and I am hopeful that he is successful. That has never been assured. I don’t view him as a savior. I do think he has proven to be inspirational to a wide range of people in this country and that is beneficial. I also am a realist, I see the current situation and the political situation is intentionally designed to eschew rapid changes–and probably that is for the good most of the time. Why so condescending?

  34. David M. Greenwald

    I supported Obama for President for a variety of reasons and I am hopeful that he is successful. That has never been assured. I don’t view him as a savior. I do think he has proven to be inspirational to a wide range of people in this country and that is beneficial. I also am a realist, I see the current situation and the political situation is intentionally designed to eschew rapid changes–and probably that is for the good most of the time. Why so condescending?

  35. David M. Greenwald

    I supported Obama for President for a variety of reasons and I am hopeful that he is successful. That has never been assured. I don’t view him as a savior. I do think he has proven to be inspirational to a wide range of people in this country and that is beneficial. I also am a realist, I see the current situation and the political situation is intentionally designed to eschew rapid changes–and probably that is for the good most of the time. Why so condescending?

  36. David M. Greenwald

    I supported Obama for President for a variety of reasons and I am hopeful that he is successful. That has never been assured. I don’t view him as a savior. I do think he has proven to be inspirational to a wide range of people in this country and that is beneficial. I also am a realist, I see the current situation and the political situation is intentionally designed to eschew rapid changes–and probably that is for the good most of the time. Why so condescending?

  37. Don Shor

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Like every other major party candidate, Democratic and Republican, and like every president of the last 100 years, Obama supports a mixed economy. They differ only in the degree to which they believe government should be involved via regulation, spending programs, and entitlement programs.

  38. Don Shor

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Like every other major party candidate, Democratic and Republican, and like every president of the last 100 years, Obama supports a mixed economy. They differ only in the degree to which they believe government should be involved via regulation, spending programs, and entitlement programs.

  39. Don Shor

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Like every other major party candidate, Democratic and Republican, and like every president of the last 100 years, Obama supports a mixed economy. They differ only in the degree to which they believe government should be involved via regulation, spending programs, and entitlement programs.

  40. Don Shor

    “You think Obama supports capitalism? Don’t you know your own candidate?”

    Like every other major party candidate, Democratic and Republican, and like every president of the last 100 years, Obama supports a mixed economy. They differ only in the degree to which they believe government should be involved via regulation, spending programs, and entitlement programs.

  41. Rich Rifkin

    “The biggest flaw of the Bush administration is that Bush never allowed his core assumptions to be challenged.”

    The biggest flaw was Bush’s brain. When his aides or generals told him what to do or think, he didn’t have the intellect to question them. When things went poorly, Bush didn’t have the sense of how to change course.

    “Bush never had a day of intellectual curiosity or philosophical doubt in his life.”

    I don’t know about “philosophical doubt.” He became a born-again Christian in his 30s. However, he’s just not smart. That’s a limitation in the president we don’t need. Sarah Palin, anyone?

    “Hillary is not going to go off on her own as a Secretary of State because that would undermine her own self-interest.”

    There is a false assumption of some people on the left: that Hillary and Barack have significantly different views on foreign policy. They don’t.

    “A lot of people suggested that John Kerry would have been a good pick, but Kerry has a strong wimp side to him.”

    Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.

    “We have lost a lot of standing with the conduct of the Iraq war, with Guantanimo.”

    It’s Guantanamo; or Guantánamo in Spanish.

    “Let me start by suggesting that there are few who dislike Lieberman more than I.”

    Ned Lamont.

    “They have put Lieberman on notice that he could lose his chairmanship down the line if he bucks them. That may be the most control over him they can exercise.”

    To what you have said I would add that Lieberman, by retaining his chairmanship and staying in the Democratic caucus, is less powerful in every way except on that one committee. If he wants to fight against a bill that they majority of his party favors, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t want to vote to kill a fillibuster, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t like an Obama nominee and wants to vote against her, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship.

    Lieberman is now walking on eggshells. As long as Reid has the chairmanship to threaten him with, Joe Lieberman is the weakest senator out of 100. He has no freedom at all, outside of his committee.

    “If we look back, what is the major accomplishment of the second Bush term? Perhaps the surge–I cannot think of anything else.”

    It’s the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the SCOTUS. Whether you like them or not, they will carry on the conservative tenor of the Court for another 20 years.

    “To many in this country, the next sixty days cannot pay fast enough.”

    Are you getting paid on January 20?

  42. Rich Rifkin

    “The biggest flaw of the Bush administration is that Bush never allowed his core assumptions to be challenged.”

    The biggest flaw was Bush’s brain. When his aides or generals told him what to do or think, he didn’t have the intellect to question them. When things went poorly, Bush didn’t have the sense of how to change course.

    “Bush never had a day of intellectual curiosity or philosophical doubt in his life.”

    I don’t know about “philosophical doubt.” He became a born-again Christian in his 30s. However, he’s just not smart. That’s a limitation in the president we don’t need. Sarah Palin, anyone?

    “Hillary is not going to go off on her own as a Secretary of State because that would undermine her own self-interest.”

    There is a false assumption of some people on the left: that Hillary and Barack have significantly different views on foreign policy. They don’t.

    “A lot of people suggested that John Kerry would have been a good pick, but Kerry has a strong wimp side to him.”

    Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.

    “We have lost a lot of standing with the conduct of the Iraq war, with Guantanimo.”

    It’s Guantanamo; or Guantánamo in Spanish.

    “Let me start by suggesting that there are few who dislike Lieberman more than I.”

    Ned Lamont.

    “They have put Lieberman on notice that he could lose his chairmanship down the line if he bucks them. That may be the most control over him they can exercise.”

    To what you have said I would add that Lieberman, by retaining his chairmanship and staying in the Democratic caucus, is less powerful in every way except on that one committee. If he wants to fight against a bill that they majority of his party favors, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t want to vote to kill a fillibuster, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t like an Obama nominee and wants to vote against her, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship.

    Lieberman is now walking on eggshells. As long as Reid has the chairmanship to threaten him with, Joe Lieberman is the weakest senator out of 100. He has no freedom at all, outside of his committee.

    “If we look back, what is the major accomplishment of the second Bush term? Perhaps the surge–I cannot think of anything else.”

    It’s the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the SCOTUS. Whether you like them or not, they will carry on the conservative tenor of the Court for another 20 years.

    “To many in this country, the next sixty days cannot pay fast enough.”

    Are you getting paid on January 20?

  43. Rich Rifkin

    “The biggest flaw of the Bush administration is that Bush never allowed his core assumptions to be challenged.”

    The biggest flaw was Bush’s brain. When his aides or generals told him what to do or think, he didn’t have the intellect to question them. When things went poorly, Bush didn’t have the sense of how to change course.

    “Bush never had a day of intellectual curiosity or philosophical doubt in his life.”

    I don’t know about “philosophical doubt.” He became a born-again Christian in his 30s. However, he’s just not smart. That’s a limitation in the president we don’t need. Sarah Palin, anyone?

    “Hillary is not going to go off on her own as a Secretary of State because that would undermine her own self-interest.”

    There is a false assumption of some people on the left: that Hillary and Barack have significantly different views on foreign policy. They don’t.

    “A lot of people suggested that John Kerry would have been a good pick, but Kerry has a strong wimp side to him.”

    Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.

    “We have lost a lot of standing with the conduct of the Iraq war, with Guantanimo.”

    It’s Guantanamo; or Guantánamo in Spanish.

    “Let me start by suggesting that there are few who dislike Lieberman more than I.”

    Ned Lamont.

    “They have put Lieberman on notice that he could lose his chairmanship down the line if he bucks them. That may be the most control over him they can exercise.”

    To what you have said I would add that Lieberman, by retaining his chairmanship and staying in the Democratic caucus, is less powerful in every way except on that one committee. If he wants to fight against a bill that they majority of his party favors, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t want to vote to kill a fillibuster, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t like an Obama nominee and wants to vote against her, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship.

