Despite all his time studying the Clinton administration, Mr. Obama told his aides that he had no intention of following the precise path of Mr. Clinton, who after the Democratic midterm election defeats of 1994 ordered a clearing of the decks inside the White House, installed competing teams of advisers and employed a centrist policy of triangulation. In fact, several advisers confirmed, the word "triangulation" has been banned by Mr. Obama because he does not believe it accurately describes his approach.
Well, it may not be what Obama will call it, but I doubt the Village will play ball. They'll call it triangulation all day. Greg continues:
Triangulation just isn't Obama's style, and his scolding of liberals seems to be rooted in genuine frustration with them for disagreeing with him about what's politically possible, given today's realities. To whatever degree Obama is using his disagreement with the left for positioning purposes, it's more about temperament than ideology: He's casting himself as the voice of sanity trying to talk sense into uncompromising partisans on both sides. This just isn't Clintonian triangulation in any sense.
The problem is there's folks on the left who don't understand the words "politically possible". Their response to this will probably fall along these lines:
The other point Greg caught was this:
The President, preparing to deal with a strengthened GOP, is studying how to maximize the powers of the executive branch. Keep an eye on that one.
Yeah. The problem with that is that Bush tried to do the same thing four years ago. It hasn't been good for the country so far. Both Republicans and Democrats are going to be hypocrites on that one.
Posts
4 comments:
Both Republicans and Democrats are going to be hypocrites on that one.
Are going to be? There's been an unending chorus of calls for extending medicare to all, and reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, e.g. by executive order, and for overturning aspects of the recently-passed tax compromise inter alia via signing statements, and God knows what other forms of executive action on DU since the inauguration.
Too damn many liberals left the polling booth in '08 saying to themselves "Well, that's done. Now we've got our Bush. Sonofabitch better start breaking shit."
Fair enough on that one, X.
Look at how many folks insisted he go plenary executive on DADT repeal. Now they've moved on to DOMA repeal under the same principle.
He's casting himself as the voice of sanity trying to talk sense into uncompromising partisans on both sides.
that's just silly. obama doesn't give much of a shit about what liberals think, so why pretend that he does? further, are we really equating/conflating people like jane hamsher with mitch mcconnell here? there aren't many elected democrats actively seeking to derail obama's presidency at this point. those "uncompromising partisans" of the left are generally found in the blogosphere. they're not out holding big "obama sucks" rallies or anything like that, as opposed to "uncompromising partisans" of the right, of which there are quite a few in congress and the senate. if people like you and the douchebag who wrote this article want to keep pretending that there's some alternate reality where extremist liberals have real political power in this country, have fun. maybe you'll convince somebody. i don't drink paint though, so you won't be converting me anytime soon.
i remain utterly mystified by smart people who willfully refuse to accept any serious disagreement in regards to obama and his failures/successes as president. those of us who find the guy irksome have to be marginalized and made to seem ridiculous, explained away as "useful idiots", dismissed as people who don't "get it", etc.
yeah, yeah, i know: you're disappointed with the prez too. but because our disappointment isn't expressed in the exact same way yours is, or because we don't arrive at the exact same conclusions that you do, we're all "wrong".
"if people like you and the douchebag who wrote this article want to keep pretending that there's some alternate reality where extremist liberals have real political power in this country, have fun. maybe you'll convince somebody. i don't drink paint though, so you won't be converting me anytime soon. "
When did I ever say this? It's pretty clear liberals don't have fundamental political power in the US.
And the difference between Jane Hamsher and Mitch McConnell is that while both of them like to pretend that the above is true to advance their own agenda, Mitch's doing it as my Senator.
"i remain utterly mystified by smart people who willfully refuse to accept any serious disagreement in regards to obama and his failures/successes as president. those of us who find the guy irksome have to be marginalized and made to seem ridiculous, explained away as "useful idiots", dismissed as people who don't "get it", etc."
And once again, I have said on a number of occasions that I have legitimate criticisms of Obama and have voiced them, and other people have too.
It seems however that whenever somebody mentions Obama might actually be capable of getting something right, I get a nice little tirade above.
If you don't like Obama, you have that right. If you don't agree with Obama, you have that right. That's why there's a comments section.
I also have the right to say when i feel I disagree with you that I think you're overlooking what he has done.
Post a Comment