Obama reelection 2012

[nots]

Heh. I had an uncle-by-marriage who was exactly the same way in reverse. No Republican was ever anything but evil personified, and no Democrat had ever done anything wrong in his/her/its life.

As for the current Congress, I expected just what we got. Say what you want about Newt (and he is a sanctimonious slimeball), but he's a man of intelligence who found ways to work with Clinton's people, just like Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan could be opponents and yet work together. Newt and Bubba were smart enough for it, Tip and Ronnie congenial enough. John Boehner possesses none of Newt's intellect and none of Tip's political astuteness; heck, he makes the last Repub Speaker, Dennis Hastert, look like a giant among legislators. President Obama deserves some of the blame, too; IMO he talks a bipartisan game but doesn't play it. Like Clinton in his first years, he relies on polls and pols to make his decisions. And Harry Reid, who should be trying to bridge the gap between the President and Speaker? Mr. Irrelevant.

I believe that, whatever amount of blame you want to ascribe to the Dems for our current situation, Harry Reid deserves more than the President. He is just the wrong guy to be a bridge.

[onejayhawk]

Heh. I had an uncle-by-marriage who was exactly the same way in reverse. No Republican was ever anything but evil personified, and no Democrat had ever done anything wrong in his/her/its life.

I assign about 95% of the blame of the Great Recession to the Republicans. Is that because I am a blind partisan?

I see what you mean DQ.

How about some of the blame going to the Republican controlled congress? As Chance pointed out the other day, it's been over 800 days since a budget was passed. Certainly they share the blame for the deficit equally...if not tipping in the favor of Congress. After all the President proposes, and the Congress disposes.

What Republican controlled Congress? Democrat House and Democrat Senate from 2007-2010.



J

[OaklandA's]

What Republican controlled Congress? Democrat House and Democrat Senate from 2007-2010.

The U.S. recession was from December 2007 - June 2009. I think it is reasonable to say that the recession was caused by the policies before 2007 rather than those after it.

[chancellor]

I believe that, whatever amount of blame you want to ascribe to the Dems for our current situation, Harry Reid deserves more than the President. He is just the wrong guy to be a bridge.

On this, many of us can agree.

[Hornsby]

I see what you mean DQ.



What Republican controlled Congress? Democrat House and Democrat Senate from 2007-2010.



J

And if you do your math, Obama was elected in 2008, and didn't start his term until 2009. So how does he take the blame for a 2007-2010 era of congress?

[Judge Jude]

The weird part about all of that analyis here - which as usual is more thought-provoking than what I read elsewhere on the 'net - is that you almost wonder if Newt's extensive similarities to Clinton as far as 'pragmatism' would work as a President.

I wouldn't just say "yes":
- we elected Bill having been suckered on the serial philanderer issue
- Newt is a lot older and might just newke a lot of things because he ain't looking for a second term
- on the same front, maybe in mid-career they compromised but neither would in late life
- but do we really know what either truly believes in, even now?


P.S. Yes, Gingrich is running out of time on that "Obama as food stamp President" meme. Please.

[onejayhawk]

And if you do your math, Obama was elected in 2008, and didn't start his term until 2009. So how does he take the blame for a 2007-2010 era of congress?

He doesnt. I was respoonding to someone blaming the GOP controlled Congress, when it was a Democrat controlled Congress.

J

[onejayhawk]

The weird part about all of that analyis here - which as usual is more thought-provoking than what I read elsewhere on the 'net - is that you almost wonder if Newt's extensive similarities to Clinton as far as 'pragmatism' would work as a President.

I wouldn't just say "yes":
- we elected Bill having been suckered on the serial philanderer issue
- Newt is a lot older and might just newke a lot of things because he ain't looking for a second term
- on the same front, maybe in mid-career they compromised but neither would in late life
- but do we really know what either truly believes in, even now?


P.S. Yes, Gingrich is running out of time on that "Obama as food stamp President" meme. Please.

We have the answer to that from his time as Speaker of the House. Newt is a fountain of ideas, but a lousy people person and very poor in leadership in normal situations. All of that distinguishesn him from Clinton. He does not separate friend from opponent, which means he is immune to constructive criticism. This is particularly bad, since he often fails to think an idea through to its conclusion. Half baked, half cocked, whatever your metaphor.

J

[chancellor]

Looks like a cheap sellout to the banks, even by my jaded estimates, is coming soon:

http://www.thenation.com/blog/165806/obama-brink-settlement-big-banks-and-progressives-are-furious

If true, the GOP is gonna be dancing on the tables - especially Romney. It's going to be awfully hard to attack him on his Bain record when you let five of the biggest banks off for a relative pittance compared to both the damage caused and the amount of essentially free money given to them in the past three years.

[OaklandA's]

Looks like a cheap sellout to the banks, even by my jaded estimates, is coming soon:

http://www.thenation.com/blog/165806/obama-brink-settlement-big-banks-and-progressives-are-furious

If true, the GOP is gonna be dancing on the tables - especially Romney. It's going to be awfully hard to attack him on his Bain record when you let five of the biggest banks off for a relative pittance compared to both the damage caused and the amount of essentially free money given to them in the past three years.

That article was written before the State of the Union address, and some parts directly contradict what Obama said. For example, the article says there will be no investigations into questionable mortgage practices. But in the SOTU, Obama said this:

I’m asking my attorney general to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans.

[chancellor]

Won't be the first time a politician backed off from SOTU statements. And this is no right-wing rag posting this - it's The Nation, a pretty left-leaning publication.

[OaklandA's]

Won't be the first time a politician backed off from SOTU statements. And this is no right-wing rag posting this - it's The Nation, a pretty left-leaning publication.

I think your linked article was wrong. It looks like Obama has moved away from that proposed settlement. 1) Obama made a point of saying he wants to investigate and prosecute; 2) Obama made Eric Schneiderman the head of the committee. Schneiderman (New York AG) has been one of the most aggressive state AGs in going after the financial industry.

[Judge Jude]

"I’m asking my attorney general to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans."

In 2012? Did Obama just find out now that there may have been some funny business?
It's only fair, seriously, to accept the fact that these issues are VERY complicated and therefore it could take a full year, or two, to get to the finish line. What a shame that we only have less than 10 months until... the election. If this was any other politician than Obama, it would seem as if he was pandering to public anger only after it was too late to make tough decisions by election time. But that's why we voted for CHANGE that we can believe in, so no worries there!

Sarcasm aside, isn't this exactly the sort of thing that he said in 2008 he wouldn't do? No more "business as usual."

[Judge Jude]

"Seems like a good move, if Obama actually follows through."

Was new evidence just uncovered since 2009 that now requires this investigatiion?
That's really the question.
And if there is no promise to resolve by September (and I would argue that starting now is likely too late), then what does "follow through" even mean?

i would think the left would wonder that as much as the center....

[OaklandA's]

Was new evidence just uncovered since 2009 that now requires this investigatiion?
That's really the question.

I don't think any new evidence was uncovered. Both the states and federal prosecutors already had authority to go after them, but whatever reason, nothing happened. It could just be a matter of priority - by emphasizing the point, and by appointing someone like Schneiderman, it makes it a higher priority. Maybe it's like the Bin Laden situation - nothing happened for years, but when Obama became President, he said that getting Bin Laden was a high priority, and finally it got done.