    Lieberman is now walking on eggshells. As long as Reid has the chairmanship to threaten him with, Joe Lieberman is the weakest senator out of 100. He has no freedom at all, outside of his committee.

    “If we look back, what is the major accomplishment of the second Bush term? Perhaps the surge–I cannot think of anything else.”

    It’s the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the SCOTUS. Whether you like them or not, they will carry on the conservative tenor of the Court for another 20 years.

    “To many in this country, the next sixty days cannot pay fast enough.”

    Are you getting paid on January 20?

  44. Rich Rifkin

    “The biggest flaw of the Bush administration is that Bush never allowed his core assumptions to be challenged.”

    The biggest flaw was Bush’s brain. When his aides or generals told him what to do or think, he didn’t have the intellect to question them. When things went poorly, Bush didn’t have the sense of how to change course.

    “Bush never had a day of intellectual curiosity or philosophical doubt in his life.”

    I don’t know about “philosophical doubt.” He became a born-again Christian in his 30s. However, he’s just not smart. That’s a limitation in the president we don’t need. Sarah Palin, anyone?

    “Hillary is not going to go off on her own as a Secretary of State because that would undermine her own self-interest.”

    There is a false assumption of some people on the left: that Hillary and Barack have significantly different views on foreign policy. They don’t.

    “A lot of people suggested that John Kerry would have been a good pick, but Kerry has a strong wimp side to him.”

    Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.

    “We have lost a lot of standing with the conduct of the Iraq war, with Guantanimo.”

    It’s Guantanamo; or Guantánamo in Spanish.

    “Let me start by suggesting that there are few who dislike Lieberman more than I.”

    Ned Lamont.

    “They have put Lieberman on notice that he could lose his chairmanship down the line if he bucks them. That may be the most control over him they can exercise.”

    To what you have said I would add that Lieberman, by retaining his chairmanship and staying in the Democratic caucus, is less powerful in every way except on that one committee. If he wants to fight against a bill that they majority of his party favors, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t want to vote to kill a fillibuster, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship. If he doesn’t like an Obama nominee and wants to vote against her, Reid can threaten his committee chairmanship.

    Lieberman is now walking on eggshells. As long as Reid has the chairmanship to threaten him with, Joe Lieberman is the weakest senator out of 100. He has no freedom at all, outside of his committee.

    “If we look back, what is the major accomplishment of the second Bush term? Perhaps the surge–I cannot think of anything else.”

    It’s the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the SCOTUS. Whether you like them or not, they will carry on the conservative tenor of the Court for another 20 years.

    “To many in this country, the next sixty days cannot pay fast enough.”

    Are you getting paid on January 20?

  45. Not going to get away with it

    Why so condescending?

    because you are not going to get away with it, that’s why.

    You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running, now
    You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform. Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching, so you bet your last dollar Obama will be held accountable also. And I am going to make sure he is.

    Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.

  46. Not going to get away with it

    Why so condescending?

    because you are not going to get away with it, that’s why.

    You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running, now
    You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform. Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching, so you bet your last dollar Obama will be held accountable also. And I am going to make sure he is.

    Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.

  47. Not going to get away with it

    Why so condescending?

    because you are not going to get away with it, that’s why.

    You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running, now
    You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform. Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching, so you bet your last dollar Obama will be held accountable also. And I am going to make sure he is.

    Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.

  48. Not going to get away with it

    Why so condescending?

    because you are not going to get away with it, that’s why.

    You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running, now
    You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform. Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching, so you bet your last dollar Obama will be held accountable also. And I am going to make sure he is.

    Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.

  49. Rich Rifkin

    “You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform.”

    D. Greenwald’s vast power notwithstanding, where the bar is set on this blog won’t affect Mr. Obama’s potential second term.

    “Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once.”

    Wasn’t electing someone who struggles to speak a simple English sentence*, someone who doesn’t have a native language, lowering the bar in the first place?

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college? If his father had never been president, would even his party have nominated someone who had done so little to be its standard bearer? Was Bush such a great and clever thinker that he put forth profound ideas? Or was he such a brilliant administrator that he efficiently effected the great ideas of others?

    Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

  50. Rich Rifkin

    “You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform.”

    D. Greenwald’s vast power notwithstanding, where the bar is set on this blog won’t affect Mr. Obama’s potential second term.

    “Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once.”

    Wasn’t electing someone who struggles to speak a simple English sentence*, someone who doesn’t have a native language, lowering the bar in the first place?

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college? If his father had never been president, would even his party have nominated someone who had done so little to be its standard bearer? Was Bush such a great and clever thinker that he put forth profound ideas? Or was he such a brilliant administrator that he efficiently effected the great ideas of others?

    Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

  51. Rich Rifkin

    “You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform.”

    D. Greenwald’s vast power notwithstanding, where the bar is set on this blog won’t affect Mr. Obama’s potential second term.

    “Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once.”

    Wasn’t electing someone who struggles to speak a simple English sentence*, someone who doesn’t have a native language, lowering the bar in the first place?

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college? If his father had never been president, would even his party have nominated someone who had done so little to be its standard bearer? Was Bush such a great and clever thinker that he put forth profound ideas? Or was he such a brilliant administrator that he efficiently effected the great ideas of others?

    Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

  52. Rich Rifkin

    “You want to make sure Obama is going to get elected for a second term by lowering the bar and saying how unrealistic it is for him to perform.”

    D. Greenwald’s vast power notwithstanding, where the bar is set on this blog won’t affect Mr. Obama’s potential second term.

    “Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once.”

    Wasn’t electing someone who struggles to speak a simple English sentence*, someone who doesn’t have a native language, lowering the bar in the first place?

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college? If his father had never been president, would even his party have nominated someone who had done so little to be its standard bearer? Was Bush such a great and clever thinker that he put forth profound ideas? Or was he such a brilliant administrator that he efficiently effected the great ideas of others?

    Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

  53. Rich Rifkin

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    50. “I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn’t here.” -at the President’s Economic Forum in Waco, Texas, Aug. 13, 2002

    49. “We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease.” -Gothenburg, Sweden, June 14, 2001

    48. “You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.” -Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001

    47. “I am here to make an announcement that this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly out of Ronald Reagan Airport.” –Washington, D.C., Oct. 3, 2001

    46. “Tribal sovereignty means that; it’s sovereign. I mean, you’re a — you’ve been given sovereignty, and you’re viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.” –Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    45. “I couldn’t imagine somebody like Osama bin Laden understanding the joy of Hanukkah.” –at a White House menorah lighting ceremony, Washington, D.C., Dec. 10, 2001 (Listen to audio clip)

    44. “You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.” –interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

    43. “The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th.” –Washington, D.C., July 12, 2007

    42. “I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president.” –as quoted in Bob Woodward’s Bush at War

    41. “F*ck Saddam. We’re taking him out.” –to three U.S. senators in March 2002, one year before the Iraq invasion, as quoted by Time magazine

    40. “Oh, no, we’re not going to have any casualties.” –discussing the Iraq war with Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson in 2003, as quoted by Robertson

    39. “I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me.” –talking to key Republicans about Iraq, as quoted by Bob Woodward

    38. “I hear there’s rumors on the Internets that we’re going to have a draft.” –presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    37. “I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.” –Greater Nashua, N.H., Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 27, 2000 (Listen to audio clip)

    36. “Do you have blacks, too?” –to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

    35. “This foreign policy stuff is a little frustrating.” –as quoted by the New York Daily News, April 23, 2002

    34. “My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we’re going to run out of debt to retire.” –radio address, Feb. 24, 2001

    33. “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” –on “Good Morning America,” Sept. 1, 2005, six days after repeated warnings from experts about the scope of damage expected from Hurricane Katrina

    32. “I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.” –Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000

    31. “I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake.” –on his best moment in office, interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, May 7, 2006

    For the top 30 on this list, click here.

