Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Take a look at this commentary - it is so on the mark!

President Obama - Political Commentary - Humor - Senior Living Magazine


David said...

I found that his bias was clearly summarized in the blatantly untrue statement: "The man is being challenged unfairly, characterized with vulgarity and treated with the kind of deep disrespect to which no previous president was subjected." For 7.5 years, GW Bush was subjected to that treatment by the Main Stream Media, while Obama only gets it from the "fringe".

At least credible results - consistent with Presidential intent - happened during Bush's administration. Obama has cleverly ensured that the results - and the consequences of those results - of his initiatives will not manifest until AFTER he leaves office.

Bahhh! Pretender!


Margie said...

well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. No one called Bush names from the floor of the Legislature on the National stage; the arguments against Bush were related to policy. I don't agree that there were credible results under Bush's administration unless you count massive deficit spending and the bank bail-out (which I believe was necessary, but if not for the deregulatory nature of the Bush administration would not have been). I know that there is no changing anyone's mind on this, really. We think how we think, believe how we believe.

I am just so saddened by the hatred for this President so blatantly expressed. And I can't help but believe that much of that hatred stems from untruths thrown out there, over and over again, about his nationality, his religious beliefs, and the fact that he's the first African-American President. I just tells 'em as I sees 'em, and I see the far Right telling lies over and over again until they're eventually accepted by many as truths. Way of doing things as old as time, and many are still duped by it.

David said...

+1 on agree to disagree

-1 on calling Obama a liar during SOUA
I just went and listened to the fragment in question on YouTube. The words shouted were "You Lie!", which implies that Obama is a liar, but is grammatically a comment on the assertion just uttered.

0 on "credible results"
One of the places where we'll disagree - though my intent with the statement was to point out that when Bush accomplished one of his objectives, the results and the consequences were immediately obvious and traceable to Bush. Obama's initiatives all come into effect either at the end of (a greatly to be feared) second term or after his tenure. So he can claim credit, but avoid consequences when they would harm his political career. And they called Nixon "Slick".

0 on bank bailout
Wow, that is revisionism! But you should review the facts about which branch of the Federal government produces the budget, the party with Legislative power at the time that the housing deregulation was pushed through, and the LegisCritters doing the pushing.

+1 on the sadness
Felt the same thing about the Dems and the MSM with Bush. He was no where near perfect as President, but the vitriol with which lies were created and advocated were truly incredible - every bit as sad as what is being done to Obama.

As an aside, I have no problem with Obama as a person, I just don't believe he has any more qualification to be POTUS than myself and I KNOW that I'm not qualified to be POTUS. His actions and effects have not (yet?) caused me to re-evaluate my analysis.


Margie said...


Thanks for a thoughtful response. It is clear to me that you truly understand the nature of politics and you do your homework - you're not just spouting off.

I have to say, though, that I feel just as strongly as you do about lies told in the name of political progress. I believe that recent history has shown that when the right-leaning in our legislative and executive branches of government have had nothing, they've resorted to revising the truth - or outright lying - and repeated those lies over and over again until the not-so-well-educated public, who tune in only to soundbites on tv, radio, or internet, came to believe their truth.

This is a big agree to disagree area, and I am not calling YOU a liar, as it is clear to me that you at least understand the history or policy making. I am, a bit sheepishly, a big conspiracy theorist. Some of my opinions/ideas about how things happened just pre and then post-9/11 would likely make your toes curl. I don't say much about these theories because I fear that many would think me insane and I really don't look good in white jackets with many sleeves!! :)

Suffice it to say that GWB's presidency was headed nowhere fast until 9/11. That one, tragic, terrible day in our history turned him and his cronies into heroes. In my opinion, unfairly and unethically. I don't expect you to agree, I am just stating my belief.

I really enjoy hearing your take on things. I am always trying to understand the other guy's point of view, and enjoy intelligent debate and discussion - not the crap on FOX and, yes, MSNBC. Sadly, I think that Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert get it right more than the political pundits out there...and they're COMEDIANS, for goodness sake! How sad is THAT??!?