As regular readers of the site are aware, I’ve taken to comparing President Obama to former presidents such as Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, men who served a single term or less, and who were viewed by the public as cold, aloof, distant, well educated, but completely in over their heads as far as the presidency is concerned. I’ve never liked the comparisons between Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter. The analogy is as sloppy as it is imprecise. Carter was a warm fellow with Middle American cultural cues who was more like a pessimistic, inept version of Bill Clinton. Obama’s problem is more similar to that of Ford or Bush 41 — individuals who were whisked from one ivory tower to the next for most of their lives, and who, as a consequence, never had to get their hands dirty, never had to learn the art of being a tough as nails negotiator, and never had to feel other people’s pain. Harry Truman, who never set foot inside a college classroom, ran circles around his opponents at home and abroad for nearly two full terms as president largely because he had those real world skills, skills that couldn’t be acquired at the Academy.
The president’s dearth of innate political prowess first became apparent to me during the 2008 presidential campaign, when Obama blew a fairly substantial summertime lead over McCain by essentially fiddling the dog days away, flying around the world and declaring himself a citizen of the globe with an almost apologetic demeanor. Americans wanted to repair the international relationships that Bush had damaged, of course, but most Americans did not believe this meant giving away the store. The average American was still proud to be an American. Obama seemed embarrassed to be one. That was the first signal to me that Obama just might be a paper tiger.
But under the right circumstances, even paper tigers can be elected president. One financial crisis and three debates later and Obama looked like the man running for Bill Clinton’s third term, while McCain looked like he just wanted to go home. But that wasn’t the last of Obama’s political miscalculations. There was the entire health care debate, where the president frequently voiced his true intentions to ration care for seniors, by suggesting that certain elderly Americans may not need certain types of care. And far more recently, there was the widespread discomfort with invasive TSA procedures that had surfaced during the holiday season, with every week bringing America a new horror story about abuse of power and travel plans gone awry. A savvy politician could have easily used this issue to turn lemons into lemonade. If Bill Clinton had been president, for example, Janet Napolitano would have been fired, the patdowns and other invasive procedures would have been put on hold pending further review, and the MSM would have run all sorts of stories about how the president just saved Christmas.
Not so with Barack Obama, though. The president seems to exhibit a certain political tone-deafness that surfaces every now and then, and that is once again coming to the forefront with his refusal not only to compromise with Republicans over Paul Ryan’s excellent plan to reform the tax code and the federal budget, but to even acknowledge that reforms are needed. The president, who Americans elected as a “different kind of politician,” is practicing politics as usual, hoping to kick the can of tectonic economic and fiscal reform down the road, preparing to instead use the issue to scare voters away from the GOP in 2012.
But the president, I think, is misreading the times, and the modern electorate. In the 1930s, 1950s, 1970s, or even the 1990s, the sorts of suggestions that the Republicans are floating, from the voucherization of Medicare to raising the Social Security retirement age to ending certain types of collective bargaining, would have resulted in Americans taking to the streets. But as Democrats’ now seemingly unsuccessful attempt to elect a judge in Wisconsin as a roadblock to Scott Walker shows, the America of the 21st Century is not the America of the 20th Century. The Greatest Generation has largely passed on, and with them has gone the unyielding refusal to modify the legacy of FDR. Today’s seniors are largely members of the Silent Generation, a much more conservative group, and Generation X, a libertarian-conservative generation, is beginning to take the reins of power. Fewer Americans depend on collective bargaining for their bread and butter, fewer medical professionals will treat patients with government health insurance plans, and more Americans are beginning to realize the price they will pay in terms of economic growth and tax burdens if the debt is not brought under control.
As such, the president’s hope that he will coast to re-election over an extremist Republican Party that hopes to tinker with Medicare, a la Bill Clinton in 1996, is probably mistaken. Instead, the president is going to have to actually propose an alternative plan to tackle the debt and resume growth in America, and that means killing a few of his party’s sacred cows. This is exactly what the president does not want to do, either because he hasn’t the stomach for it, or because he genuinely believes that the debt crisis will ultimately result in Americans embracing the Left’s long-awaited dream of social democracy on our shores, with a cradle-to-grave welfare state, a 50-percent tax rate, and a collectivist utopia for all.