  54. Rich Rifkin

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    50. “I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn’t here.” -at the President’s Economic Forum in Waco, Texas, Aug. 13, 2002

    49. “We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease.” -Gothenburg, Sweden, June 14, 2001

    48. “You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.” -Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001

    47. “I am here to make an announcement that this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly out of Ronald Reagan Airport.” –Washington, D.C., Oct. 3, 2001

    46. “Tribal sovereignty means that; it’s sovereign. I mean, you’re a — you’ve been given sovereignty, and you’re viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.” –Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    45. “I couldn’t imagine somebody like Osama bin Laden understanding the joy of Hanukkah.” –at a White House menorah lighting ceremony, Washington, D.C., Dec. 10, 2001 (Listen to audio clip)

    44. “You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.” –interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

    43. “The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th.” –Washington, D.C., July 12, 2007

    42. “I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president.” –as quoted in Bob Woodward’s Bush at War

    41. “F*ck Saddam. We’re taking him out.” –to three U.S. senators in March 2002, one year before the Iraq invasion, as quoted by Time magazine

    40. “Oh, no, we’re not going to have any casualties.” –discussing the Iraq war with Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson in 2003, as quoted by Robertson

    39. “I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me.” –talking to key Republicans about Iraq, as quoted by Bob Woodward

    38. “I hear there’s rumors on the Internets that we’re going to have a draft.” –presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    37. “I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.” –Greater Nashua, N.H., Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 27, 2000 (Listen to audio clip)

    36. “Do you have blacks, too?” –to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

    35. “This foreign policy stuff is a little frustrating.” –as quoted by the New York Daily News, April 23, 2002

    34. “My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we’re going to run out of debt to retire.” –radio address, Feb. 24, 2001

    33. “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” –on “Good Morning America,” Sept. 1, 2005, six days after repeated warnings from experts about the scope of damage expected from Hurricane Katrina

    32. “I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.” –Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000

    31. “I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake.” –on his best moment in office, interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, May 7, 2006

    For the top 30 on this list, click here.

  55. Rich Rifkin

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    50. “I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn’t here.” -at the President’s Economic Forum in Waco, Texas, Aug. 13, 2002

    49. “We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease.” -Gothenburg, Sweden, June 14, 2001

    48. “You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.” -Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001

    47. “I am here to make an announcement that this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly out of Ronald Reagan Airport.” –Washington, D.C., Oct. 3, 2001

    46. “Tribal sovereignty means that; it’s sovereign. I mean, you’re a — you’ve been given sovereignty, and you’re viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.” –Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    45. “I couldn’t imagine somebody like Osama bin Laden understanding the joy of Hanukkah.” –at a White House menorah lighting ceremony, Washington, D.C., Dec. 10, 2001 (Listen to audio clip)

    44. “You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.” –interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

    43. “The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th.” –Washington, D.C., July 12, 2007

    42. “I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president.” –as quoted in Bob Woodward’s Bush at War

    41. “F*ck Saddam. We’re taking him out.” –to three U.S. senators in March 2002, one year before the Iraq invasion, as quoted by Time magazine

    40. “Oh, no, we’re not going to have any casualties.” –discussing the Iraq war with Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson in 2003, as quoted by Robertson

    39. “I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me.” –talking to key Republicans about Iraq, as quoted by Bob Woodward

    38. “I hear there’s rumors on the Internets that we’re going to have a draft.” –presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    37. “I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.” –Greater Nashua, N.H., Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 27, 2000 (Listen to audio clip)

    36. “Do you have blacks, too?” –to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

    35. “This foreign policy stuff is a little frustrating.” –as quoted by the New York Daily News, April 23, 2002

    34. “My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we’re going to run out of debt to retire.” –radio address, Feb. 24, 2001

    33. “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” –on “Good Morning America,” Sept. 1, 2005, six days after repeated warnings from experts about the scope of damage expected from Hurricane Katrina

    32. “I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.” –Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000

    31. “I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake.” –on his best moment in office, interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, May 7, 2006

    For the top 30 on this list, click here.

  56. Rich Rifkin

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    50. “I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn’t here.” -at the President’s Economic Forum in Waco, Texas, Aug. 13, 2002

    49. “We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease.” -Gothenburg, Sweden, June 14, 2001

    48. “You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.” -Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001

    47. “I am here to make an announcement that this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly out of Ronald Reagan Airport.” –Washington, D.C., Oct. 3, 2001

    46. “Tribal sovereignty means that; it’s sovereign. I mean, you’re a — you’ve been given sovereignty, and you’re viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.” –Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    45. “I couldn’t imagine somebody like Osama bin Laden understanding the joy of Hanukkah.” –at a White House menorah lighting ceremony, Washington, D.C., Dec. 10, 2001 (Listen to audio clip)

    44. “You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.” –interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

    43. “The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th.” –Washington, D.C., July 12, 2007

    42. “I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president.” –as quoted in Bob Woodward’s Bush at War

    41. “F*ck Saddam. We’re taking him out.” –to three U.S. senators in March 2002, one year before the Iraq invasion, as quoted by Time magazine

    40. “Oh, no, we’re not going to have any casualties.” –discussing the Iraq war with Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson in 2003, as quoted by Robertson

    39. “I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me.” –talking to key Republicans about Iraq, as quoted by Bob Woodward

    38. “I hear there’s rumors on the Internets that we’re going to have a draft.” –presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004 (Watch video clip)

    37. “I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.” –Greater Nashua, N.H., Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 27, 2000 (Listen to audio clip)

    36. “Do you have blacks, too?” –to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

    35. “This foreign policy stuff is a little frustrating.” –as quoted by the New York Daily News, April 23, 2002

    34. “My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we’re going to run out of debt to retire.” –radio address, Feb. 24, 2001

    33. “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” –on “Good Morning America,” Sept. 1, 2005, six days after repeated warnings from experts about the scope of damage expected from Hurricane Katrina

    32. “I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.” –Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000

    31. “I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake.” –on his best moment in office, interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, May 7, 2006

    For the top 30 on this list, click here.

  57. Dont hold your breath.

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    as if Mr. “I did not have s. relations with that woman” had a bar raised?

    he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.

    excuse me, but if I got caught doing what Clinton did on the job, I would have been fired. The democrats didn’t seem to care, even wanted it hushed.

    Clinton supporters hardly have room to talk about raised bars.

    Furthermore, Bush has been criticized every step of the way for blunders and things he said. There was hardly a time on the tonight show where Jay Leno would not call him stupid.

    he took fire all day, every day.

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

    yes, it will. and considering the inexperience of Obama, don’t hold your breath.

  58. Dont hold your breath.

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    as if Mr. “I did not have s. relations with that woman” had a bar raised?

    he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.

    excuse me, but if I got caught doing what Clinton did on the job, I would have been fired. The democrats didn’t seem to care, even wanted it hushed.

    Clinton supporters hardly have room to talk about raised bars.

    Furthermore, Bush has been criticized every step of the way for blunders and things he said. There was hardly a time on the tonight show where Jay Leno would not call him stupid.

    he took fire all day, every day.

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

    yes, it will. and considering the inexperience of Obama, don’t hold your breath.

  59. Dont hold your breath.

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    as if Mr. “I did not have s. relations with that woman” had a bar raised?

    he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.

    excuse me, but if I got caught doing what Clinton did on the job, I would have been fired. The democrats didn’t seem to care, even wanted it hushed.

    Clinton supporters hardly have room to talk about raised bars.

    Furthermore, Bush has been criticized every step of the way for blunders and things he said. There was hardly a time on the tonight show where Jay Leno would not call him stupid.

    he took fire all day, every day.

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

    yes, it will. and considering the inexperience of Obama, don’t hold your breath.

  60. Dont hold your breath.

    * Some quotes from the man who NEVER, NOT ONCE had the bar lowered:

    as if Mr. “I did not have s. relations with that woman” had a bar raised?

    he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.

    excuse me, but if I got caught doing what Clinton did on the job, I would have been fired. The democrats didn’t seem to care, even wanted it hushed.

