Lapdog
By Mitch Berg
The initial in this article, in ordinary times, would seem just a tad premature:
Has Barack Obama’s presidency already failed?
Of course, these are not ordinary times:
In normal times, this would be a ludicrous question. But these are not normal times. They are times of great danger. Today, the new US administration can disown responsibility for its inheritance; tomorrow, it will own it. Today, it can offer solutions; tomorrow it will have become the problem. Today, it is in control of events; tomorrow, events will take control of it. Doing too little is now far riskier than doing too much. If he fails to act decisively, the president risks being overwhelmed, like his predecessor. The costs to the US and the world of another failed presidency do not bear contemplating.
What is needed? The answer is: focus and ferocity. If Mr Obama does not fix this crisis, all he hopes from his presidency will be lost. If he does, he can reshape the agenda. Hoping for the best is foolish. He should expect the worst and act accordingly.
It’s a philosophy I’m comfortable with.
Yet hoping for the best is what one sees in the stimulus programme and – so far as I can judge from Tuesday’s sketchy announcement by Tim Geithner, Treasury secretary – also in the new plans for fixing the banking system. I commented on the former last week. I would merely add that it is extraordinary that a popular new president, confronting a once-in-80-years’ economic crisis, has let Congress shape the outcome.
And that’d be the problem.
Look – I don’t know that President Obama ever was more than a pretty package into which the left poured its energy after eight frustrating years out of the White House. In normal times – and with the benefit of a little gridlock – that can be a good thing. It’s what made the ’90’s so relatively tolerable.
But today, Obama seems like nothing so much as Nancy Pelosi’s hired goon bringing the executive branch into line.
I joked for years during the Ventura Administration that if you walked into the governor’s office, you’d see a big curtain in the corner – and behind that curtain sat Dean Barkley and Tim Penny, pulling the strings and pushing the levers that made Ventura do everything (except talk and embarass the state, Ventura’s only real talents and organic duties).
It’s been less than a month, but I’m struggling to see more than that out of The President these days.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Don’t forget. No terrorist attacks on his watch!
Isn’t that the saving grace for politicians with no other positive accomplishments?
February 11th, 2009 at 8:45 am
It’s pretty clear that the Emanuel administration is in over its head.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:56 am
And yet, Obama’s approval rating is about three times that of the former “president.”
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/polltracker/2009/02/-while-a-narrow-majority.html
So the only ones who really agree with you are the hardcore grapenut Bush deadenders like yourself, Master of Bation. And who knows, maybe if Obama throws you a couple of bucks to stop trying to obstruct all that is right and good, someday we’ll all fondly look back on the great “Wingnut Awakening” of 2009.
February 11th, 2009 at 9:02 am
Its all about throwing enough people a couple of bucks?
Shouldn’t you be on the Pakistani border by now AC, or are you waiting for the Emanuel administration to clean up that whole Don’t Ask Don’t Tell thing?
February 11th, 2009 at 9:19 am
BTW, Master of Bation, I need to know something, so I can tailor the appropriate insult. When you say “the Emanuel administration” are you referring to the president’s chief of staff? Or is that one of the kooky Jesus references you grapenuts like to use on President Obama?
February 11th, 2009 at 10:02 am
Just to clear things up, President Dreamy McTeleprompter is string-pulled by Rahm Emanuel. But don’t worry, it’s still the most honest most transparent administration to ever come out of Chicago, with or without a waiver.
Now tailor away, Butt Bozo.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Come on, is it the Pelosi administration, or the Emanuel administration. Coming off the Cheney administration, you guys set the bar so low that anything will be an improvement.
On that note, I would think you would want to pump up this administration in its infancy, to create a greater distancing between success and failure, Instead, you have set the bar even lower than a Franken Senate Term. It won’t take much at all to surpass your predetermined expectations. I am sure they appreciate your assistance.
Flash
February 11th, 2009 at 10:07 am
“President Dreamy McTeleprompter”
That made me laugh. The best thing since the Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers! *laughing*
February 11th, 2009 at 10:12 am
“you would want to pump up this administration ”
’cause that hasn’t been done enough?
February 11th, 2009 at 10:55 am
It won’t take much at all to surpass your predetermined expectations.
You do realize, dont’ you, that I’d like the President to avert disaster – or, at least, not invoke one.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Flash, yes, much of what the Bush adminstration did domestically did set the bar low. But Obama and his thugs are doing a limbo better then any one could have dreamed of.
