http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39772.html

I thought this was a pretty good take on the message box the president has found himself in, and is unlikely to get out of anytime soon.

Kevin Drum had a nice rejoinder to this Beltway wank at his Mother Jones blog.

It's the economy, stupid. Were the economy returning to pre-'07 levels, were unemployment down to 7 or 8 percent (instead of up to 11 or 12), the tea-leave-smokers at Politico would be crafting a convoluted narrative for why Obama is a massive success (given, too, the passage of stimulus, health care reform, & financial reform). Instead, we're treading water -- in no small part due a watered-down stimulus (watered-down to pull in Republican votes in the House/Senate, that never came, & were never going to come; "bipartisanship", no matter how raw David Broder makes his dick jacking off to it, is a lie, particularly amongst the GOP) -- so regardless what the (other) accomplishments of the administration are, they are subsumed by a still-recessionary economy.

Of course, van de Hei & Harris cannot say this, because it would make for a shorter article & less chance of getting on Hardball to blow on about it, plus, to admit that (some of) the economic difficulties are a factor of Republican intransigence, well... These folks at Politico are crypto-Republicans, contrary the "mainstream media liberal bias" meme (which is also a lie), so to demean a Gooper -- that just cannot be done.

Ergo, suck it, "backdoor socialists".

***

To that, I say -- Eat my ass with a gelato spoon, Politico!

I thought it was a pretty weak article and argument...Isn't it the job of liberal bloggers to *gulp* push a liberal agenda?

And the president has for the most part...wait for it...done exactly what he said he would do in terms of a domestic legislative agenda (despite being subjected to some of the worst and most asinine fear mongering ever perpetuated on any politician anywhere.) and been largely successful in his foreign policy.

All this while being dealt a pretty bad hand on the economy. And two wars. Oh, and no one has a job (which, let's face it is the 800 lb gorilla [sic] in the room.)

Well, you two are are in the final 40% (myself included) of white people who think the guy is doing an OK job.

But this sets the tone for the next 4 months, which sets the tone for the mid-terms.

Ignore MSM at your own peril, because it is there, and it is Mainstream, and no humans read things like Mother Jones.

Also, I am glad neither of you bothered to read the article, because it basically says that while he has done what he said he would: PEOPLE DON'T AGREE THAT HE HAS, OR THEY DON'T LIKE HIS POLICIES.

And it says NO MATTER WHAT HE ACCOMPLISHES IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO COME BACK TO THE ECONOMY.

Way to read, guys.

I know the economy is huge on people's minds but I think it seems to get overlooked far too often that the biggest place where his actions have been dramatically different than his campaign positions has been the war. And, this was an issue where he had significant support from people of varying political ideologies. Wanting to get out of that mess was very popular and looked like a sharp break between him and Bush and got a lot of people excited. That he has done nothing about it is bigger than what I think people are talking much about...and also has effects on the economy as we watch the war funds eat yup more and more American dollars.

The article mentions this briefly but then moves on. And that seems to be the way of things with that issue these days, a little nod to oh yeah...that's still fucked, let's talk about other stuff now.

I just made this argument to a fair minded conservative friend of mine, and even he agreed below the din of media wankery some solid ground has been laid.

I think he's done a decent job at doing what he said he would do, along with some moves that disappoint me personally. Then again, anyone who would agree with me across the board should be institutionalized.

I hate that Bravo show "Work of Art", but I keep watching it. Obama would benefit greatly by watching Miles, the tortured artist with OCD on the show. He puts out decent work, but more importantly, he tells the judges what they see. He controls the story and the feeling. He has complete control over their expectations and experience.

Obama has been terrible at managing expectations.

As for some of the specifics of the story, the sentiment is more or less right, but the details are pretty shoddy. People more than 100 miles from 495 don't give a shit about how reporters are treated. Not backing the right candidate for Senate in Arkansas? He lost Arkansas by 20 points. He has zero sway there. Liberal bloggers are liberal? Yeah, maybe they are, but who else they gonna vote for in 2012?

Well, if you're the President, and 3 people run against your allies in 3 different states in more or less open defiance of your wishes, your political operation will be seen as weak-dick.

And, you see a lot of critical stories because they treat the press like shit. Same with Bush. If you play the game a little better, people tend to treat you a little better.

You think I get stories about my clients by being an asshole to reporters?

Agree with you Fu. I mean, yeah Obama's numbers are dropping but I that doesn't mean that most Americans are ready to hand the keys back over the GOP. The GOP still has a lot to prove.

As mentioned earlier, it's the economy stupid. It's fucking brutal out there right now. The Unemployment rate doesn't even factor in those with part-time jobs who are hoping to land something else. Not to mention the millions who are underemployed because companies know they can get people for cheap right now. Add it all up and it's terrifying and affecting upwards of 20 milliion people or more.

So, of course the GOP would block unemployment benefits citing "fiscal responsibility". Fuck them.

Here's a semi-rebuttal to the politico article. Basically just restates what's been said here already:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/1 ... 47749.html

So, what does the primary challenge to Bennett (granted, not quite a primary, but the prelimnary step before it) in Utah say of the institutional control of the GOP? What about the Tea-tarded races to the bottom of the gene-pool in Kentucky & Nevada?