    Clinton supporters hardly have room to talk about raised bars.

    Furthermore, Bush has been criticized every step of the way for blunders and things he said. There was hardly a time on the tonight show where Jay Leno would not call him stupid.

    he took fire all day, every day.

    “Obama is going to have to implement hope and change or he’s out just as fast as the Republicans were.”

    His reelection will depend on the public perceptions of peace and prosperity in 2012.

    yes, it will. and considering the inexperience of Obama, don’t hold your breath.

  61. Rich Rifkin

    “he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.”

    This is your defense of Bush?

  62. Rich Rifkin

    “he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.”

    This is your defense of Bush?

  63. Rich Rifkin

    “he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.”

    This is your defense of Bush?

  64. Rich Rifkin

    “he could have his genitals in the mouth of any woman on the job he wasn’t doing so long as the stock market was good at the time.”

    This is your defense of Bush?

  65. David M. Greenwald

    “You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running”

    Okay, please site examples with quotes and dates. Thanks. I don’t think I even wrote that much about Obama himself before the election.

  66. David M. Greenwald

    “You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running”

    Okay, please site examples with quotes and dates. Thanks. I don’t think I even wrote that much about Obama himself before the election.

  67. David M. Greenwald

    “You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running”

    Okay, please site examples with quotes and dates. Thanks. I don’t think I even wrote that much about Obama himself before the election.

  68. David M. Greenwald

    “You had the bar real high for Obama when he was running”

    Okay, please site examples with quotes and dates. Thanks. I don’t think I even wrote that much about Obama himself before the election.

  69. Anonymous

    Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching
    I agree with this. A democrat will never admit this. When Bush makes a mistake, he is “dumb”. When Obama makes a mistake, he is “learning”.

    Remember Joe Biden said the world will test Obama in the next 6 months. He put Hillary at Sec of State so he could blame her if anything major in the world goes wrong. If nothing major goes wrong, full credit will go to the Obama administration (because he will say Hillary is simply following the policies he laid out as president). I’m sure Hillary is aware of this too and is taking the gamble with that in mind.

  70. Anonymous

    Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching
    I agree with this. A democrat will never admit this. When Bush makes a mistake, he is “dumb”. When Obama makes a mistake, he is “learning”.

    Remember Joe Biden said the world will test Obama in the next 6 months. He put Hillary at Sec of State so he could blame her if anything major in the world goes wrong. If nothing major goes wrong, full credit will go to the Obama administration (because he will say Hillary is simply following the policies he laid out as president). I’m sure Hillary is aware of this too and is taking the gamble with that in mind.

  71. Anonymous

    Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching
    I agree with this. A democrat will never admit this. When Bush makes a mistake, he is “dumb”. When Obama makes a mistake, he is “learning”.

    Remember Joe Biden said the world will test Obama in the next 6 months. He put Hillary at Sec of State so he could blame her if anything major in the world goes wrong. If nothing major goes wrong, full credit will go to the Obama administration (because he will say Hillary is simply following the policies he laid out as president). I’m sure Hillary is aware of this too and is taking the gamble with that in mind.

  72. Anonymous

    Bush never got a lowered bar. Not once. Even in crises. You held him accountable every step of the way with your bitching
    I agree with this. A democrat will never admit this. When Bush makes a mistake, he is “dumb”. When Obama makes a mistake, he is “learning”.

    Remember Joe Biden said the world will test Obama in the next 6 months. He put Hillary at Sec of State so he could blame her if anything major in the world goes wrong. If nothing major goes wrong, full credit will go to the Obama administration (because he will say Hillary is simply following the policies he laid out as president). I’m sure Hillary is aware of this too and is taking the gamble with that in mind.

  73. David M. Greenwald

    Really, never once got a lowered bar? I disagree. On September 12, 2001, he had around a 90 percent approval rating. He has since dropped 65 percent off that. He had a chance to do a lot of great things and he largely squandered it. As Rich points out, he named two supreme court justices and enacted his “surge” strategy, that is the sum total of what he did the second term of his presidency. Meanwhile, the world has vastly changed.

    I’m still waiting for someone to quote me where I had raised the bar for Obama prior to the election as opposed to my current view, based on my assessment of the severity of the economic situation which has only gotten worse since the election.

  74. David M. Greenwald

    Really, never once got a lowered bar? I disagree. On September 12, 2001, he had around a 90 percent approval rating. He has since dropped 65 percent off that. He had a chance to do a lot of great things and he largely squandered it. As Rich points out, he named two supreme court justices and enacted his “surge” strategy, that is the sum total of what he did the second term of his presidency. Meanwhile, the world has vastly changed.

    I’m still waiting for someone to quote me where I had raised the bar for Obama prior to the election as opposed to my current view, based on my assessment of the severity of the economic situation which has only gotten worse since the election.

  75. David M. Greenwald

    Really, never once got a lowered bar? I disagree. On September 12, 2001, he had around a 90 percent approval rating. He has since dropped 65 percent off that. He had a chance to do a lot of great things and he largely squandered it. As Rich points out, he named two supreme court justices and enacted his “surge” strategy, that is the sum total of what he did the second term of his presidency. Meanwhile, the world has vastly changed.

    I’m still waiting for someone to quote me where I had raised the bar for Obama prior to the election as opposed to my current view, based on my assessment of the severity of the economic situation which has only gotten worse since the election.

  76. David M. Greenwald

    Really, never once got a lowered bar? I disagree. On September 12, 2001, he had around a 90 percent approval rating. He has since dropped 65 percent off that. He had a chance to do a lot of great things and he largely squandered it. As Rich points out, he named two supreme court justices and enacted his “surge” strategy, that is the sum total of what he did the second term of his presidency. Meanwhile, the world has vastly changed.

    I’m still waiting for someone to quote me where I had raised the bar for Obama prior to the election as opposed to my current view, based on my assessment of the severity of the economic situation which has only gotten worse since the election.

  77. Egads

    “Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.”

    Right or wrong? Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right? Where are you coming from?

  78. Egads

    “Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.”

    Right or wrong? Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right? Where are you coming from?

  79. Egads

    “Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.”

    Right or wrong? Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right? Where are you coming from?

  80. Egads

    “Kerry is a combat veteran. That’s tough. And he showed more toughness in coming home and leading the opposition to the Vietnam War, right or wrong.”

    Right or wrong? Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right? Where are you coming from?

  81. My View

    “When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?”

    Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.

    Did Bush do everything right? No. He didn’t pursue the money trail hard enough. Nor did he pay attention to the economy. On the domestic front he was weak. So was his father.

  82. My View

    “When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?”

    Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.

    Did Bush do everything right? No. He didn’t pursue the money trail hard enough. Nor did he pay attention to the economy. On the domestic front he was weak. So was his father.

  83. My View

    “When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?”

    Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.

    Did Bush do everything right? No. He didn’t pursue the money trail hard enough. Nor did he pay attention to the economy. On the domestic front he was weak. So was his father.

  84. My View

    “When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?”

    Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.

    Did Bush do everything right? No. He didn’t pursue the money trail hard enough. Nor did he pay attention to the economy. On the domestic front he was weak. So was his father.

  85. David M. Greenwald

    “Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right?”

    Consorting with the enemy? That sounds like a soundbite from the 2004 election rather than an accurate portrayal of Kerry’s patriotic but strong opposition to the war. Patriotism doesn’t mean blindly following governmental leaders.

  86. David M. Greenwald

    “Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right?”

    Consorting with the enemy? That sounds like a soundbite from the 2004 election rather than an accurate portrayal of Kerry’s patriotic but strong opposition to the war. Patriotism doesn’t mean blindly following governmental leaders.

  87. David M. Greenwald

    “Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right?”

    Consorting with the enemy? That sounds like a soundbite from the 2004 election rather than an accurate portrayal of Kerry’s patriotic but strong opposition to the war. Patriotism doesn’t mean blindly following governmental leaders.

