What a windbag!

[Meenah]

I also think the election of Barack Obama and "Change" was not so much about "Change" to liberal policies....but about this change. Change in the insanity in Washington. He hasn't done that yet - but I think anyone that expected that to change in a year has a little maturing to do.

Honestly, I'm stunned that both the Progressives and the Media thought that he could wave a magic wand and just alter the tone that's been rewarded for the last 20 years. Patience. And new blood. New ideas. The courage to try. The courage to trust. That's where I'm putting my "Hope".

You can write my speeches!!!!!

But that's a lot! Every day I work on projects funded by the ARRA. I see it providing jobs, keeping small businesses out of bankruptcy, and rebuilding our embarrasingsly decrepit infrastructure. I shudder to think where we would be now if we had not had a government willing to take action. I think Obama is a strong leader who deserves a lot of credit for guiding us through a financial crisis that could be a lot worse. I saw the SOTU address as further evidence of his capacity to lead. I'm only disheartened that people have so much contempt for him. I wish I understood why, but I just don't see it.

I totally agree with this! I shake my head at the "he hasn't done anything". Uh, that little recession thingy was a HUGE DEAL. Is it fixed? No, but we're a lot better off than we would have been. Not to mention 2 wars, and the increased drone attacks in Pakistan/Afghanistan that are actually yielding results.

I get so frustrated with people (not at all directed at you, Cheri) who are focused on their specific issue and say "Obama has been such a disappointment". I heard this from a gay rights activist the other day -- WTF?? I am right out there, in FULL support of gay marriage, but, I'm sorry -- he's only got so many places he can focus and spend political capital right now, and that can't be it.

As for Congress - that's Pelosi and Reid. And the damn democrats. The republicans fall in step and stay organized to focus on the party goals -- it took a LONG, LONG time of GWB screw ups before anyone besides McCain was willing to step out of line and go against the White House. But no, the dems have to be all 'voting my conscience' kind of crap. I don't think that they should automatically rubber stamp every thing that the White House puts out, but I do think that there should be a point at which a compromise is reached, a decision is made, and they GET SOMETHING DONE!

[PrincessFiona]

I loved how he blamed the republicans for being obstructionists, when for the last year, he had the votes to pass whatever he wanted. Until last week, the republicans couldn't stop anything. It was his failure to lead his party to pass his agenda. He failed and he blames Bush...a zilly times last night.

At what point does Obama step up and own the Presidency and quit blaming Bush/repubs?

Laker, this thought crossed my mind too. I have become very disappointed with the democratic party after the last few years. I used to be a diehard dem and voted for Hillary in the primaries... I accepted that while Bush was in power that things were stacked against the dems and that this is the reason things didn't get done. I also don't expect Obama to have changed everything in one year....but I think the Health Care Reform that was badly needed in our country has been a huge failure. For the life of me, I can't understand how they didn't end up actually really fighting for what they wanted when they could have gotten it. The massive wall street bailout and failure to get our troops out of the middle east are other disappointments. Does anyone else remember that this was one sticking point that got him elected over Hillary in the first place? Remember Hillary saying it would take more time, but Obama insisting it could be done in a matter of months?

Obama was elected on the promise of hope and change and I guess I'm such a cynic it's why I couldn't vote for him. It was all too vague and I felt like it was just cheerleader tactics to help win the "game". I feel like I was right, but I would have loved for Obama to prove me wrong.

I know my opinion on this issue rubs Shakti the wrong way, and I apologize in advance. I just think that he had huge momentum coming into this. As far as the recession goes, I don't see the same improvement that others see, but maybe it's because where I live has been so hard hit. The DOW might be up, but we have multiple foreclosures, stores closing in our malls, restaurtants closing....here in middle america there hasn't been the positive effect.

And honestly, I'll never forgive the democratic majority for letting the CMS come in through the back door and change the medicare billing codes. The only good news there is that at least now that we're earning 30% less we will pay less in taxes...of course, we won't be out there stimulating the economy anymore either. And ... wait until more scheduled medicare/medicaid cuts come through. Actually, this all disgusts me so much that I have to stop talking about it.

[PrincessFiona]

Obama and Pelosi are on the same team, a good leader with complete control of both the house and the senate and coming into office on a message of change with a huge approval rating and the backing of the media pumping him up on a daily basis should be able to get things done. But Obama has never shown himself to be a good leader, a good orator, yes, but not a leader. His lack of experience shines through.

Bingo!!!!