It’s interesting that the Democrats are still complaining about Bush’s $300,000,000,000 annual deficits, but then use that to say that Obama-Pelosi’s $1,200,000,000,000 annual deficits are okay. Wonder what’s going to happen when someone tells them that tax receipts are going to fall dramatically for the next few years.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:20 am
“You do realize, dont’ you, that I’d like the President to avert disaster – or, at least, not invoke one. ”
Yes, I know you feel that way, but your having a hard time expressing that without it sounding like exactly the opposite!
— I don’t know that President Obama ever was more than a pretty package
— Obama seems like nothing so much as Nancy Pelosi’s hired goon
— I’m struggling to see more than that
“”that Obama-Pelosi’s $1,200,000,000,000 annual deficits are okay.””
They are not OK, deficits at certain levels can be economically healthy, I think President Bush crossed that line, and to think that breaking the tether and continuing further past it is only going to delay the inevitable. Bubbles burst, and government may think they can stop it, but the market is the decider, regardless of whether either administration thought it was them.
“”tax receipts are going to fall dramatically for the next few years. “”
Come on, its a set up to let the President Bush tax cuts to the upper tier expire. *grin* Isn’t that the ultimate end game here!
Flash
February 11th, 2009 at 11:30 am
So flash,
When you were criticizing Bush’s prosecution of the Iraq war, were you secretly hoping that he would fail?
February 11th, 2009 at 11:36 am
What I can’t figure out is why they can’t get any business people to work for Obama.
Seriously, anybody who’s ever run a business has made payroll. You only have to do it once to realize there are taxes to be paid – some withheld from the employee and some paid by the employer. The quarterly withholding check is the most annoying one to write and it’s NOT optional.
But a guy like the G-man didn’t know he had to pay payroll taxes even after he got company checks to cover them? Dude, that’s like a 30% tax free raise. How thick are you?
If it was just the one guy, okay, fluke. But aren’t there ANY people with business experience available?
The guy who’ll be running the tax system doesn’t understand the tax system. That can’t end well.
.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:43 am
nate prattled: “What I can’t figure out is why they can’t get any business people to work for Obama.”
What, like Cheney and Rumsfeld you mean? How’d that work out?
February 11th, 2009 at 11:49 am
“So flash,
When you were criticizing Bush’s prosecution of the Iraq war, were you secretly hoping that he would fail?”
Of course he was not. Flash, like Angryclown, is a superpatriot. But anytime he pointed out the extreme incompetence with which the war was being prosecuted, you far-right kooks certainly did accuse him of rooting for defeat.
To quote the Bible, “To every thing there is a season.” This is wingnut payback season.
Also cold and flu season. So dress warmly while you eat that plate of crow, wingnuts!
February 11th, 2009 at 11:55 am
MoN, I have always been a staunch supporter of the GWoT including the deposing of SoDamn WhoseInsane. There were times when I was frustrated with the Bush Administrations prosecution of the war, but at no time did i ever hint or certainly not hope, they would fail. I was also one of the very few, who thought the Surge was a great idea and knew that once we had troops available to HOLD the areas after they were swept it would set up a redeployment of our brave men and women as Iraqi’s took over their own security. Although it is taking somewhat longer that I/we hoped it seems to be working out pretty well for us.
Maybe you’re thinking of someone else.
Flash
February 11th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Well, AC, as I recall, they knew enough to pay their taxes. Obama’s picks can’t even manage that.
Talk about setting the bar low.
.
February 11th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
“I was frustrated with the Bush Administrations prosecution of the war, but at no time did i ever hint or certainly not hope, they would fail.”
I never thought was the case. That’s why I don’t understand your claims that Mitch is secretly hoping that Obama will fail.
February 11th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Flash, like Angryclown, is a superpatriot.
Come on, Flash. That had to make you cringe.
February 11th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
So, flash, why do you think Mitch WANTS Obama to fail? He’s in deep disagreement with the tactics chosen, and given the literal laugh-out-loud response of the audience to Geithner’s plan it seems that he’s not alone. Obama could have made this transition much more cleanly, but he seems determined to soldier on in the dark.
February 11th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I did my taxes yesterday. Didn’t cheat.
That makes me both more responsible and more competent that Obammy’s choice to be treasury secretary.
February 11th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
“Come on, Flash. That had to make you cringe.”
Why would I cringe at the truth, I am a SuperPatriot. Not to be confues with THE SuperPatriot: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperPatriot
“our claims that Mitch is secretly hoping that Obama will fail. “”
Can someone show me where I believe Mitch wants this administration to fail. All I said is he is setting the bar pretty low, and creating an environment where any uptick at all will be considered success . . . making it difficult for him to re-lube the wheels on his goal posts. But he has gotton pretty good at that, so I have confidence he’ll figure it out.
February 11th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
OK, it’s official. Mr. Centricity and Clownie are cut from the same cloth. Fellow travellers. Brothers-in Arms.
