Thoughts on Today's Political Landscape

[SluttyShemaleAnna]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Criminal scheme? That's the first I've heard of that. I have heard that she is, or was, illegal and there was something dubious about her accounts or some such but that this is not strange when it comes to illegals. Of course there are fools out there who would condemn her on that alone rather than recognizing the perilous position she is in.

I've also heard DSK has a history of misogyny and sexual harassment.

Well, apparently an assortment of known criminals have paid $100,000 into her bank account, so there's definitely something going on, that cash didn't spring out of a monkey's butthole.

The facts of the case though is that the medical and forensic evidence is in her favour, and the circumstantial evidence that is known to the public seems to back her up too, as does DSK's history of sexual harassment.
The prosecution is going ahead however as the US justice system places so much weight on victim 'credibility', it seems quite likely that DSK will not be convicted.

[ila]

Originally Posted by SluttyShemaleAnna

...The facts of the case though is that the medical and forensic evidence is in her favour, and the circumstantial evidence that is known to the public seems to back her up too, as does DSK's history of sexual harassment...

The medical and forensic evidence shows that there was some kind of sexual activity. It does not prove that there was a rape.

[smc]

I know Enoch Root wants this thread to keep going. Today's column by Maureen Dowd in The New York Times is worthy of resurrecting the thread.

I am no supporter of Obama. His failure to stand up to the right doesn't surprise me at all. When he was running for president, I went on record saying that he stood for nothing.

But from the point of view of political process, watching his demise has been interesting. There are, of course, those on this site who will chime in with their usual dissembling about his policies. But I hope some of you will be spurred to discuss the process of governing, not just take the opportunity to spew bullshit that's already posted elsewhere.

One and Done?
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: September 3, 2011

WASHINGTON -- One day during the 2008 campaign, as Barack Obama read the foreboding news of the mounting economic and military catastrophes that W. was bequeathing his successor, he dryly remarked to aides: ?Maybe I should throw the game.?

On the razor?s edge of another recession; blocked at every turn by Republicans determined to slice him up at any cost; starting an unexpectedly daunting re-election bid; and puzzling over how to make a prime-time speech about infrastructure and payroll taxes soar, maybe President Obama is wishing that he had thrown the game.

The leader who was once a luminescent, inspirational force is now just a guy in a really bad spot.

His Republican rivals for 2012 have gone to town on the Labor Day weekend news of zero job growth, using the same line of attack Hillary used in 2008: Enough with the big speeches! What about some action?

Polls show that most Americans still like and trust the president; but they may no longer have faith that he?s a smarty-pants who can fix the economy.

Just as Obama miscalculated in 2009 when Democrats had total control of Congress, holding out hope that G.O.P. lawmakers would come around on health care after all but three senators had refused to vote for the stimulus bill; just as he misread John Boehner this summer, clinging like a scorned lover to a dream that the speaker would drop his demanding new inamorata, the Tea Party, to strike a ?grand? budget bargain, so the president once more set a trap for himself and gave Boehner the opportunity to dis him on the timing of his jobs speech this week.

Obama?s re-election chances depend on painting the Republicans as disrespectful. So why would the White House act disrespectful by scheduling a speech to a joint session of Congress at the exact time when the Republicans already had a debate planned?

And why is the White House so cocky about Obama as a TV draw against quick-draw Rick Perry? As James Carville acerbically noted, given a choice between watching an Obama speech and a G.O.P. debate, ?I?d watch the debate, and I?m not even a Republican.?

The White House caved, of course, and moved to Thursday, because there?s nothing the Republicans say that he won?t eagerly meet halfway.

No. 2 on David Letterman?s Top Ten List of the president?s plans for Labor Day: ?Pretty much whatever the Republicans tell him he can do.?