[Sheherezade]

I don't really see Obama as part of the Democratic party. How 'bout that? I think he is part of a new wave of politicians that are aligned *in name only* with their party. I don't think he can lead them because he's the young upstart that raised all his money on the internet and beat the favored son (Hillary) by sneaking in the back door. He needs to be rid of them. Hence, "throw the bums out". I'm glad that Dodd is retiring. I read after his announcement that they thought the new upstart Dem candidate was polling better than the challenger Repub OR Dodd if he had stuck around. I would like to see this trend grow. I'm wondering if that hasn't also lead to the weird party shifts in the last few years (Spector to Dems, Leiberman to his only little island). Parties don't mean so much anymore. They don't to me. Who votes a straight ticket? Seriously? I vote probably 65% Democratic and 35% Republican. In any election, that will shift one way or the other. I'm a registered independent and so is my husband.

The "Blue Dog" Dems are another group of Dems that are part of the party *in name only*. The candidate in NY that took the seat from the Republican was part of the "Conservative" party. It's all breaking up. I imagine we will see the more fractionation in the Republican party as the Tea Party movement grows. I don't think Scott Brown is so similar to McCain or Palin. Obama is not Pelosi and Pelosi is not Reid. We've got the Libertarian party gaining ground every election and viable "Green Party" candidates in state offices now.

I think the growing "independent" trend has not only occurred in the voters rolls but also in the candidates they generate. In the short term, this is problematic.....because you can't get a voting block together if you've got 4 parties or so in the house. Brave new world, here we come. I'm guessing they kill the filibuster rule and we go to straight majorities for a win with multiple political parties represented in the legislature over the next twenty years.

[PrincessFiona]

Interesting, Angie. What do you think about the platform he ran on? I think he appealed to the dens to get elected and it was a bit of a bait and switch.

I think multiple parties is a great idea.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sheherezade]

I think he had (has) very crafty marketing. I think he has always acted like a centrist in his voting record and writings - and that has been highlighted to appeal to people like me. Still, many of his stated goals were populist and progressive - which appeals to disenchanted hard core Dems and youth. He gets both groups. He disappoints both some.

Honestly, I think his progressive supporters are more disappointed these days than the middle ground folk. He hasn't made dramatic moves to the left despite what Fox News may say. (Of course, they alternate between saying he's done nothing and that he's turned us in to a socialist/communist New Europe. I don't think he's done either.) I never expected him to and wasn't afraid that any of these things would get passed because I KNOW that we don't have a majority of progressives in congress. (No way will they have the votes to do some of these things so I'm not concerned that electing you will make this happen. Something like that. I only consider the platform items that I think can actually occur in the system we have in place today.)

He's really a boring guy under all that hyped charisma. He's a smart nerd with good handlers. I'm OK with that. I like boring and smart. I just don't want to see him get played by the hill. My congressmen said just that the other day on his radio interview (he's a Republican remember). He said that he liked a LOT of Obama's ideas and that he wants to work together. He said that Obama's heart is in the right place but that he's gotten rolled by the operatives on the Hill and he needs to smarten up.

I'm keeping the faith that he will. Obviously, JMHO.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: What a windbag!

I like your opinion Angie. It's food for thought over here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[oceanchild]

I've been trying to think of a good way to articulate this, and I'm not sure I've gotten there, but I don't think it's fair to expect the president to be able to wrangle the congress. Not any more.

60 Democrats in the Senate doesn't mean 60 people who support you, as evidenced by the healthcare bill. People like Lieberman and Nelson don't need Obama's support - they need the support of their constituents. They know how best to get that, and it may mean blowing off the president.

Am I disappointed in Obama so far? Totally. There are so many things that I wanted to have changed that haven't. But I think I was expecting too much of him. There are good reasons why we have separation of powers, and I respect that, even though it drives me crazy. While the president can (and should) cajole the congress as best he can, at the end of the day, the legislative branch is the one that actually has to get these things done.

[Sheherezade]

Absolutely agree with you Julia.

[PrincessFiona]

Am I disappointed in Obama so far? Totally. There are so many things But I think I was expecting too much of him. While the president can (and should) cajole the congress as best he can, at the end of the day, the legislative branch is the one that actually has to get these things done.

I think you made some very fair points.

I think the reason for the feeling of letdown is honestly due to the hope and change rhethoric of the election cycle. At the time it was so unspecific that I felt people were able to project their own image and expectations of what hope and change were onto Obama. It rubbed me the wrong way. It seemed unrealistic and it was.

Brilliant marketing? Yes. But in a way dishonest too.

