Why are people thinking Obama can magically create jobs out of this air.

I think it matters more what leaders do rather than what they say. So far Obama's record of doing the things that the real situation before him calls for, as opposed to doing things that worsen it, is pretty poor. Pressing for comprehensive health care reform in the midst of a serious cyclical recession wasn't a good idea for the country's welfare. It may well have been the right or indeed the only moment for passing this controversial legislation from a political perspective - Democrat majorities such as exist now aren't likely to continue in the Congress - but from the perspective of the general good, it weas a serious error. I don't know what Obama really thinks or understands, however the facts suggest he is either a cynical politician; a committed progressive idealogue; or seriously lacking in an understanding of basic economics - or perhaps a bit of all three. The rather quick and dramatic shift in public perceptions should tell you something.


Alternatively perhaps the public is fickle and stupid, unable to detect a great leader when they see one. Tha, however, isn't a very sound idea for one who believes in democracy.

The rather quick and dramatic shift in public perceptions should tell you something.

Cyclo, you have a remarkable ability to imagine favorable (to your point of view) distortions of the references others make, and then to work yourself up into a twist about it. If you don't think that the difference between Obama's general popularity shortly after the election and the situation today is a "dramatic shift" then I don't know what to make of your perceptions. True, I didn't specify the specific points of comparison, but I think they were obvious in terms of the change to which I referred. To then shift the comparison to changes over the last few months and act indignant about it indicates either an unwillingness to face facts or very shifty debating tactics.

Several months ago you asserted that the passage of the health care act would lead to the development of irresistable public support for President Obama and his Democrat allies. The fact is that hasn't happened, at least so far.

You have repeatedly offered the superficial and deceptive description of the recession that beset most of the world's economies as the result of the collapse of the credit default swap market among a few financial companies in this country. That is simply false

I suppose I can can understand why you use this self-serving description. To do otherwise would bring you close to the recognition of the fact that the current Administration is following precisely the wrong course of action in many key areas.

I also believe that the public that Fido claims is held in perpetual stupidity and ignorance, is in fact beginning to understand the truth of all this and react accordingly.

My contention has ALWAYS been that the HC bill will lead to long-term support of the Democratic party, and it still is.

Quote:

My contention has ALWAYS been that the HC bill will lead to long-term support of the Democratic party, and it still is.

So you stand by this prediction?

Do you still stand by the prediction you made in my signature line?

You forget that the public is essentially powerless, so they can be kept stupid... If we had true choice instead of the secondary choice of some personality we must trust with too much power, again, out of no choice any of us has made, or been allowed to make, what can we do about it??? The parties have divided their districts to balance equally those for an against one party or another, giving a slight edge to one party, deliberately denying to approximately half the people representation of the party of their choice... This was a party choice, and reason would say that all people should be represented in congress, for and against... If you cut every house district in half there would still be only one representative for every 300K... Since the figure the constitution suggests is no more than one for every 30K which would allow for an almost direct democracy by comparison, how have we allowed the parties to manage our democracy outside of the constitution, making extra constitutional changes that have drastically effected the quality of our government, and our ability to reach out representatives and make them do our bidding??? We had no choice... Even the parties are not provided for in our constitution, but they have bent government everywhere to their wants rather than our needs... Since they have the power and we have none, where is the reason they should educated us, or give us anything good, protect our rights, hear our demands???

You must understand that party animals surviving by slight majorities in deeply divided districts cannot possibly be leaders, but are invariably followers... They must first follow the rich who will give them the money to sway the majority and to maligne the other party's candidate... Then they must follow the will of the most radical extreme of their own party who can replace them in the primaries and divide the whole country into extremes...

Districts should be parted out, representatives should be increased geometrically, and districts should be made smaller... A "leader" could be a leader if he represented 95% of his district, and if he had 95% of his district behind him... Division has been sown to make the people powerless, and it has worked to make representives powerless and fearful of the population...

Parties should be made illegal and must be if we expect to make our form of government actually work for the country. I do not think it is possible, and yet possible of not, it must be done... The parties are an unconstitutional impediment to the will of the people...

Because all the polling data of which you are so fond says you are partly wrong.

Your'e whistling in the dark. That the Democrats will lose control of the House is virtually certain. The Senate could go either way, and Harry Reid may no longer be there. Too early to tell about 2012.

Quote:

I suppose I can can understand why you use this self-serving description. To do otherwise would bring you close to the recognition of the fact that the current Administration is following precisely the wrong course of action in many key areas.

As I said earlier - what the **** do you know about it? What are your proposed solutions? What data set do you draw your evidence to back up those solutions from?

My guess is that, like most Republicans, you pretend that tax breaks for the rich and lowered regulations for corporations are the key to economic recovery. There is no evidence that this is true, however.

I generally don't respond to such crude, insolent queries. Moreover, since in framing the question, you have explicitly excluded most of the answer, I don't see much point in making any effort.