On MSNBC, the anchors were wistfully listening to old F.D.R. speeches, wishing that this president had some of that fight. But Obama can?t turn into F.D.R. for the campaign because he aspires to the class that F.D.R. was a traitor to; and he can?t turn into Harry Truman because he lacks the common touch. He has an acquired elitism.

MSNBC?s Matt Miller offered ?a public service? to journalists talking about Obama ? a list of synonyms for cave: ?Buckle, fold, concede, bend, defer, submit, give in, knuckle under, kowtow, surrender, yield, comply, capitulate.?

And it wasn?t exactly Morning in America when Obama sent out a mass e-mail to supporters Wednesday under the heading ?Frustrated.?

It unfortunately echoed a November 2010 parody in The Onion with the headline, ?Frustrated Obama Sends Nation Rambling 75,000-Word E-Mail.?

?Throughout,? The Onion teased, ?the president expressed his aggravation on subjects as disparate as the war in Afghanistan, the sluggish economic recovery, his live-in mother-in-law, China?s undervalued currency, Boston?s Logan Airport, and tort reform.?

You know you?re in trouble when Harry Reid says you should be more aggressive.

If the languid Obama had not done his usual irritating fourth-quarter play, if he had presented a jobs plan a year ago and fought for it, he wouldn?t have needed to elevate the setting. How will he up the ante next time? A speech from the space station?

Republicans who are worried about being political props have a point. The president is using the power of the incumbency and a sacred occasion for a political speech.

Obama is still suffering from the Speech Illusion, the idea that he can come down from the mountain, read from a Teleprompter, cast a magic spell with his words and climb back up the mountain, while we scurry around and do what he proclaimed.

The days of spinning illusions in a Greek temple in a football stadium are done. The One is dancing on the edge of one term.

The White House team is flailing ? reacting, regrouping, retrenching. It?s repugnant.

After pushing and shoving and caving to get on TV, the president?s advisers immediately began warning that the long-yearned-for jobs speech wasn?t going to be that awe-inspiring.

?The issue isn?t the size or the newness of the ideas,? one said. ?It?s less the substance than how he says it, whether he seizes the moment.?

The arc of justice is stuck at the top of a mountain. Maybe Obama was not even the person he was waiting for.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by smc

I know Enoch Root wants this thread to keep going. Today's column by Maureen Dowd in The New York Times is worthy of resurrecting the thread.

I am no supporter of Obama. His failure to stand up to the right doesn't surprise me at all. When he was running for president, I went on record saying that he stood for nothing.

But from the point of view of political process, watching his demise has been interesting. There are, of course, those on this site who will chime in with their usual dissembling about his policies. But I hope some of you will be spurred to discuss the process of governing, not just take the opportunity to spew bullshit that's already posted elsewhere.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

I have a story that must be all too familiar. I was in college. I had never voted before. I had never registered as a voter. Not even here in Puerto Rico. I had no idea what it was like. I'd never felt compelled to vote. But then along came Obama. I'd always been annoyed that my college years would be spent under Bush yet here was an opportunity for something different. So it seemed. An acquaintance of mine was a member of the College Democrats. Smart fellow, slim, ginger--Canadian if I remember correctly--full of energy. All in all he was a good man, calm and moral. He convinced me to register. He told me the dates to keep an eye out for. He was there in the public library we were driven to vote.

He was a Hillary man but then Obama became the candidate.

Now I wonder what he feels about Obama and Hillary. I certainly do not like what's happened. There's the old but true refrain: we've gotten four more years of Bush. It's certainly a lesson. I think I've learned it pretty well. Democrats are pretty much just like Republicans.

[randolph]

Enoch

Now I wonder what he feels about Obama and Hillary. I certainly do not like what's happened. There's the old but true refrain: we've gotten four more years of Bush. It's certainly a lesson. I think I've learned it pretty well. Democrats are pretty much just like Republicans.

