|
down with slavery posted:Stop. eating. the. rhetoric. It's a game they play to drum up their base, nothing more and nothing less. Well, it sure has led to some actual radical policy. It shows they're not afraid to go there.
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 06:11 |
|
beatlegs posted:Well, it sure has led to some actual radical policy. It shows they're not afraid to go there. I haven't seen much in the ways of radical policy. At least nothing outside the radical that we're used to. One side talks a big talk, the other side holds the keys and moves slowly to the right.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:It's OK. Not Stone's best work by any stretch. Dubya's presidency deserves a much more ruthless treatment, IMO. That's sort of why it's worth watching though, despite the flaws and Thandie Newton's execrable Condoleezza. It's like watching a time capsule to the way most people thought of the Bush presidency, and Bush personally, at the end of his first term, before things went complete off the rails during the second term. Of course the movie came out in 2008 so tonally it seemed very "what the gently caress?!" even at the time, but I think it does serve a useful purpose in capturing how the Bush presidency was perceived by many in the mid-2000's and provides an illuminating complement to the much harsher view people have of the presidency with hindsight (and having lived through the full experience). Basically I think it'll be something useful people can show their kids someday to help explain why the 2004 election went down the way it did.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:"isn't in possession of a naturally curious mind" are rarely the words used to describe GWB, but I hear "dumb" and "moron" a lot, kind of like how I hear that Obama was a "bad negotiator" despite you know, being a senator, successful politician, lawyer, etc. Obama was a terrible negotiator for most of his first term. Things like the debt ceiling fiasco stand as proof of that. Citing his pre-Presidency history doesn't stand as proof to the contrary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:32
|
|
thefncrow posted:Obama was a terrible negotiator for most of his first term. Things like the debt ceiling fiasco stand as proof of that. I guess that depends on whether you take what he says at face value. In what way did the debt ceiling fiasco illustrate Obama as a bad negotiator?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:I guess that depends on whether you take what he says at face value. In what way did the debt ceiling fiasco illustrate Obama as a bad negotiator? After his initial offer, which was both politically suicidal and would never be acceptable to the opposition, fell through, he accepted a deal without understanding that Republicans' willingness to let military contractors suffer was significantly greater than their willingness to raise taxes, which triggered another two years of perpetual crises.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
It took him, what, three years after the 2010 midterms? to realize that the only way he can negotiate with the new Republican party is that he can't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:I haven't seen much in the ways of radical policy. At least nothing outside the radical that we're used to. One side talks a big talk, the other side holds the keys and moves slowly to the right. There's plenty of radical policy coming out of the statehouses ie "places where the GOP has power to write and pass bills".
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:It took him, what, three years after the 2010 midterms? Reportedly, Harry Reid had to beg him one week into the shutdown to trust Reid to control his Senate caucus and Obama finally agreed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Eat_at_Milliways posted:Anybody here from Missouri? Yeah its all bullshit, the tea party nuts elected from districts with less people than swine are pulling out all their stops now to pander to the few people left who vote. All civilized, urban repugs are aghast at this and their recent attempts to pass a right to work bill, which was defeated by a bipartisan majority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:I guess that depends on whether you take what he says at face value. In what way did the debt ceiling fiasco illustrate Obama as a bad negotiator? Jesus gently caress is this ever a stupid loving question to anyone who has at all been paying attention to Obama's presidency. The only people who could consider Obama a good negotiator are idiots and republicans (with lots of overlap). I mean by now he's sort of learned better but it took him way too loving long to realize the kind of game the right was playing. down with slavery posted:I'm just confused as to where the bad negotiation comes in. The original offer was politically suicidal? 3:1 taxes:cuts? And then your justification for the deal he finally did sign is that you think he signed it assuming that the GOP would back down in the future? Despite the "perpetual crises" things have remained pretty swell for Obama and his donors throughout his presidency. Corporate profits at record highs, income inequality continues to grow and we move right. It seems that the people who put him there are getting what they want, and the people who voted for him continue to get hosed. Oh, if that's the angle you're taking then I kind of agree but it's probably the most depressing angle you can take on the whole last few years, even though it's also probably dead accurate. Harry Joe fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:27
|
|
