Tuesday, May 19, 2009
The strange powers of Barack Obama
The entire world knows that, for the moment, at least, Barack Obama has immense political and personal power. He has a willing Congress dominated by his own party, regulatory agencies increasingly staffed by his fellow travelers, a press corps that will give him a pass on matters that would have enraged them in earlier times, and more than enough personal charisma to get him over the rough spots with the American people. He and his allies are deploying this power to pass trillion dollar spending bills, transform America's economy industry by industry, and to reshape her relations with the world.
All of which makes it, well, strange that his powers have suddenly failed him. What could possibly account for Barack Obama's sudden onset legislative impotence? Thinking... thinking...
12 Comments:
By 
Charlottesvillain, at
Tue May 19, 12:47:00 PM:
Did you hear the one about why the democrats were comfortable with Biden in the VP slot?
Cause if Obama were to die in office he'd only be gone three days.
By 
, at
Tue May 19, 03:44:00 PM:
I'm slow. Can you spell it out? Does this mean that Obama got Rahm to circle up friendly votes in Congress to block the execution of a boneheaded idea that Obama had promised on the campaign trail? ... So that Obama can say he's for it, but doesn't have to live with the consequences? ... If so, this is even more weasely than voting "present" 129 times.
I'm slow ... and paranoid ... I actually suspect that hanging Pelosi on waterboarding was planned for by Obama & Co. It wasn't the main object in revisiting waterboarding for no good reason, but taking Nancy down a peg is an incidental benefit to Obama.
I'm not a real journalist -- who is these days? -- so I may be very wrong here. But as I understand it, it was Feinstein's committee that asked for the release of waterboarding documents. Obama could have claimed executive privilege, if he'd wanted. I'd be surprised if Obama & Co hadn't thought through the implications of whatever got released and been talking to Feinstein all along. Forcing the Right to defend torture was the main object, as well as getting Cheney airtime. But it wouldn't be that hard to foresee that Boehner would come back on the Democrats in Congress who were in the know -- Nancy especially. Am I crazy?
Link, over
By , at
Tue May 19, 05:04:00 PM:
So, keeping score, Obama is now in favor of waterboarding, rendition, indefinite detention, trial in military courts and warrantless wire tapping. Plus, Don't Ask-Don't Tell and the Protection of Marriage Act. Where he seems to differ from Bush is that he thinks Bush didn't spend enough money on government unions and on the UAW. Have I got that right?
By , at
Tue May 19, 05:22:00 PM:
Oh, and he wants to keep Guantanamo open, obviously!
By Georg Felis, at
Tue May 19, 09:36:00 PM:
You put your finger right on the reason Obama is having problems in your post. Thinking. Now that the people are actually thinking about what he is saying, instead of just feeling it...
By JPMcT, at
Tue May 19, 09:58:00 PM:
Democrats do not come to power on a tide of raw intellectual energy of their electorate.
Rather, they climb to power on the shoulders of the uneducated, misinformed, overemotional and self-serving faction of our population. Unfortunately, this faction is growing at an alarming rate.
a little less than half of the electorate saw through Obama. Of those who elected him, most are invincibly ignorant and will continue the blind support.
But some are emerging from the coma and realizing what they have birthed. Call it buyer's remorse...or whatever...but the tide is slowly turning...and Obama's magic is wearing off.
In a few more years of modern public education and increasing government subsidy, the masses will remain permanently sedated.
Thus the importance of the 2010 election.
By Kinuachdrach, at
Tue May 19, 10:02:00 PM:
You are missing the point. The Obamination still rules the Universe. In fact, without him even snapping his fingers, Guantanamo will simply disappear.
Just watch how few times Gitmo comes up in the media or Congress in the next year. A cloak of invisibility is being thrown over it right now. Even the Europeans will forget it ever existed.
And you think that the Big O doesn't have the mojo any more!
By , at
Wed May 20, 12:43:00 AM:
"Thus the importance of the 2010 election."
Nothing is written ... especially in sports and politics ... but I don't expect in 2010 a repeat of 1994 ... the result of which was to turn Bill Clinton into a moderate Republican ... and thus a fairly successful President, blowjobs included.
Given the sugar rush of "stimulus" and a dysfunctional Republican party, I make the Democrats 14 point favorites in 2010. That doesn't mean that 2010 isn't important ... just that the home team will likely lose. If so, Obama won't be weak and wounded after the 2010 elections ... and maybe even empowered. It's that bad.
No near-term scandal will change things -- MSM has already passed on Obama's lengthy Chicago rap sheet.
'
If I was a real political analyst, I'd assess Congressional district by Congessional district to confirm this ... if I did, the spread might be 20 ... as Bush-Cheney-Rove have already strip-mined the electorate. The Republicans can't even field a competitive team in about half of our states -- and the party's supposed leaders seem to welcome this. How many Democrats are in danger of losing their seats in 2010, barring scandal ... thus, game over. The Republican house has already been burned down.
New third parties in the US are a difficult trick -- odds are heavily against it still ... but if the Republicans don't win back seats in Congress in 2010 we have the necessary conditions.
"Thus the importance of the 2010 election."
By , at
Wed May 20, 12:44:00 AM:
Meant to sign, that was Link at 12:43 am
By JPMcT, at
Wed May 20, 06:54:00 AM:
I don't disagree with that. The 2010 election will be the last chance for an alternative to Obamism...whatever that alternative turns out to be. The Republicans have too long displayed a penchant for grasping defeat from the jaws of victory, not the other way around. They only seem to appeal to those who already are on board.
Libertarians are so chronically marginalized that I think that they actually enjoy that position and will be loathe to give it up.
A new "Conservative" Party. Yeah, maybe over the next generation.
Maybe our only way out as conservatives is to plan to relocate to the part of the country that will secede after a few more years of this torture.
By , at
Wed May 20, 09:39:00 AM:
Session is a Democratic tactic, and I don't see it working with conservatives.
By Dawnfire82, at
Wed May 20, 06:51:00 PM:
"They only seem to appeal to those who already are on board."
But purging the so-called RINOs (which seems to be the winning philosophy in the current soul-searching exercise) will make everything better...
'We lost some elections, what should we do?'
'I know! We'll drive away more people by focusing on hot-button/ideological social issues!'
'Because the last thing we need is to appeal to more voters.'
'Right!'
'What about our governing policies?'
'Ronald Reagan! (hallowed be thy name)'
I want to be a Republican, I really do. But the jackenapes make it so hard...