Personally, "primarying" an incumbent &/or favourite, while distasteful if the fave is my candidate, isn't such a bad idea. Encourage action over complacency, I say.

Of course, Blanche Lincoln is still an unfortunate human being. But you win some, you lose some.

I agree with a lot of the article but I also agree with this:



To me, its not surprising at all that Obama the Candidate was a lot more popular than Obama the President. I'm not sure I really believe that Obama and his operatives are all that surprised by this either. It seems to me that they recognized an opportunity to push through what hasn't been in normal times a very popular agenda, and were probably willing to trade big losses in the mid terms for getting through a bunch of policies that libs have wanted for years. Even the Stimulus bill is more a grabbag of Dem wants than anything meant to really create private sector jobs or private sector demand. I can see how it pisses off Pelosi and other House Dems that they've been put in a tough position but I don't think Rahm is probably that surprised with how things are turning out. I'm pretty sure I remember reading some remarks by him about how crisis creates opportunity.

If the Repubs don't win a ton of seats, its going to be because of their own incompetence. The interesting thing will be to see whether Obama moves to the center after the midterms ala Billy C.

That article basically says what I said before he was elected - Barry's a crappy communicator. See every post I did during the election, which I got killed for on this board despite being a Barry supporter.

That said, I'm fairly happy with the job he's done (this BP thing almost killed me though). Let's be honest, it's been a rough ride since he took office (oddly, not unlike what Bush came into). And he's not getting the credit that Bush initially got for keeping the ship together against some scary shit. He's managed to push his agenda through for the most part (at least I think - WTF is the healthcare bill?). Besides letting Lehman Bros. fail, they handled that economic disaster as well as I think possible. Mostly, I think the country is in a weird place politically. If the liberal base pulls away from him, they're retarded.

But I think the financial reform legislation is a really bad idea.

That happened under Bush.

That's right. I couldn't remember when. That was a screw-up.

How much of a ratings drop is due solely to the BP issue? I can't imagine it's not significant.

The singular is "leaf", dumbfuck.

Going on a lot of vacations? Really? You gotta stop listening to Hannity.

There is nothing "crypto" about the republican suck-offs at Politico. I don't even read it much any more, it's like watching Fox (which I do religiously every Sunday morning to accept the Lord's bitter cup). That was a mediocre and obvious article.

Mid-terms... it'll creep within 5-10 seats in the House of a Repub majority. Obama will be elected in 2012 by 5%. I am mildly annoyed with him; he's done a fair job. However if they don't shape up soon (they bettah not pull the plug on Elizabeth Warren and cave AGAIN to that midget wimp Geithner), they won't get my money again. And yep, Da Kingfish is right and wrong (as is often the case). In McLuhan terms, Obama is cooooooool and cerebral (first black president would have to be). Sometimes that works. Some occasions call for a heat he doesn't do well.

I hate to say it but imagine a Black Prez giving the heat too much. Might scare a lot of dumb ones out of their couches.

The reason it, and HCR are not great legislation is that neither really accomplishes their stated purpose.

Fin Ref creates new boards, councils, and agencies, but we have seen under Bush its more about who is watching the store AT those agencies than the lack of agencies themselves.

But to look at our financial system and say Fin Ref is a bad idea, I will need a little further explanation from you, Tanner.

Yeah, I agree. (I actually feel the same way about Health Care--even flawed legislation gets the ball rolling; if not in the right direction, then in a different direction.)


As an aside, the case that I need to see made immediately is to let the Bush Tax Cuts expire. People need to be made to understand that, all politics aside, those Tax Cuts were a grave mistake and that those who constantly want tax cuts AND more military intervention are not only wrong, but stupid. This false gospel that tax cuts create jobs...god, somebody please make it stop.

please explain.

I think you pretty much nailed why. The agencies in place had the authority to regulate but they didn't. I'm not sure that adding more layers is going to correct that. Let's just be honest, the Fed Reserve and SEC were asleep at the wheel. A "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau" to protect consumers against fraud isn't going to keep them awake. And the Fed Reserve already has similar boards and adding more (or renaming them) won't shift the focus of the Feds from keeping banks solvent.

I find it also mildly humorous that the principal architects behind the collapse were Greenspan, Bernanke, Dodd and Frank in my opinion. Bernanke kept his job and Dodd and Frank are still in charge of Congressional regulatory oversight in this matter. That's sort of like putting the drunks in charge of checking for DWIs.

tanner i think you are missing the point. the pullback of banking regulation since reagan and under clinton, and horrificly bad management by financial institutions that took on systemic risk themselves, is what caused the collapse. we should separate investment from commercial banking, and drastically increase capital requirements at banks. the fact that the new legislation will not accomplish its stated purpose is due to republican opposition to the part of the bill that would have stopped too big to fail, among other things. yes, the taxpayers will be bailing out mega-banks again, and that is thanks to the republicans in congress who gutted a large portion of this bill.

the only real hope we have is that the rule making associated with this bill is way tougher than expected, however, i am not holding my breath at all.

to not fix what just transpired in our country is a failure of our government of epic proportions, in my opinion.