Joementum posted:After his initial offer, which was both politically suicidal and would never be acceptable to the opposition, fell through, he accepted a deal without understanding that Republicans' willingness to let military contractors suffer was significantly greater than their willingness to raise taxes, which triggered another two years of perpetual crises. I'm just confused as to where the bad negotiation comes in. The original offer was politically suicidal? 3:1 taxes:cuts? And then your justification for the deal he finally did sign is that you think he signed it assuming that the GOP would back down in the future? Despite the "perpetual crises" things have remained pretty swell for Obama and his donors throughout his presidency. Corporate profits at record highs, income inequality continues to grow and we move right. It seems that the people who put him there are getting what they want, and the people who voted for him continue to get hosed. Harry Joe posted:Jesus gently caress is this ever a stupid loving question to anyone who has at all been paying attention to Obama's presidency. The only people who could consider Obama a good negotiator are idiots and republicans (with lots of overlap). I've been paying attention to the presidency, not once have I ever encountered a scenario which made me think Obama was a bad negotiator, just many scenarios that made me think that the public is very confused as to what his agenda actually is, who's paying for him to be where he is, and what they are getting out of it. On top of the always entertaining political rhetoric from both sides attempting to placate their respective masses while working against them.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:It seems that the people who put him there are getting what they want, and the people who voted for him continue to get hosed. Oh ho ho! I fell into your trap, I see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:33
|
|
Joementum posted:Oh ho ho! I fell into your trap, I see. There's no trap, I just don't see where the bad negotiation comes in. I think people fundamentally misunderstand his goals and are willing to explain the difference between rhetoric and results as "poor negotiation". You simply do not get to his position without being able to negotiate, and there's really nothing I've seen that suggests he didn't get what he wanted out of the deal. I do think he'd raise taxes on the rich if he could. But I don't think he appreciates the severity of the situation that the disenfranchised in this country are faced with. For example, how he can let so many non-violent drug offenders rot in federal prison while their children are left without parents? There are just so many little things he could be doing that he chooses not to. You can say he's playing some 10th dimensional political chess game, and I agree with you, but I think we'd disagree on what his actual end goals are. Same goes for GWB. And regardless of whether you want to laugh it off or not, the fact that Obama's donors are sitting pretty while a vast majority of his voters continue to suffer is just the reality.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
But don't you see? Obama is a terrorist, and we don't negotiate with terrorists.... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:You can say he's playing some 10th dimensional political chess game, and I agree with you To be clear, I am very much not saying this. Also, your example of pardoning non-violent drug offenders is particularly funny this week.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:41
|
|
Joementum posted:Also, your example of pardoning non-violent drug offenders is particularly funny this week. Again, I'm not saying that he hasn't done any good or doesn't want to. I just don't think he's a bad negotiator. He's a center-right democrat with the absurd economic views required to be involved in the federal government. I just don't see how he "lost" the debt ceiling crisis. Joementum posted:To be clear, I am very much not saying this. So what are you saying, that you take his words at face value? I mean, what are Obama's goals in your eyes? down with slavery fucked around with this message at 23:47 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
Bush is incredibly intelligent. In terms of his emotional intelligence he ranks very highly (Bill Clinton agrees with this). One of the better moments in Stone's movie is where Bush, as a DKE pledge, remembers the name of every single member of the frat. That's how Bush's mind works, he has an exceptional memory, good narrative skill and great people skills.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 00:35
|
|
|
Deadulus posted:Libertarian friend of mine went off about how the Koch brothers only gave $20 million to campaigns in the 2012 election and that groups like ActBlue was way worse because they gave $100 million. I assume he was neglecting money the Koch's gave to PACs or any of their think tanks. You're also debating at a disadvantage if you're relying on facts to make your case. What does your friend like? Net Neutrality? The Self Made Man myth? Fairness of contract law? The Koch Brothers are like anti-Libertarian bingo dressed up in the good Libertarian optics of being rich. edit: Haha, tell him that the Koch brothers are to Libertarians what those Chinese bitcoin mining warehouses are to hobbyists. Yeah, the rules are the same for both teams. Sure, I'll give you that. Pythagoras a trois fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Apr 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
I've really been enjoying this cycle of renewal. During the Healthcare debate, Nixon was rehabilitated as a sort of pro-reform icon. "The last left-wing President" and all that, I mean, look at the EPA! And people were dumb enough to get behind it too. Lots of people lamenting, lamenting that loving Richard Mi(l)hous(e) Nixon was our last truly left-wing President. During Obama's Presidency there has also been a savvy navigation between the lines of "President Who? Let's look at the Senate!" and "Take responsibility, you can't keep blaming the past administration for your failures like TARP!" And now as Obama's Presidency's sun sets, it is time to remember GWB as the Decider he was, the great man! And how dare you question that? You know, "first as tragedy/then as farce", "capitalism has a way of accelerating itself" and all the other jargon we've come to expect but drat if GWB's rehabilitation didn't come early.