Monday, March 04, 2013
Obama Fatigue
You had it with Bill Clinton and George W. Bush now I think it's beginning to settle in especially with the sequestration. Obama is slowly but surely going down in History as The President of Bad Times. It's as if he doesn't mind so long as he doesn't get blamed for it, so long as he can blame them Republicans. Also you have to ask yourself how stupid was it to pick a fight with Bob Woodward, I mean he's not some new squirrel in the park. At least with Clinton he felt our pain, Obama abstracts it always into some political issue that throws him in the best light. Drama Queen-in-Chief, our existential leader and now I get this on my Mobile Web day in and f'ing day out. QUESTION: does the IRS get sequestered? Followup Question: can Woodward deepthroat Obama?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Honestly, do you write these things to just cause outcry and commentation or do you actually believe them?
ReplyDeleteObama doesn't seem to care that he's the president of bad times and blame who you will but it happened on his watch. If you're Obama aren't you taking a chance with the historical verdict though, you know the presidential biographers like Doris Kearns Goodwin and Michael Beschloss? Ah maybe they'll give him a pass.
ReplyDeleteFor Christmas sake, can you not admit that things have been steadily getting better, on his watch?
ReplyDeleteThe man walked into the biggest mess this country has been in since the Great Depression and despite nonstop obstructionism, rabid ignorance on the part of the right wing masses and frivolous bullshit birther stuff, he's managed to get the economy moving in the right direction.
Is it fixed all the way? Hell no.
Has it been CONSISTENTLY moving in the right direction? HELL YES.
Can you not, like, admit this?
The 'historical verdict' is in. Let's go the the horse\'s mouth .
ReplyDeleteBeginning in 1980, wages went flat and have stayed there. Markets, corporate profits skyrocketed as their taxes fell. History will not
judge Reagan as leniently as his
worshippers.
He can't admit it.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Fox News today, the private sector just added more jobs than it has in a year, signaling that economic recovery continues.
ReplyDeleteObama's fault?
The Fox Report also says they expect that the unemployment rate remained at 7.9%, hardly anything to get excited about.
ReplyDeleteAnd how much does it cost to fill up your gas tank compared to when Obama took office? And how much more are your grocery bills?
Beth, honestly, are we still having this discussion?
ReplyDeleteDo you think that the president has a little red Batphone that links directly to Exxon and Shell? Do you think he's in charge of setting their prices?
You might want to think about that. Take your time. Go slow. It's not hard, but I know you.
The President has NOTHING TO DO WITH GAS PRICES. They are regulated by, guess who? The gas companies, who are entirely more concerned about enhancing the dividends for their stockholders than they are about how much it costs to buy a bag of frozen peas. And your beloved Republicans won't even entertain the idea of cutting some of the BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TAX SUBSIDIES that the oil companies receive every year. Because oil companies are job creators, Beth! Cutting those subsidies means the collapse of civilization!
Please, for Christmas sake, come up with a better one next time.
Saty: "For Christmas sake can you not admit that things have been getting better on his watch?"
ReplyDeleteThis is the old Dave Miller argument and let's just say that Dave has a point there's one thing you're missing - THIS WAS BEFORE THE SEQUESTER - which even Obama admits is a terrible thing and will ruin the economy. So how is having less airport security a good thing Saty? you like the federal workers, how is furloughing thousands of them a good thing? and so on. Put another way if there were no sequester cuts you might, might just have a point.
"The President has NOTHING TO DO WITH GAS PRICES."
ReplyDeleteWell by this standard Jimmy Carter was a fine and dandy president so I guess the historical verdict in his case is wrong. Well you know the president can have something to do with gas prices after all by not doing something about our dependence on foreign oil. Get my drift?
Great idea Z-Man. Obama has been
ReplyDeletequite good in that area. There are
a number of factors in the price of gasoline. Probably the most important is that finding and processing fossile fuels gets more difficult (and expensive) every year. Can't imagine the price when
they suck up the last drop.
Do you realize that we actually EXPORT oil?
ReplyDeleteIn 2011 the United States EXPORTED 117 MILLION GALLONS OF GASOLINE EVERY DAY.
So, let us continue to subsidize the oil companies to the tune of billions per year, while they continue to post profits to the tune of billions per quarter, and while the Beths of the world blame the price of gas on a President she doesn't like.
Because being liberal is eeeeevil, you know. Facts is eeeeevil things.
And last I checked, the blame for the sequester fell on all shoulders, not one.
ReplyDeleteThe Republicans are hell bent on protecting half a million very wealthy people at the expense of 310 million who can't afford it.
But you go on blaming the president, because you can't bring yourself to deal in reality.