I agree also that the legislative branch has to get it done. In my opinion though, the president should be leading and directing the discussion. That isn't quite what happened. I think I expected him to stand up and propose a public option, insurance company reform, spearhead groups to look at Healthcare in other countries etc. It seems he didn't take on that leadership role. Though I have no doubt he is smart, i just think he wasn't ready for the job just yet. I don't know that Hillary or McCain would have been better though.

It's time to put a lot of fresh faces into office I think.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[oceanchild]

I agree that Obama should have been out front on healthcare. It sorta seems like healthcare was never his passion, and then he got pushed into dealing with it when he didn't really want to. I don't know if him proposing a plan would've resulted in a better bill (or any bill at all), but it seems like it might have.

I'd love some fresh faces too. The problem with congress is that people tend to hate the congress as a whole but love their own representative. So everybody just keeps winning. I apparently now live in one of the most evenly split congressional districts in the country, but our incumbent rep is so good at raising money that he's basically untouchable. I'm not sure anyone's even running against him. Our next Senate race might be interesting though.

Actually, since I'm babbling anyway, I'm feeling like we've created a sort of politician class. Maybe it's always been like that, I don't know. But several of my city council members are former state representatives. Sounds to me like a demotion, but they were term limited in the state legislature, and it's like they're politicians now, so they just have to find something else to run for. So even term limits aren't really bringing in new people - they're just shuffling them around.

Sorry. Tangent.

[DCJenn]

I think this is the first wave of a huge generational shift that's going to impact ALL parties.

I vote with the Dems for a lot of social issues but I have significant disagreements with them on lots of issues that they support.

I think the days of 'you like X, Y, and Z and therefore are ________" are over. They have to be. There are some people who have ONE issue agendas- abortion, health care, etc. but honestly, I think the world is way too complicated and complex to come down to decision-making based on black and white thinking anymore.

Cable news has it's place but to fill a 24-hour news cycle with 'new' information, they end up repeating a lot of things, they typically are sloppy journalists (if they're journalists at all), and they perpetuate the 'magical thinking' myths. NO ONE can fix the problems that we had in one year. If McCain/Palin had been elected (he would have banished her back to Alaska by now) everyone would be complaining about how nothing has happened and nothing would be done. Assume that the Congress would have stayed Dem. The DEMs would have been the "Party of No" because until we get a new generation of Congressional leaders who realize that everyone in the sandbox means everyone gets some of the sand, instead of WE get all of the sand until you get all of the sand, nothing is going to change.

Remember when I threw out the idea of mandatory retirements for policitians and the Supremes? I still don't think it's a bad idea. Eric Cantor, whom I happen to disagree with on a lot of issues, must walk into his office and want to stuff his head in the microwave when he has to deal with Boehner. Cantor KNOWS how to communicate with his fellow generation of politicians- both the Obama people and his fellow conservatives. The generation in their 40s (my generation, as it happens) think completely differently than our parents. The Boomers can't think past themselves. Their generation is SO big that they truly have changed the American landscape at every generation turn. Politics is just one more place they've ram-rodded into they way they want it to be.

We're much more collaborative than our 'elders' because most of us went through school at a time when 'group' was really trendy. My elementary school and high school were built when 'open classrooms' were all the rage. (and NO, they most definitely did not work)

I think of it like the generational shift in medicine. Today's generation of docs aren't willing to sacrifice the entire rest of their lives (kids, spouses, home life, vacations) just for medicine. It is a complete paradigm shift for the medical institutions. The same thing is happening in politics.

The Boomers don't like to not be in charge. With the exception of Vietnam, they've been able to do exactly as they pleased, through very prosperous times, for most of their adult lives. They don't want to play nicely because they've never had to. It's no different whether they identify themselves as Ds or Rs or Is or whatever- they don't want to share.

That kind of thinking on a National level isn't going to happen until an entire set of old (mostly white men) politicians retires.

Jenn

[Sheherezade]

Thanks Jenn. I was avoiding going down the Boomer trashing road because I do that all the time. Honestly, this is (like everything) all their fault. I agree completely with your analysis. I'd add that the expectation that Obama would cure the world's ills and usher in an era of everlasting peace in a year (or so! ) is classic Boomer. Impatient, idealistic, intense. I think that energy was great when they were twenty, not so pretty when they were middle age and will be amusing in their 60s and 70s. They are a youthful lot, for better or worse.

[DCJenn]

and lord knows they're going to outnumber us for a VERY long time.

and then the boomerangs are going to plow us over in our dotage.

Jenn