  88. David M. Greenwald

    “Consorting with the enemy against your own country is right?”

    Consorting with the enemy? That sounds like a soundbite from the 2004 election rather than an accurate portrayal of Kerry’s patriotic but strong opposition to the war. Patriotism doesn’t mean blindly following governmental leaders.

  89. David M. Greenwald

    “He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan”

    And then quickly moved on to Iraq and allowed the situation in Afghanistan to erode to the point where we may have to put more troops there, in the meantime, he missed capturing Bin Laden, which was the actual point of invading Afghanistan.

  90. David M. Greenwald

    “He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan”

    And then quickly moved on to Iraq and allowed the situation in Afghanistan to erode to the point where we may have to put more troops there, in the meantime, he missed capturing Bin Laden, which was the actual point of invading Afghanistan.

  91. David M. Greenwald

    “He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan”

    And then quickly moved on to Iraq and allowed the situation in Afghanistan to erode to the point where we may have to put more troops there, in the meantime, he missed capturing Bin Laden, which was the actual point of invading Afghanistan.

  92. David M. Greenwald

    “He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan”

    And then quickly moved on to Iraq and allowed the situation in Afghanistan to erode to the point where we may have to put more troops there, in the meantime, he missed capturing Bin Laden, which was the actual point of invading Afghanistan.

  93. Anonymous

    The airplane came back in pieces on a barge after disassembled and reverse-engineered by the Chinese. They returned unusable junk, not an airplane. The Taliban never left Afghanistan. Democracy was not encouraged, it was created by us and installed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He should have been “encouraging” democracy in places that matter such as Saudi Arabia, the real source of terrorism.

  94. Anonymous

    The airplane came back in pieces on a barge after disassembled and reverse-engineered by the Chinese. They returned unusable junk, not an airplane. The Taliban never left Afghanistan. Democracy was not encouraged, it was created by us and installed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He should have been “encouraging” democracy in places that matter such as Saudi Arabia, the real source of terrorism.

  95. Anonymous

    The airplane came back in pieces on a barge after disassembled and reverse-engineered by the Chinese. They returned unusable junk, not an airplane. The Taliban never left Afghanistan. Democracy was not encouraged, it was created by us and installed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He should have been “encouraging” democracy in places that matter such as Saudi Arabia, the real source of terrorism.

  96. Anonymous

    The airplane came back in pieces on a barge after disassembled and reverse-engineered by the Chinese. They returned unusable junk, not an airplane. The Taliban never left Afghanistan. Democracy was not encouraged, it was created by us and installed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He should have been “encouraging” democracy in places that matter such as Saudi Arabia, the real source of terrorism.

  97. Rich Rifkin

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?

    “Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.”

    You confuse (what you believe to be) accomplishments with a bar, meaning a standard of competence or expectation going in.

    You seem unable to deny that the expectations for Bush were very low, given his poor preparation for the presidency and his limited talents.

  98. Rich Rifkin

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?

    “Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.”

    You confuse (what you believe to be) accomplishments with a bar, meaning a standard of competence or expectation going in.

    You seem unable to deny that the expectations for Bush were very low, given his poor preparation for the presidency and his limited talents.

  99. Rich Rifkin

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?

    “Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.”

    You confuse (what you believe to be) accomplishments with a bar, meaning a standard of competence or expectation going in.

    You seem unable to deny that the expectations for Bush were very low, given his poor preparation for the presidency and his limited talents.

  100. Rich Rifkin

    When we elected Bush in 2000, what great bar did he pass over beyond the electoral college?

    “Let’s see, he got our airplane and military personnel back from China, after they were shot down. He removed the Taliban from Afghanistan; he removed Hussein from power and encouraged democracy abroad.”

    You confuse (what you believe to be) accomplishments with a bar, meaning a standard of competence or expectation going in.

    You seem unable to deny that the expectations for Bush were very low, given his poor preparation for the presidency and his limited talents.

  101. Bushs Fist

    DPD/Rich I’ll take you both on.

    Rich:

    “Nepotism?” Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat? How did she damn near become president? All her own hard work? Or the fact that she stayed married to Bill and forgave his infidelities?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.

    Furthermore, Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms. There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it. Is the same going to happen for Obama? I doubt it. Look at the butt kissing in the reprint of NYTimes reprinted in Sunday’s Enterprise. Not exactly a piece that is objective.

    DPD, your quotes? How about “change we can believe in” at the top of this very page. Then you follow it up by saying don’t expect much from Obama. Doublespeak in a single column.

    Not just you, but the media’s objective is to lower the bar now by saying things like people expect too much from Obama to cover for his mistakes and ineptness, so you guys can guarantee him an unearned 2nd term.

    But I’m not going to let you guys get away with it.

    Obama is not getting the free ride you are trying to give him.

    Someone else on this blog referred to John Kerry. John Kerry’s photo at Saigon museam shows he is the most traitorous figure we have ever had as a presidential candidate.

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

  102. Bushs Fist

    DPD/Rich I’ll take you both on.

    Rich:

    “Nepotism?” Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat? How did she damn near become president? All her own hard work? Or the fact that she stayed married to Bill and forgave his infidelities?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.

    Furthermore, Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms. There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it. Is the same going to happen for Obama? I doubt it. Look at the butt kissing in the reprint of NYTimes reprinted in Sunday’s Enterprise. Not exactly a piece that is objective.

    DPD, your quotes? How about “change we can believe in” at the top of this very page. Then you follow it up by saying don’t expect much from Obama. Doublespeak in a single column.

    Not just you, but the media’s objective is to lower the bar now by saying things like people expect too much from Obama to cover for his mistakes and ineptness, so you guys can guarantee him an unearned 2nd term.

    But I’m not going to let you guys get away with it.

    Obama is not getting the free ride you are trying to give him.

    Someone else on this blog referred to John Kerry. John Kerry’s photo at Saigon museam shows he is the most traitorous figure we have ever had as a presidential candidate.

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

  103. Bushs Fist

    DPD/Rich I’ll take you both on.

    Rich:

    “Nepotism?” Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat? How did she damn near become president? All her own hard work? Or the fact that she stayed married to Bill and forgave his infidelities?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.

    Furthermore, Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms. There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it. Is the same going to happen for Obama? I doubt it. Look at the butt kissing in the reprint of NYTimes reprinted in Sunday’s Enterprise. Not exactly a piece that is objective.

    DPD, your quotes? How about “change we can believe in” at the top of this very page. Then you follow it up by saying don’t expect much from Obama. Doublespeak in a single column.

    Not just you, but the media’s objective is to lower the bar now by saying things like people expect too much from Obama to cover for his mistakes and ineptness, so you guys can guarantee him an unearned 2nd term.

    But I’m not going to let you guys get away with it.

    Obama is not getting the free ride you are trying to give him.

    Someone else on this blog referred to John Kerry. John Kerry’s photo at Saigon museam shows he is the most traitorous figure we have ever had as a presidential candidate.

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

  104. Bushs Fist

    DPD/Rich I’ll take you both on.

    Rich:

    “Nepotism?” Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat? How did she damn near become president? All her own hard work? Or the fact that she stayed married to Bill and forgave his infidelities?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.

    Furthermore, Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms. There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it. Is the same going to happen for Obama? I doubt it. Look at the butt kissing in the reprint of NYTimes reprinted in Sunday’s Enterprise. Not exactly a piece that is objective.

    DPD, your quotes? How about “change we can believe in” at the top of this very page. Then you follow it up by saying don’t expect much from Obama. Doublespeak in a single column.

    Not just you, but the media’s objective is to lower the bar now by saying things like people expect too much from Obama to cover for his mistakes and ineptness, so you guys can guarantee him an unearned 2nd term.

    But I’m not going to let you guys get away with it.

    Obama is not getting the free ride you are trying to give him.