And above and beyond any of all this: if you love the free market and hate socialism, then you should be cheering for Shell, Exxon, BP and Chevron every time gas prices go up, because that's your beloved free market at work.
ReplyDeleteIn my Socialist world we'd nationalize that shit so stockholders can't hold a company hostage for something it cannot live without.
But we don't live in my Socialist world, we live in your free-market world, where people like Beth *simultaneously* preach against Socialism and bitch about high gas prices, and blame it all on a President who has no more to do with the price of gas than I do with the availability of chrome fender flares in southeastern Malaysia.
I'm sorry that you equate 'evil Liberal' with 'reality based', Beth, but, you know, there it is. Maybe next time you can choose an argument that isn't so tired and previously debunked to the Nth degree.
stockholders can't hold a company
ReplyDeleteshould read
stockholders can't hold a country
sorry, getting to be time for bed.
I guess you're all heartbroken Saty over Hugo Chavez's death? Interesting how left-wing media covered this making him out to be a populist who cared for his poor. The big one though will be Castro:)
ReplyDeleteSo much for assistance for the
ReplyDeleteU.S. poor ...
He was also paranoid and said the US government gave him cancer, guess it was a good paranoia. BTW how the hell can we give somebody cancer when we can't even balance our budget?
ReplyDeleteA dash of Po-210, Th-228 or associated high MEV alpha emitters of medium range halflife in the
ReplyDeletecheese tacos?
Hang on a second. We exported 117 MILLION GALLONS of gasoline every day in 2011, and you want to move from blaming Obama for our 'dependency on foreign oil' to Hugo Chavez?
ReplyDeleteI shall not be red herringed here.
The title of this blog was Obama Fatigue, but besides me being super sick and tired of that man, I am almost as sick and tired of Saty who is either so blind to reality, or so caught up in her love fest for anything Obama, or most likely too dumb to understand economics, that I recall why I stopped reading the comments for a while here and only read the good parts that Z-man wrote. I think I need to go back to doing that again, because talking to Saty is like talking to a brick wall, no that is an insult to brick walls.
ReplyDeleteSaty instead of exporting those 117 million gallons of gasoline as you say maybe we should have used that gas ourselves so my point stands. BB need we get into the whole thing with Hugo Chavez and Joe Kennedy here?
ReplyDeleteBeth I believe my theory is correct that liberals can't look beyond race in Obama's case. Look it is a great historical fact that we elected our first black president but that nostalgia kinda gets negated the more he sucks in office. It's hard for them to admit even as a possibility. Even if he doesn't suck, that may be a biased term on my part let's be fair by all objective standards Obama is not a great president and he is fast going down in History as the leader in hard times who can't seem to get the train back on the track. Again just hard for them to admit.
ReplyDeleteYou're right, we should have used that 117 million gallons. Why didn't we?
ReplyDeleteBecause the big oil companies chose to export it. Why did they do that?
That's your beloved free market at work. Billions and TRILLIONS of gallons of gasoline EXPORTED, gas companies posting $40B *PROFIT* a quarter while the Beths of the world whine that we're 'dependent on foreign countries' for oil and that somehow the President is responsible for it.
If Beth wants to utilize her vast knowledge of economics to explain that I would love to hear it.
Meanwhile, Beth, Z once made an important point that before he posted a comment around here he tried to do a little research because he knows that either BB or myself will call him on it. I suggest most humbly to you that you do the same. Or at least choose an argument that isn't so easily blown to bits.
Your free market is the reason that gas is as high as it is. It has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the President, who does not make the decisions to export TRILLIONS OF GALLONS OF GASOLINE to other countries. That would be the decision made by oil companies; to export gasoline to other countries while jacking the price of gas sky high here and claiming it's because we're dependent on other countries for oil.
And the Beths of the world believe that nonsense because it fits in with their worldview, in which all things liberal are EVIL.
Please, I wait anxiously for your exposition on economics to explain this.
But I should say I will not be surprised if you go back to your cozy little world where "everyone agrees with you".
ReplyDeleteI'd prefer to hear you expound on economic theory to explain this, though.
You want a president with cheap gasoline? You'd love Venezuela:
ReplyDeleteNine cents a gallon:
Hugo Chavez
...due south. Via con Dios
You're free to live there BB, they might have cheap gas but not much freedom. I have to get back to Jimmy Carter again and the inflation and high gas prices and long gas lines that we suffered under his Administration. OK Saty I'm not an economic laureate but seems to me most people including historians say Carter was a bad president, remember the word "malaise"?, partly because of the economic conditions at the time and those conditions heavily included the whole gas problem/crisis. Traditionally if something happens on a president's watch, to be more precise if the economy is bad under a certain president we generally conclude he was not a great or good president. So applying your same logic here Saty maybe we'd have to go back and say maybe Carter was a good president after all and I'm not willing to do that. In fact there was a bumper sticker at the time - "Out of gas? My ass. Fire Schlesinger!" Reagan made the country feel good about itself again, infused optimism into people. Now I ask you does Obama do this?
