Comments Posted By jackson1234
Displaying 171 To 180 Of 190 Comments
RIGHT OR WRONG, BUSH MADE AN IMPACT
They will blame any Obama failure on Bush – and people will accept it.
We'll see, first, in two years. Given our nation's short memories and even shorter attention spans, I bet I'll be proved right, particularly when the economic stimulus boondoggle fizzles, fails to produce more jobs, and explodes the deficit.
What I didn't post above, and meant to post, is that like the one-term lightweights that marked the pre-Civil War and pre-Reagan eras, I expect a series of one-term presidents starting with Obama and continuing until things either improve or someone actually does improve the economy and foreign policy in his or her first term. We are in that type of cycle, and it is aggravated by the need for instant gratification. The Bloody Shirt of George W. Bush will last about six months.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 15.01.2009 @ 17:05
I agree to a large degree with what you wrote. I disagree with the implication that Bush has left the door open for the election of liberals to the White House for the next three or four cycles. I'll even go out on a limb and predict Obama isn't re-elected because his policies won't work and the Democratic Congress not only is composed of asshats but will be perceived as asshats in short order. More on that last point later
They will blame any Obama failure on Bush - and people will accept it.
ed.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 15.01.2009 @ 15:05
You give Obama way too much credit. He does believe he can heal the oceans, whatever that means. He does believe his force of personality can make cold-blooded murderers come to the peace table.
The man is fucking deluded. He was duly elected, by a substantial margin, with the full knowledge he is fucking deluded. I just watched his national security presser. A chill went down my spine. Obama actually believes, as he is prone, that Panetta will be effective due to his wonderful personality. Jesus Christ. When the shit storm comes down, and I'm certain it will, Obama and the Democrats won't be able to blame Bush. It will be on their collective heads, and if the MSM tries to spin it into a Cuban missile crisis "success" they will fail.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 9.01.2009 @ 11:44
PANETTA WILL HAVE OBAMA'S BACK AT CIA
Obama said a few things yesterday that indicate he doesn't think his Panetta choice was particularly inspired. Will Panetta go under the bus? With Obama, that always is a possibility when the president-elect begins to list someone's good points and none of them pertain to the issue at hand. I'm certain the response from Langley has been less than positive. Obama may have second thoughts on this one. We'll see. The more I consider it, he chose poorly and that could be the opinion of some of those who can make his four years hell through leaks and the drip drip drip of bureaucratic infighting. In other words, an appointment that was supposed to curtail infighting may increase it dramatically to Obama's detriment.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 7.01.2009 @ 12:12
Other than not knowing his ass from a hole in the ground on intelligence and defense matters and foreign affairs, Panetta was an inspired choice. It was a damned shame that Caroline "The Human Wind Tunnel Between the Ears" S. Kennedy had been tagged to be in the Senate.
Yes, Obama probably will avoid political infighting even if the country glows in the dark in a few months.
This Administration is a joke before the swearing in.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 6.01.2009 @ 14:32
REID BALKS AT BLAGO SENATE CHOICE
Very well done. I agree Blago was brilliant. I imagine the defense, "I was targeted because my choice wasn't the establishment choice," will have some resonance.
I think we need to watch Reid's kabuki here. He and other Democratic hacks would not allow a special election so in a sense they are, in fact, responsible for what has happened. As it has emerged, of course, the Senate may not have a choice but to seat Burris. Reid will then claim he did all he could but the law would not allow him to do what was right. He lost that opportunity when he and others opposed a special election, and he must not be allowed to get away with his two-bit Pontius Pilate act (which is what I believe this is).
Anyhow, good work per usual--with the exception of your bail out column yesterday, which you may want to reconsider. Okay, that was gratuitious but I couldn't avoid it.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 31.12.2008 @ 11:28
Yeah – but is that really the only strategy the GOP has? Hope for failure?
Got to be something better.
Not at all. The point was that this is very bad legislation, failure is likely--which is precisely the point, and it should have been opposed. This isn't a matter of hoping for failure. Unless we are to become a party of McCains and other squishes, we need to do the right thing. Hell, sometimes it works.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 30.12.2008 @ 14:50
I have to disagree. It is the Democrats who have played with fire here. If this stimulus doesn't produce much, and my guess is it won't, it will be hung squarely around their necks. McConnell has acted brilliantly.
Yeah - but is that really the only strategy the GOP has? Hope for failure?Got to be something better.
ed.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 30.12.2008 @ 12:29
NO CLIMATE CHANGE TREATY WITHOUT CHINA
Very well done, but if you walk up to the bell ring it. Romme and his ilk want the United States to be like China, not vice versa. Climate change fearmongering simply is a tool to make the United States into another workers paradise.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 5.12.2008 @ 11:41
THE INCREDIBLY STUPID THOUGHTS OF DEEPAK CHOPRA
Jesus Fucking Christ. Madonna would have been a font of wisdom compared to Chopra.
Is the problem really the delusional banalaties that emanate from Deepak Chopra (or Andrew Sullivan and other deranged/vacuous fools who hold forth on things outside their respective depths)? I submit the problem is with CNN (or The Atlantic or The Huffington Post or whatever). Rabinowitz is dead on here. It is one thing to note the utter madness of certain individuals, or their stupidity, or both, but quite another to quote them as legitimate sources. Who would be Chopra's second source? Chauncey the Gardener?
You made me laugh, quite a bit at that, but the media has problems these days that go well beyond run of the mill bias.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 1.12.2008 @ 14:33
