Upstate Dem nails Mr. Bipartisan, Barack Obama, with this dairy over at mydd (bold added):
President Obama’s Compromises
by Upstate Dem, Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 09:20:00 AM CDTAfter 9/11 George W. Bush put the country on a permanent war footing and created a new role for himself — The Decider. In so doing he revitalized his presidency and greatly expanded and solidified his political base. . . . They were both enemies of Bush and needed to be defeated by any means necessary. In this domestic war confrontation was unavoidable and to be welcomed. . . .
In the wreckage of the Bush presidency Barack Obama has pursued a different means of obtaining power. He would end the political wars and declare himself The Uniter. In this role confrontation is his enemy and must be avoided. (This does not apply in Obama’s current struggle with Hillary Clinton because she is seen as a Divider. She and her supporters just don’t get it. Once they are disposed of, Obama can begin bringing us together.)
President Obama will be under tremendous pressure from his base to fulfill his role as a uniter. They trust him to worry about the details and are unlikely to push him in any particular direction. His election will be victory in itself. On policy Obama’s path of least resistance will be to the right. Confrontation will sap his power. (The media will also provide a check on Obama’s liberal impulses. For them Republican rule is the natural order of things. Democrats must be bipartisan.)
Premeditated capitulation will likely be the legislative strategy of the Obama administration. This helps account for Obama’s disturbing language on health care and Social Security.
I responded with this Obama domestic policy prediction:
Re: President Obama’s Compromises (none / 0)
. . . Obama’s more or less explicit about it: he presents himself as a substanceless change agent and whatever platform promises he has made, they will all be quickly shelved when some early trumped-up budget crisis ‘requires’ firm bipartisan action. End result will be some sort of mighty cutbacks on the last of FDR and LBJ’s safety net.
He knew the ‘liberals’ wouldn’t stand in his way from their non-reaction to his Republican spin ‘Social Security is in crisis’ talk.
by fairleft on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 10:55:17 AM CDT
A comment by supertendar predicts Obama foreign policy, how his ‘avoid confrontation at all costs’ approach might play out. Not so bad, actually, except (as usual!) for the Palestinians:
Re: President Obama’s Compromises
“In the wreckage of the Bush presidency Barack Obama has pursued a different means of obtaining power. He would end the political wars and declare himself The Uniter. In this role confrontation is his enemy and must be avoided…. Confrontation will sap his power.” — Upstate Dem
You very astutely struck gold in figuring out Obama. What you’ve said here is very important. I’m wondering if the same strategy applies to foreign policy, where countries like Iran and Pakistan will play on Obama’s political image of himself as a uniter by taking things to the brink and then forcing compromises more favorable to them, understanding as you note that for Obama “confrontation saps his power.” I suspect the Israeli’s too will test Obama’s tolerance for confrontation by creating more settlements while relying on Obama’s uniter-at-all-cost reputation to force unequal resolutions on the innocent party after the fact. If I were an ambassador sending home dispatches about a potential Obama presidency, your insight would be key in weighing how to deal with him and how far to go.
by superetendar on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 01:29:19 PM CDT
.
(Washington Post) March 13, 2007 – The cultural values of “educational achievement and delayed gratification and intergenerational responsibility and hard work and entrepreneurship” produce success. But “if a child is raised in a disorderly environment with inadequate health care and guns going off late at night, then it’s a lot harder to incorporate those values. We as a society can take responsibility for creating conditions in which those cultural attributes are enhanced.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Based on the substance he has proposed, he won’t do anything about that.
start to finish.
Who invented “triangulation”? Clinton
Who accomplished nothing for the left and everything for the right? Clinton
Would hillary do better? You must be joking
Under the circumstances, given the choice between a KNOWN FACT OF CLINTON THIRD-WAY, and Obama, Obama is the obvious choice.
Who invented “triangulation”? Bill Clinton. Hillary Clinton, for non-sexists, is not her husband, and is not responsible for his sins.
Who accomplished nothing for the left and everything for the right? Bill Clinton. Hillary Clinton, for non-sexists, is not her husband, and is not responsible for his sins.
Would Hillary do better? I must be not saying that.
Under the circumstances, given the choice between a KNOWN FACT OF CLINTON THIRD-WAY [You have a right to feel that way about Bill Clinton, not Hillary, if you are not a sexist] , and Obama, Obama is the obvious choice.
So, you choose Obama despite what the bipartisan with a passion Republican spin he is spouting, and choose against Hillary Clinton because you think she is Bill Clinton. Pretty much standard Obamamania.
god, you’re stupid.