|
|
"all your cities lie in dust" |
Friday, November 06, 2009Why is the President getting involved in New York?According to CBS (h/t Roses): " That would be fine if Obama were the head of the Democratic National Committee. But he's not. He's the President. The Presidency, like it or not, has a stature beyond partisanship. When The President says that so-and-so should not run, he is saying that this person is bad for the nation. That is a bombshell a President would reserve for the likes of David Duke. Labels: fascism, obama, presidency posted by Zimri on 18:22 | link | Thursday, November 05, 2009Obama's "shout-out"President Barack Hussein Obama, you are not a cool cat. In addition, as "franticflintstone" points out: while we are under attack by existential enemies, it is not the time to opine that America is an illegitimate nation. But then - I've never thought much of your loyalties. If you want to be seen as Presidential, it's time you started earning it. UPDATE 4:40 - Upon seeing FFs's comments at Ace's, I posted the latest two parags and then - the comment board immediately went down. Gah. Labels: bullshit, obama, presidency posted by Zimri on 16:17 | link | Thursday, October 22, 2009Presidential FailIn the run-up to reviving this blog, I was writing essays in other peoples' comments. I posted a few comments about to what degree we can hope for Obama's failure. I had first taken Jeff Goldstein's position, but then at LGF I posted "to hell with Goldstein" because he was acting like a schmuck. Maybe the most thought-out of my comments was at Roses' on 3 October. The occasion for that last comment was Obama's personal failure to get the Olympics for Chicago. Many Conservatives and Libertarians cheered that failure. Obama's supporters were upset about it all, including about the cheering. When the head of state sticks himself out this far: he is not just himself, but he is also the mascot for the position of "head of state". Therefore when Obama fails, the Presidency is weakened. I do not know anyone who can argue otherwise. The question then becomes: does it weaken the country when Obama fails? To answer that we need to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the Presidency. School A is that the Presidency as an institution is kinda bogus, in which case weakening the Presidency isn't a problem for the US. School B is that the Presidency is sacred, and that weakening the Presidency is a problem for the US. In the short-term, A isn't going to be replacing the Presidency with their chosen head of state in the next two years. As a result we have to put off that discussion and move on to B. Where the office of "head of state" is strong: when the ruler is seen as a success, the display of power helps make his country a success. I'd love it if Obama could pick the right battles and win them, and I don't hope he fails overall. But Obama first has to learn to pick the right battles. If he is fighting for the crooks in Chicago, or for the bureaucrats' takeover of the medical industry: those are battles Obama is waging against me and mine. I want him to fail in what he is trying to do NOW: first, because what he's trying to do is wrong; second, because he has to learn that it is wrong. Obama's predecessor Bill Clinton began his stint as Carter Junior in 1993-4. In 1994 he was taught a sharp lesson and in 1995 he was close to irrelevant. Then he hired Dick Morris, who taught him he would be personally better off if he governed more like Reagan Junior. This, Clinton did: 1996-2000. When Obama learns humility, I will root for him. Where Obama and his defenders are being attacked unfairly, I will defend them as if I were defending this country. But until then and otherwise, I will root for Obama's humiliation. The country cannot succeed until Obama's current course fails. Labels: obama, presidency posted by Zimri on 16:44 | link | |
On this siteAfield
FriendsTable 9 |
|
Property of David Ross; All Rights Reserved | |