The irony is that the president would probably be able to guarantee his re-election by cutting a deal with Ryan and the GOP on taxes and entitlements. The Democrats could trade some of Ryan’s cuts in domestic spending for cuts in defense spending, and could leave traditional Medicare as an option for seniors who don’t feel comfortable embracing the newer model. In order to keep the debt at Ryan’s projected levels, Democrats could agree to Ryan’s tax simplification, but at somewhat higher rates (e.g., a top rate of 30 percent instead of 25 percent, etc). Add to it all a reform of Social Security that raises the retirement age and means-tests the program and Obama could sign into law a bill that “cuts taxes for all Americans, saves Social Security and Medicare, and pays down our national debt, all while protecting our investments in education and infrastructure.”
Hey, that’s what Bill Clinton would do. And he would sail to re-election.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:22 pm
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-williamsburg-mayor-president-obama-coming-to-visit-this-weekend-20110406,0,6881733.story
Obama is taking another vacation this weekend.
I have never been so anti Obama as I’am right now.
Obama’s tone-deafness is due to the fact…he has never led anything in his life.
The man is not a leader.
I’m even starting to believe this birther crap…GOD I can’t believe I said that.
Politically Obama is in big trouble.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:26 pm
Interesting stuff Dave. I do think that Obama is following the Carter model when it comes to reelection. When he ran for a 2nd term in 1980, Carter essentially ran a negative campaign saying “you may not like me, but the Republican nominee is just way too crazy/racist/stupid”. He’s not going to offer a vision of the next four years or give any reason to keep him in office other than the evil Republicans.
Obama certainly has shown a tin-ear for politics. Even during the 2008 campaign, when he was on top of the world, he made some pretty stupid remarks, including about those “bitter gun-clingers”, renegotiating NAFTA and other things like that.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:34 pm
Dave,
Great post, as usual. It is amazing to me that Obama is willing to fiddle while Rome burns. He’s promising the plebes bread and circuses which can only last a few more years. He keeps lecturing that “We cannot continue to do” the things he continues to do.
One quibble with the post though, and while technical, I don’t think it’s minor….. We cannot “leave traditional Medicare as an option for seniors who don’t feel comfortable embracing the newer model.” Traditional Medicare is a blank check whose expense is growing exponentially. We can’t continue to give people blank checks as an option.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:35 pm
Ha ha I kid you not, I just became a birther last month along with Donald Trump and i say to myself, I really would like to see the long form. This is ridiculous. Then this shows up in my e-mail! What do you all think? (Well, there’s really nice photos that go with it of official looking documents, but they don’t transfer here.)(I’ll probably be banned from this site now for putting this here.)
Could it be??
Finally exposed. This is what Obama has spent almost $2M (so far) to hide.
Here’s a close-up of the top of the document where you can plainly read his name and his parent’s names, etc
A British history buff was asked if he could find out who the colonial registrar was for Mombasa in 1961.
After only a few minutes of research, he called back and said “Sir Edward F. Lavender” Note the same name near the bottom of the photo above.
Source(s): “ Kenya Dominion Record 4667 Australian library.”
And here’s a close-up of the bottom of the document where you can read “Coast Providence of Kenya ” and the
official signature of the Deputy Registrar…
The above document is a “Certified Copy of Registration of Birth”, but below is a copy of the actual Certificate of Birth…
the real-deal legal kind of certificate.
The Mombasa Registrar of Births has testified that Obama’s birth certificate from Coast Province General Hospital in
Mombasa is genuine. This copy was obtained by Lucas Smith through the help of a Kenyan Colonel who recently got it
directly from the Coast General Hospital in Mombasa , Kenya .
Here it is….
