Politics --> Obama --> Deal with it or don't

Post Reply New Topic

Anyway, I found this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xtNr5-up0U

I loved this video, because Obama's fanbase is crazy. They are so zealous to their leader. When it was cool to rebel, I rebelled. Now many the "rebels" are working for the man. All he pretty much spouts is what they want to hear -- can't they see that? Now I continue to practice the first ammendment. Plus, the song rocks.

I always read the comments. They were pretty crazy. How do people bring satanism into it?

Hilariously, this video was censored. As a result, I feel the need to post it everywhere. So there it is.

I don't feel like logging in to see the video (it's censured for people without accounts). All I have to say is the Obama sycophants are getting increasinly delusional. "Obama's a 3D Chest Master, by compromising away everything we'll have universal healthcare! Oh, he's going to checkmate them after caving into Joe Lieberman, just you wait!".

I can proudly say that I was among a group of leftists pessimistic about Obama from day one (Dennis Kucinich was my first choice, by the time I realized Edwards was a semi-viable and semi-progressive enough as a candidate, it was January 2008). Others in that group included Chomsky, PZ Myers, Ralph Nader, and "Progressives (Critically) for Obama".

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGK5tXNItV0&feature=PlayList&p=3343C473278B78D6&index=0&playnext=1[/youtube]

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009 ... regret.php

I'm a bit more pessimistic than PZ about a progressive in 2012, though.

Yeah... there is absolutely no chance Obama will face a serious threat from the left. Remember, 67% of Republicans (and 40% of Americans overall) believe Obama is a socialist. And given the current political climate, I expect the GOP to field an extremely right-wing candidate; not necessarily Palin but someone in that general Tea Party/Religious Right camp. That leaves us with disastrous consequences should they win: imagine, worse than Bush...

Hopefully I'm completely wrong and passions will cool after the midterm elections, allowing the Republicans to nominate someone more sensible like Romney (or similar). I suppose in that case you would view the election as a lose-lose situation, but the prospects would look a lot safer at least.

On the other hand, a fanatical and incompetent rightwing Republican may just provide the catalyst for a strong progressive in 2016. If the republic survives the rightwing fanatic, of course.

Every election cycle I hear people on both sides say "Oh, the guy from the other side is obviously so terrible that if we let him get in office, people will see how horrible that is and support someone who's really on our side." Poppycock. The electorate has a short memory, and in any case is composed largely of simpletons who are unable to draw any meaningful causal link between who is in charge and the state of the country.

I don't buy into this sort of "equal and opposite reaction" type of thinking in politics. Why has a centrist Democrat sparked the greatest right-wing fury in over a generation? My Congressman recently stood up before the entire country and basically said that a half-hearted insurance regulation bill was the death of America's political tradition.

Because the Centrecrat failed to develop detailed healthcare policies before running and failed develop simple slogans to market his proposals. The politically self-defeating President also failed to hone in a consistent and persistent message.

Furthermore, Obama failed to learn from his hero Reagan and implement something like an legally sound verison of "The Office of Public Diplomacy". If it works for somebody as vacuous as Teflon Ron, it should work for Obama.

I dunno about the GOP nominating an "extremely right wing" candidate. The favorites right now are what Romney, Huckabee, and Palin in that order and they're all extremely flawed. Others in the possible field are like Ron Paul(he'd be pretty old), Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich, Gary E Johnson, Rick Santorum, and Haley Barbour. Maybe one of the young GOP congressmen who on the news a lot now in Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, and Mike Pence. Who knows maybe, a complete dark horse like General David Petraeus(who did just make a trip to New Hampshire) It's a completely open field but I don't see Romney or Huckabee winning the nomination.

Ronmey's really old. I mean, not that old, biologically. But, he has the baby boomer's vote, those which are right-leaning, at least. I just caught myself thinking, "oh, a young candidate might be nice." Yeesh. With youth comes not-experience. Like now. I would like to see what the GOP will bring to the primaries. Question for you all: If Bush was all that terrible, how did he get elected twice? Not that I am very supportive. (Honestly, better him than Gore or that random Kerry fellow. Puppet much? Interesting activity: Compare Kerry to Obama.) I actually think it was his second term that did his reputation in. He was voted for a second time, of course. I think people were supportive because he was doing something about Al Qaida. Those same people that cried for revenge flip-flopped and now hate him. I almost believe, truly, that this country runs on emotions more than logic. Emotions are so fleeting, especially once perspective slaps one across the face with a wet rubber glove.

Eek, why would you through the Tea Party in with the Religious? As far as I know, there are just enough religious lefties as their are righties. I can site several friends and relatives. Well the Tea Party is for the fiscally conservative and/or anti-tax people. I guess many fiscally conservative people are also socially conservative? :shrug

Well, my original point was, I think, that I think the GOP will go for someone more central right. I believe this because well darn it I want someone with a sense of fiscal responsibility, haha. And also to go with the social climate. A lot of Americans are caring about social things like UHC and gay rights and stuff. Social tradition is being challenged and is changing. Or trying to, at least, California *ahem* I really wonder: 1. Will the GOP cater to the youth and young adults and 2. How far would they go to attract them?

Thank you all for replying! All of your posts are really interesting! Lots of food for thought. Figuratively speaking. Mmm....food...

Why was Bush II re-elected? - Every heard of rallying around the flag? Terror attacks and ongoing wars can do that, as ineffectual and slow to respond to attack ad candidacies will also do.

Bush was terrible in both terms - it took until his second term for the effects of his first term to become apparent.

Lets not forget the fact that despite being a nice guy, John Kerry was really lacking in the communication department (relate much to us?). The 2004 election was like watching Beavis vs Butthead, both of the candidates were terrible at getting their message across.

That being said, Bush II was the nastiest thing to inhabit the Oval Office since Nixon, the only difference is that unlike him, Bush & Co actually understood the value in covering their tracks.

in b4 "Bush was never elected"

I'm using "elected" in a very loose sense - quite frankly, I don't know what would happen if the votes in Ohio were properly counted. They weren't, though.

The only man running with any caliber or intellectual merit in 2004 was Ralph Nader. Unfortunately, he didn't stand a chance.

Typical. Ron Paul is another guy who has the courage of his convictions, and who is even right sometimes. But he's in his mid 70s. Reagan was 68 when first elected, IIRC. The electoral process is made so that we have the choice of Tweedledee and Tweedledum, and the people who ACTUALLY pull the strings do so freely while the frontman is there to distract people. People can't even agree on what the guy behind the curtain wants, although some sort of totalitarian socialism is a safe bet.

He wants to cause a revolution, then like the tea parties the revolution will be twisted to serve the needs of the powerful instead of what the people want, and the people will get a dictator when they thought they were fighting for their freedom. Revolutions are just transfers of power between factions of the same elite lineage. There has never been a true "people's revolution" in the history of man, except maybe the French Revolution, and we all know how that turned out-they slaughtered each other until French society was toast, then Napoleon came along and took over, and the people were too exhausted to resist. Elections have never mattered. The Constitution is just a mirage. Always has been.

You do realize that most Americans are skeptical at the very least of an all-progressive agenda although Obama did campaign by making some fairly progressive promises. Obama was about the best chance for a progressive president the United States will get.

You mean like George W. Bush?

I dunno if we can survive a repeat of the Bush administration. Consider the track record: when Bush took office, America was a peaceful, prosperous nation. We ran budget surpluses and were on track to completely pay off the national debt by 2010. We were respected around the world. When he left office, we were bogged down in two foreign wars, we had record deficits, massive debt, were the laughingstock of the developed world, and were plunged into the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.