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Bush is incredibly intelligent. In terms of his emotional intelligence he ranks very highly (Bill Clinton agrees with this). One of the better moments in Stone's movie is where Bush, as a DKE pledge, remembers the name of every single member of the frat. That's how Bush's mind works, he has an exceptional memory, good narrative skill and great people skills. I can't tell if you're a committed troll or if you actually believe this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Bush is incredibly intelligent. In terms of his emotional intelligence he ranks very highly (Bill Clinton agrees with this). One of the better moments in Stone's movie is where Bush, as a DKE pledge, remembers the name of every single member of the frat. That's how Bush's mind works, he has an exceptional memory, good narrative skill and great people skills. That W could be quite affable and personally emotive is not the same as being particularly bright. The man coasted through college on gentleman's Cs by his own admission, and botched just about every job he ever held. "Incredibly intelligent" my goddamn rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:So what are you saying, that you take his words at face value? I mean, what are Obama's goals in your eyes? I take Obama completely at his word, as stated prior to the 2008 election, that he believes structural reforms are necessary for the long-term survival of the Medicare and Social Security programs, and at his word in the negotiations with Republicans in 2011 that he'd (and the Democratic Congressional coalition) would be willing to accept incremental reform in the mode of switching over to C-CPI to calculate inflationary adjustments to the programs in exchange for modest short term tax revenues. I think Obama would be willing to go even further, but probably couldn't sell that to Democrats. All of which is meaningless because you could tell Republicans that you're willing to destroy Social Security and use the funds to build a giant statue of Ronald Reagan in exchange for slightly higher tax rates on the rich and they will refuse the offer and then run against you in the next election saying that you want to destroy Social Security. And that's what Obama took five years to figure out about his negotiations with the opposition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Bush is incredibly intelligent. In terms of his emotional intelligence he ranks very highly (Bill Clinton agrees with this). One of the better moments in Stone's movie is where Bush, as a DKE pledge, remembers the name of every single member of the frat. That's how Bush's mind works, he has an exceptional memory, good narrative skill and great people skills. Captain_Maclaine posted:That W could be quite affable and personally emotive is not the same as being particularly bright. The man coasted through college on gentleman's Cs by his own admission, and botched just about every job he ever held. "Incredibly intelligent" my goddamn rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:One of the better moments in Stone's movie is where Bush, as a DKE pledge, remembers the name of every single member of the frat. I think that the chances this scene was Oliver Stone making a joke about President Bush creating juvenile nicknames for everyone in his administration and various world leaders (ex. "Pootey Poot") are very, very high.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Joementum posted:I take Obama completely at his word, as stated prior to the 2008 election, that he believes structural reforms are necessary for the long-term survival of the Medicare and Social Security programs, and at his word in the negotiations with Republicans in 2011 that he'd (and the Democratic Congressional coalition) would be willing to accept incremental reform in the mode of switching over to C-CPI to calculate inflationary adjustments to the programs in exchange for modest short term tax revenues. I think Obama would be willing to go even further, but probably couldn't sell that to Democrats. I don't think this is entirely fair to Obama. The most important part of the 2008/2009 narrative is that Obama wanted to be the post-partisan president. I don't think he or anyone in his administration was stupid enough to think the Republicans would roll over for him. If you've read "The Audacity of Hope," you'll clearly see signs that Obama was looking for a chance to return Washington to a place where ideas could be exchanged over cocktails, politician's kids would go to the same schools, and people generally knew each other. Similarly, Obama very clearly wanted Congress to own their legislation. It would have been a good gambit except the Democrats didn't want to defend their record and ran from the ACA as hard as they could... And lost. After that, well. I don't know what to say. I think Obama was negotiating from a position of common ground. Boehner is a lot of things, but he's primarily interested in his legacy and some sort of governance. Obama wanted to get things done. They agreed on some points, most definitely, and Obama was willing to make some of those bad decisions. But saying he didn't learn until 2012 that you can't negotiate with the Republicans is a little disingenuous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:00
|
|
Joementum posted:I take Obama completely at his word, as stated prior to the 2008 election, that he believes structural reforms are necessary for the long-term survival of the Medicare and Social Security programs Isn't this a truism? Of course they require "reform", it's what form that reform takes that is the question quote:, and at his word in the negotiations with Republicans in 2011 that he'd (and the Democratic Congressional coalition) would be willing to accept incremental reform in the mode of switching over to C-CPI to calculate inflationary adjustments to the programs in exchange for modest short term tax revenues. Isn't this a bad thing? quote:I think Obama would be willing to go even further, but probably couldn't sell that to Democrats. Based on what? quote:All of which is meaningless because you could tell Republicans that you're willing to destroy Social Security and use the funds to build a giant statue of Ronald Reagan in exchange for slightly higher tax rates on the rich and they will refuse the offer and then run against you in the next election saying that you want to destroy Social Security. And that's what Obama took five years to figure out about his negotiations with the opposition. At the end of the day those tax cuts would have expired had Obama not done anything, so it's hard to put the blame for those low tax rates on anyone but Obama. Obama resigned the patriot act, Obama resigned the bush tax cuts, these things that were sold to us as GOP creations for all of GWB presidencies, change, hope, all of that bullshit, it's just that, bullshit. The whole "Obama is a bad negotiator" seems more like a way to placate the progressive elements of his base who look at his results and question his abilities. It's way easier to claim he's a bad negotiator than to admit that a politician you voted for/believed in actually isn't working in your interests or the ones they stated during the campaign.