Note the footprint!!
The local Muslim Imam in Mombasa named Barack with his Muslim middle name Hussein so his official name on this certificate is Barack Hussein Obama II.
The grandmother of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. reveals the story of his birth in Mombasa , Kenya , a seaport, after his mother suffered labor pains while swimming at ocean beach in Mombasa .
“On August 4, 1961 Obama’s mother, father and grandmother were attending a Muslim festival in Mombasa , Kenya . Mother had been refused entry to airplanes due to her nine month pregnancy. It was a hot August day at the festival so the Obama’s went to the beach to cool off. While swimming in the ocean his mother experienced labor pains so was rushed to the Coast Provincial General Hospital, Mombasa, Kenya where Obama was born a few hours later at 7:21 pm on August 4, 1961(what a sad day for the USA!). Four days later his mother flew to Hawaii and registered his birth in Honolulu as a certificate of live birth which omitted the place and hospital of birth.”
Letter from Kitau in Mombasa , Kenya ……
“I happen to be Kenyan. I was born 1 month before Obama at Mombasa medical center. I am a teacher here at the MM Shaw Primary School in Kenya . I compared my birth certificate to the one that has been put out by Taitz and mine is exactly the same. I even have the same registrar and format. The type is identical. I am by nature a skeptical person. I teach science here and challenge most things that cannot be proven. So I went to an official registrar today and pulled up the picture on the web. They magnified it and determined it to be authentic. There is even a plaque with Registrar Lavenders name on it as he was a Brit and was in charge of the Registrar office from 1959 until January of 1964. The reason the date on the certificate says republic of Kenya is that we were a republic when the “copy” of the original was ordered. I stress the word “copy”. My copy also has republic of Kenya . So what you say is true about Kenya not being a republic at the time of Obama’s .
birth, however it was a republic when the copy was ordered.
The birth certificate is genuine. I assure you it will be authenticated by a forensic auditor. We are very proud Obama was born here. We have a shrine for him and there are many people who remember his birth here as he had a white mother. They are being interviewed now by one of your media outlets.
Fortunately they even have pictures of his parents with him immediately after his birth at the Mombasa hospital with the hospital in the back ground.
It will be a proud day for us when it is proven that he was born here and a Kenyan became the most powerful man in the world.
I encourage anyone to come here and visit. I will be happy to take you and show you the pictures at the hospital myself as well as my document and many others that are identical to what Taitz posted. God Bless. Kitau”.
So, how much more proof do we need?
WELL, HERE IT IS….
Lolo Soetoro, Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro, baby Maya Soetoro, and 9 year old Barry Soetoro.
This registration document, made available on Jan. 24, 2007, by the Fransiskus Assisi school inJakarta, Indonesia , shows the registration of Barack Obama under the name Barry Soetoro made by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro.
Name: Barry Soetoro
Religion: Islam
Nationality:Indonesian
How did this little INDONESIAN Muslim child – Barry Soetoro, (A.K.A. Barack Obama) get around the issue of nationality to become President of the United States of America ?
PART 2:
In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama’s qualifications for the presidency, the group “Americans for Freedom of Information” has released copies of President Obama’s college transcripts from Occidental College …
The transcript indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia while an undergraduate at the school. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California . The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program.
To qualify for this scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.
This document provides the smoking gun that many of Obama’s detractors have been seeking – that he is NOT a natural-born citizen of the United States – necessary to be President of these United States . Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya , here we see that there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship..
Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama’s campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records.
Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still on-going but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. attorney gene ral, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused comment on this matter.
LET OTHER FOLKS KNOW THIS NEWS – THE MEDIA WON’T!
April 7th, 2011 at 8:38 pm
…so this is maybe why Obama doesn’t triangulate. And here’s the second e-mail (sans photos):
VERY QUIETLY OBAMA’S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES THE SUPREME COURT
AP – WASHINGTON D.C. –
In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama’s qualifications for the presidency, the group “Americans for Freedom of Information” has Released copies of President Obama’s college transcripts from Occidental College … Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.