ReplyDeleteAnd what I'm talking about is the cognitive disconnect in a person who believes in the free market bitching about high gas prices and blaming it on a president who has nothing to do with it.
ReplyDeleteTradition means nothing.
Is Beth going to educate me on economics (since she said I was ignorant) or has she gone back to her happy place where no one ever disagrees with her?
I could make the case though since Obama believes in Bigger Government, is always singing its praises it seems he could have done something or tried about those 117 millions of gallons of gas exported and ALSO do something about all those oil speculators who many say are really behind rising gas prices. Put another way if you believe in Bigger Gov't then it seems logical you have tools at your disposal so seen in this way you could say Obama could do something about the gas prices even a little bit. Just trying to play Devil's Advocate here:)
ReplyDeleteRight. Can you imagine the outcry from the right had he tried to do something? They won't even agree to lower those tax subsidies. Now he might have sat up all night wishing he could, bottom line is what CAN he do? Should he hold a press conf and say, you know I'd love to hold those bastards accountable but sorry I can't? I mean in real life, what do you expect the man to do? He hasn't got all that many tools. Hell Republicans couldn't even agree to pass bills (VAWA) that previously they had np problem with, just because they have Obama's support. The man could say the sky is blue and they'd fight it. So in the real live world that we live in, what do you think he actually could do? I mean apart from that whole we live with a free market thing and all... Has Beth decided to leave me in my ignorance and not give the economics lesson? I have so been looking forward to it.
ReplyDeleteI think you and probably BB too are coming at many of these issues from the framework of the free market never works, the free market if left unfettered never benefits people etc. and soap has made the case time and again that it does the opposite, that it's the way, the only way to go. Obama has issued a slew of executive orders re guns in the wake of Newtown but nothing here I guess. He could've okayed the Keystone pipeline earlier too. Look I get your point and BB's too that a president doesn't really have anything to do with gas prices but if gas was $5/gal under Bush would you feel the same? You know Bush started a couple wars and you could make the point a president can negatively effect the price of gas and oil supplies through his actions or inactions, just sayin'
ReplyDeleteIf you can come up with something realistic and concrete (that could actually occur in real life) that he could have done, let me know.
ReplyDeleteAnd this is for Beth:
ReplyDeleteBeth, I really miss you around here, but here's the thing. If you're going to come in here, stir things up, and say I'm ignorant, you really sorta need to defend that stuff. If you really think I'm ignorant, make a valid case for it. Use facts, statistics, and reality-based thinking. Be able to defend your premise. Really, before you ever post anything, know what you're going to say and know how you're going to defend it.
When you come in here, write some silly ass post about how the President is responsible for gas prices, accuse me of not understanding basic economics and then vanish, you really have totally negated yourself and your whole argument. It just looks juvenile, like all you wanted to do was piss in the cornflakes and run away.
Cmon, Beth. You can do better than that. Even Z has learned that he has to know where all his ducks march if he's gonna make a statement. Simply retreating to some little Stepford world where everyone looks, dresses, eats, and thinks exactly alike might be really comforting to you, and I guess it is, but if that's the case, then stay there... because out here, it just looks bad.
With all the love in the world.
Dependency on foreign oil, no president does anything about it.
ReplyDeleteWe wouldn't be dependent if they weren't exporting so effin much of it.
ReplyDeleteWhat we ARE dependent on is big oil companies whose stockholders find it expedient to keep us that way.
I just read the other day they're flying some plane to France on cooking oil.
ReplyDeleteThat might 'biggie fry' the turbines...
ReplyDelete& attract swarms of gulls.
ReplyDeleteI have a friend who's been running her VW on used restaurant oil for years. Driving around and all you can smell is frenchfries.
ReplyDeleteAs long as it's not transfats right?
ReplyDeleteNobody wants a clogged carburetor.
ReplyDeleteIf Bloomberg were in charge of aviation I don't think we'd be seeing any of this.
ReplyDeleteAnybody remember Fred Thompson,
ReplyDeletesuper candidate?
Rich Lowry has a good column today, he says what the GOP needs is a Jack Kemp.
ReplyDeleteFred Thompson, bit part in Hunt for Red October, currently shilling The Reverse Mortgage on TV.
ReplyDeleteYep. IMO, old character actor Fred is still a notch higher than
ReplyDeletethe Donald, though...
The Donald only likes to get his name in the paper.
ReplyDelete