February 11th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Mitch sez:
“You do realize, dont’ you, that I’d like the President to avert disaster – or, at least, not invoke one. ”
Flash sez:
Yes, I know you feel that way, but your having a hard time expressing that without it sounding like exactly the opposite!
February 11th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Still not finding the word fail . . . .
February 11th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Solicitor general nominee says ‘enemy combatants’ can be held without trial
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-solicitor-general11-2009feb11,0,7158432.story
Hope. Change.
February 11th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
And yet AC at the same time in their presidencies, Obama’s and Bush’s approval ratings are very close. Bush was around 63% at this stage.
February 11th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
“And yet, Obama’s approval rating is about three times that of the former “president.””
…and in a freefall. Fastest drop in the first month of a presidency.
Cheney administration
We can only wish it was a Cheney administration! I guess we do have Cheney to thank for smacking Bush upside the head so would not govern left of FDR!
February 11th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
What a shock. Chad has his head up his ass. Again.
“In February 2001, a month into his presidency, 42 percent of Americans had a favorable opinion of Mr. Bush.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/16/opinion/polls/main4728399.shtml
February 11th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Was that a Dan Rather poll?
February 11th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Chad looks to be closer to the truth than you are, AC. From the BBC, hardly a pro-Bush outlet:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7814441.stm
February 11th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
“Chad looks to be closer to the truth than you are, AC.”
What are you talking about, Mr. D(umb)? Angryclown doesn’t make any claims about Bush’s 2001 poll numbers, you great buffoon. Angryclown merely says Chad is wrong. If you believe either the BBC or CBS numbers, Chad has his head up his ass. The only question is how far.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Angryclown doesn’t make any claims about Bush’s 2001 poll numbers
Whatever, Shecky. I guess the quote and the link were just more of your usual masturbation. Time for you to climb back in your clown car and drive back to Perth Amboy. You should know better than posting links — snark is your metier.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Christ you’re stupid, Mr. D. Both our links proved Chad wrong. Yours simply makes him out to be a little less of a jackass. (You find that 63 percent approval rating yet? No? Then why don’t you go enjoy a nice steaming plate of shut the fuck up?) And that’s only if your source is more accurate than mine, for which you provide zero support. So go crawl back under your rock. You are what the French call “Le douchebag.”
February 11th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Sorry to have upset you so, Carrot Top.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Wisdom pleases Angryclown. Stupidity vexes him. Angryclown has not been faced with such stupidity since W. passed out from eating a pretzel.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Gallup puts The One at 63%.
Bush’s approval ratings were around 60%, give or take four or five, at both inaugurations.
PBO will be heading south soon, I have a hunch.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Oh, and one other thing — the BBC link provides a longitudinal look at Bush’s poll numbers from 3 separate pollsters: Gallup, Fox and CBS. And if you look at the line for Feb. 2001, the CBS poll approval number was in the mid to high 50s. Is that the 63% that Chad claimed? Nope. I’ll assume that Chad can find a link to a poll to substantiate his numbers, or he’ll walk it back. But it ain’t 42%, either.
A president’s poll numbers are always going to be positive early on – Americans want to support the new guy, until he gives them a reason not to. Perhaps Clown will be right and Obama will remain highly popular. We’ll find out.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Yeah, the Clown Poll was done by CBS, the Most Trusted Name in News. So you all just shut up because Bush sux and President Obama is Immaculate.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Wisdom pleases Angryclown.
This congress has near record low public approval ratings. Obama has allowed congressional leadership to dictate the terms of the stimulus bill that he has pledged that he will sign.
Angry clown thinks Obama is wise.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Here’s a link for you AC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:George_W._Bush_public_opinion_polling.png
Upon further review, it does appear that I wrong because I misread the graph. Bush’s approval numbers in Feb 01 were 57%. In March 01 they were 63%. I regret the error.
But the numbers still reinforce my point that if you compare Bush’s and Obama’s numbers at the this stage of their presidencies, you won’t find that much difference. As Mr. D says, it’s fairly common for presidents to enjoy high numbers early on.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
angryclown said:
“Stupidity vexes him”
I can only imagine the vexation that angryclowns own company provides him.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:39 am
Mr. D(umb) said: “A president’s poll numbers are always going to be positive early on – Americans want to support the new guy, until he gives them a reason not to.”
Yet another difference between you grapenuts and Americans.
February 12th, 2009 at 8:43 am
angryclown said:
“Yet another difference between you grapenuts and Americans”
Sounds like “hate”. Why all the “hate”, angryclown?
February 12th, 2009 at 9:02 am
Why not?
February 12th, 2009 at 9:34 am
Why not?
Indeed.