This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama’s detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama’s legitimacy and qualification to serve as President article titled, “Obama Eligibility Questioned,” leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama’s first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama’s legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey . This lawsuit claims Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president.. Donofrio’s case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama’s citizenship or qualification to serve as president.
Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama’s campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter…
LET OTHER FOLKS KNOW THIS NEWS, THE MEDIA WON’T !
Subject: RE: Issue of Passport?
While I’ve little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?
And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?
The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A : Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities.
1) He traveled with a U.S. … Passport,
2) He traveled with a British passport, or
3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. .. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he were traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims.. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008.
Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:40 pm
“The irony is that the president would probably be able to guarantee his re-election by cutting a deal with Ryan and the GOP on taxes and entitlements.”
I wouldn’t count on it. It would be too hard for them to claim the leadership on this issue now.
I’m also skeptical of whether younger voters really are more libertarian…or simply apathetic about other people’s lives. They sound similar, but where a libertarian might actively take to the streets to defend another person’s life choice, it seems that many young voters today simply couldn’t give a flip, one way or the other.
======
As for Obama…I’m starting to sense that he is overexposed and underperforming. While many Presidents have taken the reigns in Washington, and used their public appearances sparingly, Obama seems to be doing the opposite. As such, not only has the power of his presence been severely deminished, but people are taking the view that he is saying much and doing little – and in America, talk is cheap.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:43 pm
We cannot “leave traditional Medicare as an option for seniors who don’t feel comfortable embracing the newer model.”
You may be right, Matt. I guess I was assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that most seniors would find that they prefer the new model, and that only the most risk-averse, and perhaps the poorest and sickest, would stay on the traditional model. I know that Pete Domenici has come out in favor of going that route. It may be true though that leaving a blank check option for anyone is tantamount to doing nothing, as people ultimately prefer to spend other people’s money if given the choice.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:45 pm
#5 -
It matters not where Obama was born, nor what citizenship he held at age 20, nor where his father – birth or otherwise – was from.
Obama’s mother was a US citizen when Barack Hussein Obama was born. That makes Obama a natural born US citizen. End of story.
That one might once have held joint citizenship does nothing to prove that he is not [constitutionally] qualified to be President of the United States.
Nobody wishes more than I that we could simply disqualify Obama from remaining President – but unless you have evidence to prove that HIS MOTHER was not a US citizen at the time of his birth, Obama IS natural-born.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:46 pm
Yah but Mr. Kilburn, if he has an Indonesian passport or a British passport and as an adult traveled with such…..what about that?
April 7th, 2011 at 8:47 pm
You are saying that if Obama relinquished his U.S. citizenship, that doesn’t matter? Stunning point of view.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:47 pm
Interesting. Only time will tell. Of course, if Obama gets reelected and the Democrats retake the house (worst case scenario), the future will change so much that it won’t matter who Clinton was, or Carter or Bush Sr. Because Obama will have locked in his policies and the negative spiral will be well under way. The world will be a different place, with completely rewritten history.
Glad I could cheer everyone up.
lettertohuckabee.com
April 7th, 2011 at 8:48 pm
“I guess I was assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that most seniors would find that they prefer the new model”
As long as the plan does not result in any seniors receiving any less medicine, dying any sooner, or going without medical coverage at any time, we can and should be pitching this program as the most effective method of keeping our promise to America’s present and future seniors of a healthy retirement.
Whether they will prefer one program of the other…as long as all people are covered, its probably a wash.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:48 pm
Not to hijack this very, very fine thread. But you have to admit, this is interesting. I got reeled in by the pictures and stuff. What if? Surely you get jail time for this kind of a lie. And then we get stuck with Joe Biden. Goes from bad to worse.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
..and some anti, anti birther people here and elsewhere would be eating some crow. Doesn’t matter, eh? That’s wild. Maybe it doesn’t matter. Maybe our president can lie about birthplace, gender, intentions, whatever. And it doesn’t matter. I guess that might be about where we’re at.