I would not jump to that conclusion in the upcoming election. Think about what will happen if Republicans get control of both houses. The democratic firewall will be gone and the Republicans can enact the immoral teabagger adjenda
Destroy social Security, destroy Medicare, eliminate family planning, redefine rape, the list goes on and on. We will see our great country decend into a morass of pseudo religious bull shit that supports a corporate takeover of the country. These are very dangerous times and it's not from Al Quida.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by randolph

Enoch

I would not jump to that conclusion in the upcoming election. Think about what will happen if Republicans get control of both houses. The democratic firewall will be gone and the Republicans can enact the immoral teabagger adjenda
Destroy social Security, destroy Medicare, eliminate family planning, redefine rape, the list goes on and on. We will see our great country decend into a morass of pseudo religious bull shit that supports a corporate takeover of the country. These are very dangerous times and it's not from Al Quida.

Tell me randolph, how are the Democrats any different? To me it seems a matter of degree (a very slight one) rather than substance. Am I wrong? I welcome any information for further education.

A note: I have seen a difference between the rank and file Democrats like you, who do appear to have a concern for other people, and those Democrats in power, which appear to have power rather than people as their concern.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

The democratic firewall will be gone and the Republicans can enact the immoral teabagger adjenda
Destroy social Security, destroy Medicare, eliminate family planning, redefine rape, the list goes on and on. We will see our great country decend into a morass of pseudo religious bull shit that supports a corporate takeover of the country. These are very dangerous times and it's not from Al Quida.

yikes... It's not about destroying social security and medicare. It's a recognition that those programs are going bankrupt. I know what you're going to say, but the democrats also said Fannie & Freddie were financially sound. It's about what to do to either rescue those programs so that it's actually there for the people who are paying into it, or gradually phasing it out based on age so that something else will replace it for the younger generations. It's not about destroying those programs leaving people with nothing.

I'm really not sure what's wrong with family planning. They should just call it sex ed though lol.

With respect to redefining rape. I wasn't aware of this and had to look it up...
"This legislation would exclude adult victims of incest, women who were raped while drugged or unconscious, and statutory rape."

I think you can exclude the first one. If adult siblings willingly want to go at it, then who cares. The other two are rape. The repubs screwed up on this in an effort to outlaw as much abortion as they can. If the repubs had control of the presidency and congress as you fear, they could just outlaw abortion for most cases rather than redefining rape.

There is certainly religious bullshit on the part of republicans, but how does said bullshit support a corporate takeover of the country?

I agree with your last sentence. Over the last 3 years, the democrats have stuck us with spending packages and royally expanded government which greatly accelerates our debts rise to $20 trillion. The debt level and current spending levels has already brought our credit rating down for the first time ever. This limits our ability to care for the segment of our society that worries you so much without putting us further in the hole. Dangerous times...

[randolph]

Tracy

I agree with your last sentence. Over the last 3 years, the democrats have stuck us with spending packages and royally expanded government which greatly accelerates our debts rise to $20 trillion. The debt level and current spending levels has already brought our credit rating down for the first time ever. This limits our ability to care for the segment of our society that worries you so much without putting us further in the hole. Dangerous times... __________________

We have gone over the "quantitative easing" and the enormous costs of that program in other posts and threads. I hate it that the banks have got off Scott free on the financial debacle.
The massive debt is indeed very scary, particularly in view of the fact that it has had marginal beneficial effect. Presumibably it prevented a worldwide depression, which is very good. If the economy was back on its feet and unemployment was down to 6% I suspect the huge debt would seem less important.
A lot of that will be paid back with recovery and the rest will be inflated away to the detriment of my and everybody elses savings. It will be good for the stock market however.
Indeed, we are in a serious bind and now Obama wants to spend another 450 billion to reduce unemployment,. Where is that money coming from, more debt? Now he wants to cut employment taxes, further weakening social security. Reinstating the Bush tax cut for the rich would only add 80 billion, where is the rest coming from. A serious slashing of our bloated imperialistic military budget would help alot.