Democrats in Disarray

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

There's alot of media and political sites looking at the "what has really been accomplished in the first year" type of thing now, and the first year of this Presidency is looking to be up there with the very historical best, so far. Some pretty outstanding accomplishments, and numerous, too.
Of course, if one doesn't agree with the agenda, yes, the world is ending.

That said, the bankers are in Washington today, sworn in and trying to explain themselves. Overshadowed by Haiti disaster, of course, but it's happening.

you are kidding, right? it seems to me that more than anything, it's just continued on from where bush left off. economy still a mess, still talking about more stimulus packages, unemployment still far too high, and two wars still being waged, deficits still rising, housing still a joke. what exactly is it that has been accomplished? what has changed? what's different?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

There's alot of media and political sites looking at the "what has really been accomplished in the first year" type of thing now, and the first year of this Presidency is looking to be up there with the very historical best, so far. Some pretty outstanding accomplishments, and numerous, too.

Of course, if one doesn't agree with the agenda, yes, the world is ending.

How anyone can say this with a straight face is amazing. Taking Obama and his illustrious first year out of the equation, exactly what "media and political sites" are "looking" at what has "really been accomplished" this year? And What exactly are the criteria of the rankings of the historically best first years?

I love how you write some generalized bs then make sure that you throw in the kicker when someone doesnt agree. We can all argue politics till we are blue in the face but this kind of drivel is why I continue to bother posting here.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I would bet on the field over Palin, Romney, Jeb, or Huckabee right now. I think Republicans will want somebody "new" for 2012.
Their best strategy figures to be constructing a message that acts as if the world began when Obama took office. The last thing they'll want to do is discuss 2001-2008, and I think primary voters and Republican Party insiders will all figure that a "fresh face" will give them the best chance of pulling that off.

I agree with you. Better to try an unknown especially with having the precedent of electing a candidate that is very light on credentials like Obama was.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you are kidding, right? it seems to me that more than anything, it's just continued on from where bush left off. economy still a mess, still talking about more stimulus packages, unemployment still far too high, and two wars still being waged, deficits still rising, housing still a joke. what exactly is it that has been accomplished? what has changed? what's different?

The inference that there is some measuring stick that "first years" are ranked by is even stupider than trying to say a country with as many continuing issues as we have just had an all time great year.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The inference that there is some measuring stick that "first years" are ranked by is even stupider than trying to say a country with as many continuing issues as we have just had an all time great year.

well...i guess you could say it was a good year compared to some from our past. no plagues, no yellow fever, no smallpox, we can buy fresh meat and dairy and we have electricity and running water. in that respect, obama is ahead of many presidents.

[SOREHOOF]

We were headed for catastrophe. It was a great year compared to how awful it might have been if Obama hadn't rode in to head off a certain Apocalypse.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

well...i guess you could say it was a good year compared to some from our past. no plagues, no yellow fever, no smallpox, we can buy fresh meat and dairy and we have electricity and running water. in that respect, obama is ahead of many presidents.

I have his first year ranked 40th, above Harrison and Garfield (both croaked in their 1st year) and above Hoover (stock market crash of 1929) and Jimmy Carter (general purposes)

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I have his first year ranked 40th, above Harrison and Garfield (both croaked in their 1st year) and above Hoover (stock market crash of 1929) and Jimmy Carter (general purposes)

Where would Bush's first year rank?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Where would Bush's first year rank?

31st.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

We were headed for catastrophe. It was a great year compared to how awful it might have been if Obama hadn't rode in to head off a certain Apocalypse.

Catastrophe?..Haiti is a catastrophe..Higher taxes are an inconvenience at best and unjust at worst. It sucks when the right uses end of World phrases to describe politicians they don't like. Put things in perspective man..

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Catastrophe?..Haiti is a catastrophe..Higher taxes are an inconvenience at best and unjust at worst. It sucks when the right uses end of World phrases to describe politicians they don't like. Put things in perspective man..

you expect perspective on a thread titled "democrats in disarray" over the career ending racist comments of harry reid?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

you expect perspective on a thread titled "democrats in disarray" over the career ending racist comments of harry reid?