Back to triangulation.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Liz:
Please stop talking about this nonsense. The President is an American. He’s our President until next January when a Republican replaces him. End of story. The man faced the Clinton Attack Machine in the primaries and the full force of the RNC and the McCain campaign in 2008 and they found NOTHING about this crap. It’s a waste of time and focusing on it helps Obama more than anyone else.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:52 pm
There is such a thing as joint citizenship – it is discouraged, but entirely possible, that Obama may have held more than one passport. Obama need not have surrendered his US citizenship to hold citizenship of a foreign nation at some point in his life, nor would holding that joint citizenship (particularly so long ago) preclude him from the election victory he won in 2008.
As I said, the birther argument is MEANINGLESS unless you can prove both that: 1) Barack Obama was not born in the United States, and 2) Neither of his parents held US citizenship at the time of his birth.
April 7th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
I didn’t mean to offend you, Jonathan. I just find it quite….astonishing. I’m sure you could understand it if you tried. Nonetheless, as you wish. Angry person.
(so bizarre)
April 7th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
Liz,
THIS IS NOT A BIRTHER THREAD.
Please take your conspiracy theories somewhere else, and don’t threadjack a good FPP.
There are TONS of websites you can talk Birtherism ’til the cows come home…..
April 7th, 2011 at 8:54 pm
Holy cow, Matthew Kilburn. You don’t care either? What if your wife lied to you like this? Or your employee? Obviously you guys don’t care, but….I suspect there are others out there that would see this as a scandal.
Back to triangulation.
!
April 7th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
Anyways, on the triangulation issue, Clinton’s experiences prior to becoming President. He was Governor of a conservative Southern state and as an executive, had to deal with a legislature. Obama was a Chicago machine hack in a Democratic, liberal government. He hasn’t triangulated because he’s never had to or had his views adequately challenged/
April 7th, 2011 at 8:57 pm
(applied to school as a foreigner to get financial aid! Now the POTUS! But you’re right, who cares)
April 7th, 2011 at 8:57 pm
Of course, if Obama gets reelected and the Democrats retake the house (worst case scenario)
The Democrats aren’t retaking the House.
There are 216 congressional districts that were Republican before the 2006/2008 debacle, and that have gone back to being Republican thanks to last year’s election. These are Republican seats by default and only went Democrat in ’06 and ’08 because those years represented a low point for the GOP in every possible way. Even an Obama re-election won’t flip those seats. It would take a perfect storm to flip those seats, like the one in ’06 and ’08.
There are also a handful of Southern seats that we won for the first time and that have been “red” seats for years in blue dog hands. Those seats aren’t going back either.
And then there will be a handful of new GOP seats that we gain due to redistricting.
In sum, there is a structural Republican majority in the House of Representatives. It ain’t going anywhere.
April 7th, 2011 at 9:00 pm
Matthew,
I completely understand where you are coming from. We’re both committed Catholics (I think). We both believe in putting people, and humanity, and morals first. I get that, and I totally agree. But that commitment to Catholic humanism does not lead me to conclude that seniors have the first claim to every dollar in America, if that’s what it takes to get them to live a few seconds longer.
There are MAAAAANY competing goods in this world, including saving children, and the disabled, and the mentally retarded, and the destitute, and the widowed, and the orphaned, etc… etc….. With all due respect, I think you’ve developed a myopic vision of the good that is crowding out the broader picture. We are dealing with finite resources in this life, and to give one class of people first claim on all of it is simply immoral, however well intentioned.
April 7th, 2011 at 9:06 pm
Dave,
It will also be almost impossible for Democrats to hold the Senate as well. They are now defending their gains in ’06, and must defend 23 of 33 seats. Of those 23, 4 are retiring, and of those 4, 2 are in red states. Of the 23 Democratic seats, 8 are in states Bush won. Of the 10 Republican seats, 3 are states Obama won.