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:I don't know about the 60s klan, but during the 70s that is pretty much exactly the angle that David Duke took during his time as Grand Wizard. No, Duke's exactly who I'm thinking of. Plus ça change, non? zoux posted:And that's the bottom line because Stone Cold says so. "You sit there and thump your bible, and where did it get you?! Leviticus 18:22 says gay marriage is wrong. Well, Austin 18:22 says I just gay-married your rear end!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:The whole "Obama is a bad negotiator" seems more like a way to placate the progressive elements of his base who look at his results and question his abilities. It's way easier to claim he's a bad negotiator than to admit that a politician you voted for/believed in actually isn't working in your interests or the ones they stated during the campaign. Obama can both be a bad negotiator and be willing to sell out the progressive base of the Democratic party to achieve a deal on reform of social welfare programs. I think you're more interested in trying to make me defend Obama's actual policy goals, which I personally disagree with, than you are about discussing his ability to achieve those goals. I didn't vote for him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:08
|
|
Joementum posted:Obama can both be a bad negotiator and be willing to sell out the progressive base of the Democratic party to achieve a deal on reform of social welfare programs. I think you're more interested in trying to make me defend Obama's actual policy goals, which I personally disagree with, than you are about discussing his ability to achieve those goals. I didn't vote for him. It would appear that he is achieving his policy goals to me though, which is why I don't call him a bad negotiator... When has he been unable to accomplish his policy goals (which obviously are not the same as the ones he's stated) or which goals haven't been accomplished?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:It would appear that he is achieving his policy goals to me though, which is why I don't call him a bad negotiator... When has he been unable to accomplish his policy goals (which obviously are not the same as the ones he's stated) or which goals haven't been accomplished? He failed to achieve his goal of structural reform to Medicare and Social Security in exchange for added revenues to reduce the federal deficit, which was both his stated and I guess top secret 12 dimensional chess goal. In failing to achieve this he panicked and accepted a short term deal on sequestration that led to disastrous political consequences in the next two years of his Presidency.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Joementum posted:He failed to achieve his goal of structural reform to Medicare and Social Security in exchange for added revenues to reduce the federal deficit, which was both his stated and I guess top secret 12 dimensional chess goal. In failing to achieve this he panicked and accepted a short term deal on sequestration that led to disastrous political consequences in the next two years of his Presidency. Can you imagine this negotiation being anything but an absolute farce anywhere else? "I'll give you $20 for that coffee table. Firm, cash in hand." "You'll give me $100 and I'll gently caress your wife or I'm going to call you a doo doo head" "HUH WHA OH OH OK heres the money take my wife!" "Good call doo doo head, gently caress off" Master negotiator.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:So what you're saying is he's personable. That's not necessarily the same thing as saying he's bright. Christ. Not all intelligence is "beep boop I am good at logic and math" intelligence. I mean, there's a lot of academic debate as to exactly how many facets intelligence can be classed into, but it's pretty recognized (I think, psych folks feel free to correct) that interpersonal relationships require a certain type of intelligence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Christ. Not all intelligence is "beep boop I am good at logic and math" intelligence. I mean, there's a lot of academic debate as to exactly how many facets intelligence can be classed into, but it's pretty recognized (I think, psych folks feel free to correct) that interpersonal relationships require a certain type of intelligence. <sarcasm>  Nope! If you can't do math good you're a dummy dumb doo doo head ololol go work at Statbucks. </sarcasm> Dystram fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Apr 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
Ted Cruz and Mike Lee went shopping for stuff to put in Cruz's Houston office today.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
His Harvard Law degree didn't provide Ted Cruz the tools to get the point behind Green Eggs and Ham.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Ted Cruz and Mike Lee went shopping for stuff to put in Cruz's Houston office today. Pretty sure that's illegal (if it's genuine), but whatever it's not like they care about endangered animals or laws written by three letter agencies they don't like. e: also, displaying an animal you didn't kill yourself is poseur poo poo. ReidRansom fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Apr 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Ted Cruz and Mike Lee went shopping for stuff to put in Cruz's Houston office today. Most politicians, and people in general, you can get a sense for what they're thinking or feeling from their eyes. Not Cruz though. I've always held a suspicion that those fat eyelids and overly practiced smile are 2/3 of his success as a politician.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Ted Cruz and Mike Lee went shopping for stuff to put in Cruz's Houston office today. That seems too small to be real?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 06:11 |
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:That seems too small to be real? They're just kneeling
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 03:05
|
|