    Someone else on this blog referred to John Kerry. John Kerry’s photo at Saigon museam shows he is the most traitorous figure we have ever had as a presidential candidate.

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

  105. Too bad. McCain lost!

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

    Would you care to compare, point by point, how Bush was better, here?

    And you focus on foreign affairs, with no comment on domestic affairs or economics.

    Our economy sucks, right now.

    How has Bush been good for our economy?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    He was a good community organizer, which he put to good use as a good campaign organizer.

    He was more effective at communicating in a way that more voters identified with.

    He was more disciplined in running his campaign.

    He can add those to his growing resume. Those traits apply to leading.

    In the “free market” of politics, Obama was the better candidate. McCain was not.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    Every candidate has challenges to overcome. Ronald Reagan figured out how to control the media. Obama figured out how to overcome lack of a kind of resume that you would seem to prefer.

  106. Too bad. McCain lost!

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

    Would you care to compare, point by point, how Bush was better, here?

    And you focus on foreign affairs, with no comment on domestic affairs or economics.

    Our economy sucks, right now.

    How has Bush been good for our economy?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    He was a good community organizer, which he put to good use as a good campaign organizer.

    He was more effective at communicating in a way that more voters identified with.

    He was more disciplined in running his campaign.

    He can add those to his growing resume. Those traits apply to leading.

    In the “free market” of politics, Obama was the better candidate. McCain was not.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    Every candidate has challenges to overcome. Ronald Reagan figured out how to control the media. Obama figured out how to overcome lack of a kind of resume that you would seem to prefer.

  107. Too bad. McCain lost!

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

    Would you care to compare, point by point, how Bush was better, here?

    And you focus on foreign affairs, with no comment on domestic affairs or economics.

    Our economy sucks, right now.

    How has Bush been good for our economy?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    He was a good community organizer, which he put to good use as a good campaign organizer.

    He was more effective at communicating in a way that more voters identified with.

    He was more disciplined in running his campaign.

    He can add those to his growing resume. Those traits apply to leading.

    In the “free market” of politics, Obama was the better candidate. McCain was not.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    Every candidate has challenges to overcome. Ronald Reagan figured out how to control the media. Obama figured out how to overcome lack of a kind of resume that you would seem to prefer.

  108. Too bad. McCain lost!

    Also, Obama is not change. He is hiring a bunch of Washington insiders because he doesn’t have a clue on what to do.

    Would you care to compare, point by point, how Bush was better, here?

    And you focus on foreign affairs, with no comment on domestic affairs or economics.

    Our economy sucks, right now.

    How has Bush been good for our economy?

    How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits? Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.

    He was a good community organizer, which he put to good use as a good campaign organizer.

    He was more effective at communicating in a way that more voters identified with.

    He was more disciplined in running his campaign.

    He can add those to his growing resume. Those traits apply to leading.

    In the “free market” of politics, Obama was the better candidate. McCain was not.

    Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants. He basically got a free ride.

    Every candidate has challenges to overcome. Ronald Reagan figured out how to control the media. Obama figured out how to overcome lack of a kind of resume that you would seem to prefer.

  109. Rich Rifkin

    Nepotism?

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    “How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits?”

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    It was not the case that he was born or married into privelege or that he ran on his resume. Rather, he ran on his personal talents as a man.

    “Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.”

    That’s right. He was seen by millions as viable, because he had such excellent and inspirational personal qualities. The only other president I can think of whose background was like that prior to being elected was Lincoln. However, Lincoln only commanded 35% of the popular vote and won because of the extreme divisions in our country in November, 1860.

    “Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants.”

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There are 300 million Americans. Maybe 1/2 of 1% read the NY Times ever. Far more people listen to the drug addled Rush Limbaugh and his clones.

    “Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms.”

    You are looking at this backwards. Bush did such a poor job — even McCain said Bush did a terrible job running the Iraq War; and no one can defend his economic performance, which is worse than every president since Hoover — and that poor job drew the criticism, from both the public and the media.

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

  110. Rich Rifkin

    Nepotism?

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    “How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits?”

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    It was not the case that he was born or married into privelege or that he ran on his resume. Rather, he ran on his personal talents as a man.

    “Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.”

    That’s right. He was seen by millions as viable, because he had such excellent and inspirational personal qualities. The only other president I can think of whose background was like that prior to being elected was Lincoln. However, Lincoln only commanded 35% of the popular vote and won because of the extreme divisions in our country in November, 1860.

    “Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants.”

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There are 300 million Americans. Maybe 1/2 of 1% read the NY Times ever. Far more people listen to the drug addled Rush Limbaugh and his clones.

    “Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms.”

    You are looking at this backwards. Bush did such a poor job — even McCain said Bush did a terrible job running the Iraq War; and no one can defend his economic performance, which is worse than every president since Hoover — and that poor job drew the criticism, from both the public and the media.

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

  111. Rich Rifkin

    Nepotism?

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    “How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits?”

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    It was not the case that he was born or married into privelege or that he ran on his resume. Rather, he ran on his personal talents as a man.

    “Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.”

    That’s right. He was seen by millions as viable, because he had such excellent and inspirational personal qualities. The only other president I can think of whose background was like that prior to being elected was Lincoln. However, Lincoln only commanded 35% of the popular vote and won because of the extreme divisions in our country in November, 1860.

    “Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants.”

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There are 300 million Americans. Maybe 1/2 of 1% read the NY Times ever. Far more people listen to the drug addled Rush Limbaugh and his clones.

    “Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms.”

    You are looking at this backwards. Bush did such a poor job — even McCain said Bush did a terrible job running the Iraq War; and no one can defend his economic performance, which is worse than every president since Hoover — and that poor job drew the criticism, from both the public and the media.

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

  112. Rich Rifkin

    Nepotism?

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    “How about Obama? He got where he is based on his merits?”

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    It was not the case that he was born or married into privelege or that he ran on his resume. Rather, he ran on his personal talents as a man.

    “Umm, Obama has no resume to speak of. His presidential career began when someone floated his name out as a viable candidate.”

    That’s right. He was seen by millions as viable, because he had such excellent and inspirational personal qualities. The only other president I can think of whose background was like that prior to being elected was Lincoln. However, Lincoln only commanded 35% of the popular vote and won because of the extreme divisions in our country in November, 1860.

    “Second, Obama got where he was because the media was in his pants.”

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There are 300 million Americans. Maybe 1/2 of 1% read the NY Times ever. Far more people listen to the drug addled Rush Limbaugh and his clones.

    “Bush had the bar set high because he was pounded every step of the way by the media during his eight year terms.”

    You are looking at this backwards. Bush did such a poor job — even McCain said Bush did a terrible job running the Iraq War; and no one can defend his economic performance, which is worse than every president since Hoover — and that poor job drew the criticism, from both the public and the media.

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

  113. Bushs Fist

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    Let’s put it this way: there hasn’t been a 9-11 since 9-11, and we were winning in Iraq before Bush left office. Will Obama be able to say the same thing?

    Furthermore, you brought up nepotism. You attacked your political opponents for Nepotism, and I just threw it back in your face with Clintons and Obama who epitomize nepotism. Unless you can counter this, you just got torn apart.

    Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    You think everyone who goes to Harvard/yale and graduates deserves it?

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    The hell it didn’t. If major news networks who can give you the press you need slant the coverage by refusing to cover the opponents campaign or taking words out of context, that very much can have an impact. Also, they can do push polls. Obama basically got much of his campaigning done for him without having to spend $. Also, many in the press even had to admit Obama was getting favorable treatment.

    Obama was getting humped from the beginning by these people and they know it. They have the power to plaster his name and face all over and say how wonderful he is, in spite of the truth.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    So Bush was only criticized because he was screwing up. Sure. And Obama will get criticized when he screws up? (he will screw up and you know it) I doubt it. The enterprise hasn’t said one bad word about Obama.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

    Yes, hopefully he will. But since you appear to have a brain, you know better.