By the way, I note that you, in turn, chose to ignore my comments about your own inadequate and unrealistically narrow definition of the cause of what is in fact a nearly world-wide cyclical economic recession

You arbitrarily restrict the domain of the question, just as you do with respect to the answer. No surprise that you get to declare victory. However, you won't find real understanding that way.

Fido wrote:

You forget that the public is essentially powerless, so they can be kept stupid... If we had true choice instead of the secondary choice of some personality we must trust with too much power, again, out of no choice any of us has made, or been allowed to make, what can we do about it??? The parties have divided their districts to balance equally those for an against one party or another, giving a slight edge to one party, deliberately denying to approximately half the people representation of the party of their choice... This was a party choice, and reason would say that all people should be represented in congress, for and against... If you cut every house district in half there would still be only one representative for every 300K... Since the figure the constitution suggests is no more than one for every 30K which would allow for an almost direct democracy by comparison, how have we allowed the parties to manage our democracy outside of the constitution, making extra constitutional changes that have drastically effected the quality of our government, and our ability to reach out representatives and make them do our bidding??? We had no choice... Even the parties are not provided for in our constitution, but they have bent government everywhere to their wants rather than our needs... Since they have the power and we have none, where is the reason they should educated us, or give us anything good, protect our rights, hear our demands???

You must understand that party animals surviving by slight majorities in deeply divided districts cannot possibly be leaders, but are invariably followers... They must first follow the rich who will give them the money to sway the majority and to maligne the other party's candidate... Then they must follow the will of the most radical extreme of their own party who can replace them in the primaries and divide the whole country into extremes...

Districts should be parted out, representatives should be increased geometrically, and districts should be made smaller... A "leader" could be a leader if he represented 95% of his district, and if he had 95% of his district behind him... Division has been sown to make the people powerless, and it has worked to make representives powerless and fearful of the population...

Parties should be made illegal and must be if we expect to make our form of government actually work for the country. I do not think it is possible, and yet possible of not, it must be done... The parties are an unconstitutional impediment to the will of the people...

Come on Fido, I like and agree with what you say. So, is it possible to make parties illegal? Especially when it has worked to make representatives powerless and fearful of the population. Talk some more on this.

eoe, Even before I finish reading your post(s), I want to let you know that your thinking on this subject mirrors close to mine. It's easy to criticize - and I've done my share against Obama. The problem left behind by GW Bush was monumental, and trying to work with the GOP congress members went nowhere. The biggest problem with the stim plan was that a good portion of it went to give tax breaks to the middle class, extend unemployment insurance, and give small businesses some tax relief, and not towards our infrastructure that badly needs more government spending. Trying to get the GOP to approve any legislation is a struggle, and conservatives don't want to give Obama any credit for repairing our economy. It seems obvious to me that conservatives are blind to this political gamesmanship.

Obama should get another stim bill passed that will really improve our infrastructure. It's the best opportunity to create jobs, and stimulate growth at a time when interest rates are at its lowest. Why his advisers have not done this is a mystery to me.

Spending $1 now will multiply itself in a domino effect, and pay for itself with increased income for Americans, and increase in taxes for all government levels who are struggling with their budgets. A trillion dollar stim bill will jump start our economy in no time. Businesses are waiting for more signals to show consumers are ready to spend.

Somebody needs to kick Obama in the ass to get his attention.

cicerone imposter wrote:

eoe, Even before I finish reading your post(s), I want to let you know that your thinking on this subject mirrors close to mine. It's easy to criticize - and I've done my share against Obama. The problem left behind by GW Bush was monumental, and trying to work with the GOP congress members went nowhere. The biggest problem with the stim plan was that a good portion of it went to give tax breaks to the middle class, extend unemployment insurance, and give small businesses some tax relief, and not towards our infrastructure that badly needs more government spending. Trying to get the GOP to approve any legislation is a struggle, and conservatives don't want to give Obama any credit for repairing our economy. It seems obvious to me that conservatives are blind to this political gamesmanship.

Obama should get another stim bill passed that will really improve our infrastructure. It's the best opportunity to create jobs, and stimulate growth at a time when interest rates are at its lowest. Why his advisers have not done this is a mystery to me.

Spending $1 now will multiply itself in a domino effect, and pay for itself with increased income for Americans, and increase in taxes for all government levels who are struggling with their budgets. A trillion dollar stim bill will jump start our economy in no time. Businesses are waiting for more signals to show consumers are ready to spend.

Somebody needs to kick Obama in the ass to get his attention.

"Rail Service Expansion Imperiled at State Level
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/us/05rail.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

Where have you been c.i.? The party of NO has been busy shooting down the concept of creating jobs as well. They don't want the economy to improve. They don't want the country to move out of this quagmire under Obama and they're doing everything they can to prevent it. It's so obvious, anyone who doesn't see through their bullshit by now has simply elected not to.

It astounding to me how people seem to think that Mr. Obama doesn't get it, or he needs a kick in the ass to get his attention. Do you really think he's stupid? Out of touch? Do you honestly think that this brilliant man, who cut his teeth on the political streets of Chicago, doesn't have a clue what's going on? Get real. That's just more media-driven hoo-hah, created on a slow news day.