April 7th, 2011 at 9:06 pm
TRUMP/PROSSER 2012 Trump would triangulate.
April 7th, 2011 at 9:11 pm
#23 -
The plan is being pitched as a way to preserve our promise of health care for seniors…it is only reasonable that it then meet that claim.
————–
“if that’s what it takes to get them to live a few seconds longer.”
This is a point that is often brought up…but after some recent family experiences, I’m not convinced its that accurate of a reflection of the situation. Although the relative of mine who very recently passed away DID receive a good deal of medical care in the final months of their life that ultimately did not do something (primarily in the form of Chemotherepy), there was simply no way of knowing that the treatments were not effective…and indeed, once the situation was obviously terminal, all but the simplest of medical care – that is, very low-flow oxygen and sedetives – was withdrawn.
I’ve thought about trying to write a full-length article on the full experience…still slightly hesitant.
April 7th, 2011 at 9:33 pm
Matthew,
1. Our promise of health care for seniors cannot possibly mean a limitless supply.
2. I think you are missing my larger point of competing goods.
3. You should write that article. I’d like to read it.
April 7th, 2011 at 9:42 pm
“3. You should write that article. I’d like to read it.”
I’m not sure I’d be comfortable doing that without approaching the rest of my family about it – and I’m not sure now is QUITE the right time to do that.
======
” I think you are missing my larger point of competing goods.”
No, I understand it…but if we really DID want to debate that point, I’m not sure if seniors would come least off. After all, of all people alive, don’t seniors have the best claim to having earned what they receive from the government and society in genreal?
April 7th, 2011 at 9:48 pm
Matthew,
“I’m not sure I’d be comfortable doing that without approaching the rest of my family about it – and I’m not sure now is QUITE the right time to do that.”
I can appreciate that.
“After all, of all people alive, don’t seniors have the best claim to having earned what they receive from the government and society in genreal?”
Let me give that some more thought. I’m getting sleepy now, but would love to take that question up with you again in the future.
You are Catholic, btw, aren’t you? I just don’t want to make a bad assumption that we’re operating in the same moral framework, if that’s not true.
April 7th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
..and you know why else I’m believing this? No American would cut the pay of our troops, keep his own pay, and go off on vacation. That’s just a foreign way of thinking. He doesn’t care. That’s why he doesn’t TRI-ANG-U-LATE.
April 7th, 2011 at 10:15 pm
Liz, I like how you tied that in with the topic
And personally, I haven’t looked into the birther issue much. But I don’t like how people keep shutting down discussion… reminds me of:
“The debate is over” – Al Gore
lettertohuckabee.com
April 7th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
OK thanks L T Huckabee, just trying to stay relevant.:) So now SNOPES has listed my exciting long form as a phony. Who to believe…who to believe….until Obama coughs up his $17 long form, I choose to believe he’s a fraud. I’m sure Candidate Trump will get to the bottom of this for me.
April 7th, 2011 at 10:37 pm
No doubt, L T Huckabee, that’s what bugs me too – you make an inquiry and suddenly you get pelted with scoffs and irritated superiority complexes. That’s a SURE sign that something is there. BOTH sides freak about it. Cough up the freakin’ document. How hard is that? I’ve had it with the slippery snake. I hope Trump can hold him down long enough to check his I.D.
April 7th, 2011 at 11:05 pm
Cutting any sort of deal with Ryan and Republicans on taxes and spending will just further anger his base and either they’ll try to get someone to run against him in a primary or they’ll sit at home for the most part come November 2012. If we do manage to get the White House and Senate back next year Republicans have to stay true to their principles and prove to the American people that smaller government that lives within its means is far more efficient than having what we’ve had for quite some time. I’d also encourage the Republicans to repeal some of the garbage stuff they voted on last time such as REAL ID, NCLB,and even scrapping the Patriot Act.
April 8th, 2011 at 2:22 am
David your article gives Obama too much credit.