I'd respect you a lot more if you would capitalize god

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I'd respect you a lot more if you would capitalize god

some might see that as sacrilegious.

[SOREHOOF]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Catastrophe?..Haiti is a catastrophe..Higher taxes are an inconvenience at best and unjust at worst. It sucks when the right uses end of World phrases to describe politicians they don't like. Put things in perspective man..

Catastrophe came out of Obama's mouth, not the right. That was his pretext for the massive stimulus. I used Apocalypse because the Left avoids words that may have a religious overtone, and I like the word. Does that help your perspective? The Left is engaging in the fear mongering this time around. Haiti was a catastrophe before the Quake. It's way beyond catastrophe now.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I would bet on the field over Palin, Romney, Jeb, or Huckabee right now. I think Republicans will want somebody "new" for 2012.
Their best strategy figures to be constructing a message that acts as if the world began when Obama took office. The last thing they'll want to do is discuss 2001-2008, and I think primary voters and Republican Party insiders will all figure that a "fresh face" will give them the best chance of pulling that off.

I agree. think they have indeed been looking for an "Obama" type guy - off the radar, young, new, fresh. Jindal was supposed to be that last year, but isn't.

[Riot]

How anyone can say this with a straight face is amazing. Taking Obama and his illustrious first year out of the equation, exactly what "media and political sites" are "looking" at what has "really been accomplished" this year? And What exactly are the criteria of the rankings of the historically best first years?

I love how you write some generalized bs then make sure that you throw in the kicker when someone doesnt agree. We can all argue politics till we are blue in the face but this kind of drivel is why I continue to bother posting here

Thank god you do continue posting here, so the rest of us can get the opinion of a rude jerk. Talk about drivel ...

All the general media sites, bloggers, etc. are looking at Obama's first year accomplishments this week, genius. Some dare to disagree with your personal assessment of Obama's performance.

Get over it. "Stupid" is in the eye of the beholder.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you are kidding, right? it seems to me that more than anything, it's just continued on from where bush left off. economy still a mess, still talking about more stimulus packages, unemployment still far too high, and two wars still being waged, deficits still rising, housing still a joke. what exactly is it that has been accomplished? what has changed? what's different?

No, I'm not kidding, 'Zig. Your opinion is certainly not shared by all. You want specifics? Here's a sampling - you can just dismiss what you disagree with as "left wing" propaganda (you might like The Economist stuff):

http://www.slate.com/id/2236708/

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31098.html

http://www.economist.com/opinion/dis...=hptextfeature

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/rich...imeline-110309

http://themoderatevoice.com/57560/obamas-first-year/

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opin...f8472a67a.html

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The inference that there is some measuring stick that "first years" are ranked by is even stupider than trying to say a country with as many continuing issues as we have just had an all time great year.

I didn't say this country had an all-time great year, genius. Neither has anybody else.

Here ya go: certainly you are free to point out why all the below are bad things for the US:

When we Americans elect a president, we’re doing much more than putting someone in the White House to steer the country through a maze of high-profile issues like health care, climate change and the economy.

For instance, President Obama’s first year in office seemed to be consumed only by health care and unemployment. Yet hundreds of other issues were addressed, most of them flying beneath the radar but making significant changes that will affect millions of Americans for years to come.

That’s why I take issue with those who insist they vote only “for the man” during a presidential election and not for the party, as if that’s some kind of virtue. It’s the overall party philosophy that guides an administration and shapes the policies that it puts in place. When we elect a president, we’re making decisions on who serves on the Supreme Court, who presides over the national parks and what environmental policies will be enforced, to name just a few.

With thanks to West Coast writer Dan Benbow, let’s take a look at some of the changes that Obama’s administration has made during his first year in office.

In his first month, the president signed equal-pay-for-equal-work legislation to counteract a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that placed severe restrictions on a woman taking legal action over unequal treatment. A couple of weeks later, he signed into law a bill extending health coverage to 4 million uninsured children that the previous administration and Congress had blocked.