  114. Bushs Fist

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    Let’s put it this way: there hasn’t been a 9-11 since 9-11, and we were winning in Iraq before Bush left office. Will Obama be able to say the same thing?

    Furthermore, you brought up nepotism. You attacked your political opponents for Nepotism, and I just threw it back in your face with Clintons and Obama who epitomize nepotism. Unless you can counter this, you just got torn apart.

    Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    You think everyone who goes to Harvard/yale and graduates deserves it?

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    The hell it didn’t. If major news networks who can give you the press you need slant the coverage by refusing to cover the opponents campaign or taking words out of context, that very much can have an impact. Also, they can do push polls. Obama basically got much of his campaigning done for him without having to spend $. Also, many in the press even had to admit Obama was getting favorable treatment.

    Obama was getting humped from the beginning by these people and they know it. They have the power to plaster his name and face all over and say how wonderful he is, in spite of the truth.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    So Bush was only criticized because he was screwing up. Sure. And Obama will get criticized when he screws up? (he will screw up and you know it) I doubt it. The enterprise hasn’t said one bad word about Obama.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

    Yes, hopefully he will. But since you appear to have a brain, you know better.

  115. Bushs Fist

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    Let’s put it this way: there hasn’t been a 9-11 since 9-11, and we were winning in Iraq before Bush left office. Will Obama be able to say the same thing?

    Furthermore, you brought up nepotism. You attacked your political opponents for Nepotism, and I just threw it back in your face with Clintons and Obama who epitomize nepotism. Unless you can counter this, you just got torn apart.

    Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    You think everyone who goes to Harvard/yale and graduates deserves it?

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    The hell it didn’t. If major news networks who can give you the press you need slant the coverage by refusing to cover the opponents campaign or taking words out of context, that very much can have an impact. Also, they can do push polls. Obama basically got much of his campaigning done for him without having to spend $. Also, many in the press even had to admit Obama was getting favorable treatment.

    Obama was getting humped from the beginning by these people and they know it. They have the power to plaster his name and face all over and say how wonderful he is, in spite of the truth.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    So Bush was only criticized because he was screwing up. Sure. And Obama will get criticized when he screws up? (he will screw up and you know it) I doubt it. The enterprise hasn’t said one bad word about Obama.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

    Yes, hopefully he will. But since you appear to have a brain, you know better.

  116. Bushs Fist

    “Excuse me? How did Hillary Clinton get her senate seat?

    So your defense of Bush is that Senator Clinton benefitted from nepotism? In other words, you cannot defend GW Bush, so you deflect that by attacking someone outside of the argument.

    Let’s put it this way: there hasn’t been a 9-11 since 9-11, and we were winning in Iraq before Bush left office. Will Obama be able to say the same thing?

    Furthermore, you brought up nepotism. You attacked your political opponents for Nepotism, and I just threw it back in your face with Clintons and Obama who epitomize nepotism. Unless you can counter this, you just got torn apart.

    Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.

    Yes. He didn’t have a long resume. He graduated near the top of his class at Harvard and was elected by his classmates to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, which is very prestigious.

    You think everyone who goes to Harvard/yale and graduates deserves it?

    But certainly, he had accomplished little in public office, including his short term in the Senate. His meritorious case for the presidency was that a) he was smarter than his competitors in the Democratic nomination contest, b) he advocated the policies which most Democratic primary voters prefered, and c) he was better at articulating those policies than were any of his Democratic competitors.

    Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.

    It didn’t matter who the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Fox News prefered. The people who voted in the primaries wanted Obama for his qualities and they ultimately got him. The majority of Americans wanted him in November because Bush did such a horrible job in office for 8 years.

    The hell it didn’t. If major news networks who can give you the press you need slant the coverage by refusing to cover the opponents campaign or taking words out of context, that very much can have an impact. Also, they can do push polls. Obama basically got much of his campaigning done for him without having to spend $. Also, many in the press even had to admit Obama was getting favorable treatment.

    Obama was getting humped from the beginning by these people and they know it. They have the power to plaster his name and face all over and say how wonderful he is, in spite of the truth.

    “The New York Obama Times refused to print MCCain’s rebuttal to Obama’s op-ed on the grounds McCain didn’t go along with Obama on the war, pure and simple.”

    There was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t criticized for something and you know it.”

    I agree. It was because there was hardly a day that went by when Bush wasn’t screwing up. Brownie, you’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

    So Bush was only criticized because he was screwing up. Sure. And Obama will get criticized when he screws up? (he will screw up and you know it) I doubt it. The enterprise hasn’t said one bad word about Obama.

    “Is the same going to happen for Obama?”

    Hopefully, Obama will do a good job, unlike Bush.

    Yes, hopefully he will. But since you appear to have a brain, you know better.

  117. Rich Rifkin

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

  118. Rich Rifkin

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

  119. Rich Rifkin

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

  120. Rich Rifkin

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

  121. Chuck

    “Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.”

    Well, there you go. Obama was the best we could get.

    I can imagine that it must really bother you that someone worse than Obama didn’t win so that you’d have more to complain about.

    Bush got a free ride after 9-11. And he had a good approval rating up through Katrina. The slow government response to Katrina was when Bush started getting trashed.

    Obama wasn’t pampered growing up the way Bush was.

    And Bush has set the bar pretty low in plenty of respects. If Obama does an average job, it will look pretty good by comparison.

  122. Chuck

    “Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.”

    Well, there you go. Obama was the best we could get.

    I can imagine that it must really bother you that someone worse than Obama didn’t win so that you’d have more to complain about.

    Bush got a free ride after 9-11. And he had a good approval rating up through Katrina. The slow government response to Katrina was when Bush started getting trashed.

    Obama wasn’t pampered growing up the way Bush was.

    And Bush has set the bar pretty low in plenty of respects. If Obama does an average job, it will look pretty good by comparison.

  123. Chuck

    “Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.”

    Well, there you go. Obama was the best we could get.

    I can imagine that it must really bother you that someone worse than Obama didn’t win so that you’d have more to complain about.

    Bush got a free ride after 9-11. And he had a good approval rating up through Katrina. The slow government response to Katrina was when Bush started getting trashed.

    Obama wasn’t pampered growing up the way Bush was.

    And Bush has set the bar pretty low in plenty of respects. If Obama does an average job, it will look pretty good by comparison.

  124. Chuck

    “Thank you for making my point.
    And yes, his competitors sucked worse than he did.”

    Well, there you go. Obama was the best we could get.

    I can imagine that it must really bother you that someone worse than Obama didn’t win so that you’d have more to complain about.

    Bush got a free ride after 9-11. And he had a good approval rating up through Katrina. The slow government response to Katrina was when Bush started getting trashed.

    Obama wasn’t pampered growing up the way Bush was.

    And Bush has set the bar pretty low in plenty of respects. If Obama does an average job, it will look pretty good by comparison.

  125. Anonymous

    I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?

  126. Anonymous

    I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?

  127. Anonymous

    I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?

  128. Anonymous

    I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?

  129. Bushs Fist

    “Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?”

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    According to the top quote, you said “nepotism” did you not? That was what I was responding to.

    Am I missing something? Maybe you used “neoplatonism” in another place and thought I was responding to that? It’s okay Rich, we all make mistakes.

  130. Bushs Fist

    “Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?”

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    According to the top quote, you said “nepotism” did you not? That was what I was responding to.

    Am I missing something? Maybe you used “neoplatonism” in another place and thought I was responding to that? It’s okay Rich, we all make mistakes.

  131. Bushs Fist

    “Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?”

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    According to the top quote, you said “nepotism” did you not? That was what I was responding to.

    Am I missing something? Maybe you used “neoplatonism” in another place and thought I was responding to that? It’s okay Rich, we all make mistakes.

  132. Bushs Fist

    “Or more likely, was he a guy who benefitted from nepotism and thus the bar for him was set lower than it had been for any other president since WH Taft?”

    “Obama epitomizes nepotism for having a media prop him up, and Hillary Clinton for riding the coattails of her disgusting husband.”