April 8th, 2011 at 7:30 am
David – as usual, interesting and insightful analysis. I agree with what Jonathan said earlier on about taking some of the Carter playbook for his campaign. That said, his policies and actual implementation as President are classic aloofness. He doesn’t connect one-on-one with voters, that’s why he did so poorly in town hall settings during the campaign trail.
April 8th, 2011 at 8:23 am
Liz,
Part of the irritation is you trying to threadjack every post now to talk about your new-found interest.
Part of the irritation is the pointlessness of it- there are a TON of more productive things to talk about.
Part of the irritation is that Indies are against you on this issue, and people like you drive them away from the GOP and towards Obama. Why? Because intentionally or not, Birthers makes us all look irrational, conspiratorial, and racist.
For 80-90% of America (including me and the vast majority here), it is a settled issue, and/or irrelevent. But if you want to indulge your new found interest, there are a ton of birther sites out there. Have at it.
April 8th, 2011 at 10:46 am
Matt, I find most people who are easily irritated tend to be extremely concerned with what others think about them. Bummer is, they seldom grasp the truth easily – they are trying too hard to impress. I’m so sorry about your irritation. It must be very…irritating. I wonder if Trump is going to be in the May 5th debate?
April 8th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
Obama doesn’t triangulate because it’s not altogether clear he needs to. Obama belongs to a class of politicians, of which perhaps George W. Bush was a forerunner, that believes in using capital. That is to say, he doesn’t simply accumulate it endlessly and store it in his piggy-bank. If Obama negotiated the sort of compromise you’re suggesting it’s very likely he’d be re-elected and by a large margin. But he’d also be stuck with policy dramatically further away from the liberal ideal than the current policy. The GOP line with entitlements is that if things get much worse financial necessity will force us to end these programs or impose dramatic austerity measures; therefore, by making bold, but not radical changes now, we’d be saving the programs. This is not true. There are of course two options; dramatically higher taxes or dramatic cuts/reforms, and there’s probably a third that somehow blends the two. In an imminent crisis Democrats like Obama are betting, perhaps rightly, that we’re more likely to default towards the first or third options, both preferrable to any sort of triangulating compromise. Obama could triangulate, like Clinton, and accumulate lots of political capital; but then in all likelihood he leaves office with non-transferable political capital and a country that is oriented towards Republican priorities. Rationally Obama perceives a third way between the old third way (triangulation) and loss; a continuation of what he’s been doing followed by a 3-4 point and 60 electoral vote victory over whatever weak nominee the GOP produces. Yes, he probably loses the Senate but he’d probably lose the Senate anyway- triangulator’s from Eisenhower to Nixon to Clinton have proven to have precious little coattails. He then spends 4 years unprofitably dueling with the Republican Congress- something that would probably happen even if he won by 200 electoral votes instead of 60- and leaves office with a country that has Obamacare and a decidely more progressive center. There is no incentive for Obama to compromise as long as his re-election odds are above 50% (which I think they certainly are). The fact that the GOP is likely to control all of Congress, after 2012, decreases that incentive because it’s not as though he’ll find it easy to spend any of the massive political capital he accumulates after triangulation. It’s all downside.
I talked about this a little during the Rubio/Crist/Meek senate race. Crist never understood that the purpose of accumulating political capital is to spend it; either securing a base, or advancing your agenda. Instead he flitted about aimlessly, accruing surface popularity which melted away when he was given a serious challenge. Had Crist simply stayed silent on the stimulus and vocally supported the teacher tenure bill he would have fended off Rubio in the primary and won in November by 10-12 points. Instead, he was accumulating capital, and letting it sit idle in his bank, as he NEEDED to win a 30 point victory in the general election. Obama is not making this mistake. He sees a weak GOP field and a Republican proposal that is bound to be controversial, and he’s betting he can stall, and above the fray, and demagogue his way to a small, but comfortable reelection victory, an outcome that would leave with almost as much an influence as a large victory. He may be right.