The president ordered his new attorney general to take action against people who avoid income taxes by laundering their money in foreign countries. At the same time, he proposed that the government quit the practice of having banks make student loans and then having the U.S. guarantee their repayment. Rather, Obama declared, the government should eliminate the middle man and loan the money itself.

He reversed the Bush administration’s restrictions on the use of stem cells for medical research, clearing the way for federal help for experiments being conducted in places like the University of Wisconsin. He reversed the Bush administration’s crackdown on medical use of marijuana even in states that had legalized the sales. He ordered the Food and Drug Administration to ease access to the “morning after” pill.

Obama began overturning the Bush administration’s “midnight” rules that OK’d mountain mining operations and dumping waste into streams. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced the Bush rule that limits the role of science in Endangered Species Act decisions was being rescinded and he placed a million acres of public lands surrounding the Grand Canyon off limits to uranium claims and exploration.

Obama made more aid available to the still-Katrina-ravaged New Orleans and ordered the antitrust division of the Justice Department to scrutinize monopolies in agriculture that may be harming family farm businesses. He unshackled AIDS programs from restrictions that prevented their use for family planning.

The president urged Congress to pass new restrictions on onerous bank overdraft fees and pushed the passage of a credit card consumer act to counter high fees and interest rates. He ordered the Pentagon to allow photographs of soldiers’ coffins returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and he opened the White House visitors’ log to public scrutiny.

All that plus dealing with an obstinate Congress on health care legislation, a massive federal stimulus program to help get the economy moving again, money for the first time ever to build high-speed passenger rail, fostering a new international climate of cooperation, progress with Russia on a new nuclear arms treaty and much more.

Yes, there have been many disappointments during Obama’s first year, but the accomplishments are more than meet the eye.

Dave Zweifel is editor emeritus of the Capital Times. dzweifel@madison.com

[GBBob]

Alright righties...who gets the nod from this fine group

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

No, I'm not kidding, 'Zig. Your opinion is certainly not shared by all. You want specifics? Here's a sampling - you can just dismiss what you disagree with as "left wing" propaganda (you might like The Economist stuff):

http://www.slate.com/id/2236708/ how is 'prevented a depression' provable? and at the time it was passed, it was to keep unemployment from rising above ten percent. whoops as for fixiing health care, that whole bit was prefaced with 'if it passes'-that's not a done deal yet. based on an unprovable thing, and an unfinished one, they're saying he could have a good year-not that he has had one.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31098.html i'll have to re-read this, since the first two times i went through it, i didn't see anything obama actually accomplished...but i did see
'To be sure, Obama’s first year accomplishments are more in the realm of creating good inputs to policy rather than achieving good outputs. Results to date have been relatively few..'




http://www.economist.com/opinion/dis...=hptextfeature yeah, this starts out well. i'd cringe if i read this in my eval:
One year on, how well has he done?

Not too badly, by our reckoning

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/rich...imeline-110309 er, gitmo is still open....

http://themoderatevoice.com/57560/obamas-first-year/ yes, those are accomplishments, but is that list really something to crow about? reset relations? really? iran still developing a nuclear program, we're no closer to getting out of iraq or afganistan, pakistan still a huge issue, and here's a newsflash-we're still hated by most of them. yeah, that's a reset. what about our dealings with russia last year, we're a laughingstock with them too. they got us to back out of the missile shiled for our allies, what'd we get in return? nada. oh, and yippie-he nominated a supreme court justice. certainly no other president could have managed that-that certainly was beyond his predecessor.

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opin...f8472a67a.html

much good among disappointments...madison dot com is right. he did some good. but one of the best first years ever?



at any rate, none of the above showed where any new ground was broken-as i said, it just seems a continuation of the previous admin, and none of what you linked to showed otherwise. wars aren't over, gitmo still running apace, as is unemployment, the credit crunch, a depressed housing market, etc.

but here's to 2010- may it be better than '09.