    There is no point in my arguing neoplatonism with a canine. Nor is it fruitful having a discussion with someone who doesn’t own a dictionary or know how to look up words.

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    According to the top quote, you said “nepotism” did you not? That was what I was responding to.

    Am I missing something? Maybe you used “neoplatonism” in another place and thought I was responding to that? It’s okay Rich, we all make mistakes.

  133. Are they avoiding the subject?

    “I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?”

    I’ve noticed that Republicans have generally avoided talking about the economy. It’s just too painful and embarrassing for the economy to fail like this on their watch. Unfortunately it’s all I ever think about.

  134. Are they avoiding the subject?

    “I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?”

    I’ve noticed that Republicans have generally avoided talking about the economy. It’s just too painful and embarrassing for the economy to fail like this on their watch. Unfortunately it’s all I ever think about.

  135. Are they avoiding the subject?

    “I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?”

    I’ve noticed that Republicans have generally avoided talking about the economy. It’s just too painful and embarrassing for the economy to fail like this on their watch. Unfortunately it’s all I ever think about.

  136. Are they avoiding the subject?

    “I really wonder in addition to the individual’s vocabulary and understanding of the meaning of some of the words they seem to almost haphazardly throw out, what their understand is of the current economy. Do they realize just how bad things are right now?”

    I’ve noticed that Republicans have generally avoided talking about the economy. It’s just too painful and embarrassing for the economy to fail like this on their watch. Unfortunately it’s all I ever think about.

  137. Don Shor

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    Interesting. I have never heard of nepotism applying to anything other than relatives. As I’ve usually seen it defined it has to do with appointing relatives to positions of power without regard to their qualifications. I see Wikipedia uses a broader definition. But “nepotism” doesn’t include the general idea of a media favoritism under any definition.

    Hilary Clinton was elected by a huge margin by the voters of New York. Certainly her husband’s political history and connections helped her (and probably hurt her in some ways). She got re-elected with 67% of the vote, so I think you can give her credit for her own career now.

    Obama has not benefited from any “nepotism” that I can figure by either the narrow or broader definitions.

    I’m curious: do you really believe that the only reason Barack Obama was elected was because of favorable treatment by the mainstream media?

  138. Don Shor

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    Interesting. I have never heard of nepotism applying to anything other than relatives. As I’ve usually seen it defined it has to do with appointing relatives to positions of power without regard to their qualifications. I see Wikipedia uses a broader definition. But “nepotism” doesn’t include the general idea of a media favoritism under any definition.

    Hilary Clinton was elected by a huge margin by the voters of New York. Certainly her husband’s political history and connections helped her (and probably hurt her in some ways). She got re-elected with 67% of the vote, so I think you can give her credit for her own career now.

    Obama has not benefited from any “nepotism” that I can figure by either the narrow or broader definitions.

    I’m curious: do you really believe that the only reason Barack Obama was elected was because of favorable treatment by the mainstream media?

  139. Don Shor

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    Interesting. I have never heard of nepotism applying to anything other than relatives. As I’ve usually seen it defined it has to do with appointing relatives to positions of power without regard to their qualifications. I see Wikipedia uses a broader definition. But “nepotism” doesn’t include the general idea of a media favoritism under any definition.

    Hilary Clinton was elected by a huge margin by the voters of New York. Certainly her husband’s political history and connections helped her (and probably hurt her in some ways). She got re-elected with 67% of the vote, so I think you can give her credit for her own career now.

    Obama has not benefited from any “nepotism” that I can figure by either the narrow or broader definitions.

    I’m curious: do you really believe that the only reason Barack Obama was elected was because of favorable treatment by the mainstream media?

  140. Don Shor

    “Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives and friends, based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability, …”

    Interesting. I have never heard of nepotism applying to anything other than relatives. As I’ve usually seen it defined it has to do with appointing relatives to positions of power without regard to their qualifications. I see Wikipedia uses a broader definition. But “nepotism” doesn’t include the general idea of a media favoritism under any definition.

    Hilary Clinton was elected by a huge margin by the voters of New York. Certainly her husband’s political history and connections helped her (and probably hurt her in some ways). She got re-elected with 67% of the vote, so I think you can give her credit for her own career now.

    Obama has not benefited from any “nepotism” that I can figure by either the narrow or broader definitions.

    I’m curious: do you really believe that the only reason Barack Obama was elected was because of favorable treatment by the mainstream media?

  141. David M. Greenwald

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

  142. David M. Greenwald

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

  143. David M. Greenwald

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

  144. David M. Greenwald

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

  145. Chuck

    And if we can waste all kinds of comments talking about things like nepotism — how ever you want to define it — and the damn liberal media (which includes any media organization that even breathes a hint of a positive comment about a Democrat), then we might forget to talk about more substantive issues like…. oh…. the economy.

  146. Chuck

    And if we can waste all kinds of comments talking about things like nepotism — how ever you want to define it — and the damn liberal media (which includes any media organization that even breathes a hint of a positive comment about a Democrat), then we might forget to talk about more substantive issues like…. oh…. the economy.

  147. Chuck

    And if we can waste all kinds of comments talking about things like nepotism — how ever you want to define it — and the damn liberal media (which includes any media organization that even breathes a hint of a positive comment about a Democrat), then we might forget to talk about more substantive issues like…. oh…. the economy.

  148. Chuck

    And if we can waste all kinds of comments talking about things like nepotism — how ever you want to define it — and the damn liberal media (which includes any media organization that even breathes a hint of a positive comment about a Democrat), then we might forget to talk about more substantive issues like…. oh…. the economy.

  149. Bushs Fist

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

    hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.

  150. Bushs Fist

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

    hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.

  151. Bushs Fist

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

    hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.

  152. Bushs Fist

    It does have the advantage of enabling Republicans and conservatives to fail to take responsibility for the failures of their own policies as well as the fail to take responsibility for the shortcomings of their own candidates. It’s basically a scapegoat mentality that seeks to divert the strategy.

    hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.

  153. David M. Greenwald

    Your defense of the Republicans is that the Democrats have done likewise at past points in time? So you are acknowledging blame on this occasion?

  154. David M. Greenwald

    Your defense of the Republicans is that the Democrats have done likewise at past points in time? So you are acknowledging blame on this occasion?

  155. David M. Greenwald

    Your defense of the Republicans is that the Democrats have done likewise at past points in time? So you are acknowledging blame on this occasion?

  156. David M. Greenwald

    Your defense of the Republicans is that the Democrats have done likewise at past points in time? So you are acknowledging blame on this occasion?

  157. Anonymous

    “hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.”

    Are you still talking about the 2000 election?!? I thought we were over that by now!

  158. Anonymous

    “hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.”

    Are you still talking about the 2000 election?!? I thought we were over that by now!

  159. Anonymous

    “hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.”

    Are you still talking about the 2000 election?!? I thought we were over that by now!

  160. Anonymous

    “hmm, and the democrats never scapegoated anything? They still refuse to take responsibility for their loss in 2000, insisting the only way they lost is if the election was stolen from them.
    Not once did they ever hint that Al Gore was at all responsible for his loss.”

    Are you still talking about the 2000 election?!? I thought we were over that by now!

  161. Anonymous

    Don Shor,

    You forgot to mention that nepotism is also a pratice by union thugs. The exception is that usually the case is not nepotism, just cooperative business between union theives.

  162. Anonymous

    Don Shor,

    You forgot to mention that nepotism is also a pratice by union thugs. The exception is that usually the case is not nepotism, just cooperative business between union theives.

  163. Anonymous

    Don Shor,

    You forgot to mention that nepotism is also a pratice by union thugs. The exception is that usually the case is not nepotism, just cooperative business between union theives.

  164. Anonymous

    Don Shor,

    You forgot to mention that nepotism is also a pratice by union thugs. The exception is that usually the case is not nepotism, just cooperative business between union theives.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for