« Daily Kos = Comedy Gold | Main | I Don't Know Dick »

The Troll President

There's this person who visits blogs. A lot. Way more than just a regular reader. He pretty much lives there, and comments on everything. So far, fine. Bloggers love people who read their stuff all the time. But this guy, well, he lives in the wrong side of reality. You got some folks with low self-esteem, some with a bit too much self-image, then you have this guy. A guy who imagines that his opinion is so good, that no one else has a right to do anything but agree. In the old days, a guy like that would try to get his own radio show, and in modern days most such blowhards write blogs or work for outfits like MSNBC or CBS. But some folks are just too stupid and lazy to write their own articles. Instead, guys like this show up in someone else's blog, and instead of making cogent and reasoned observations, or at least presenting rational opinion and defending it with something like logic, this guy basically screams insults and flings poo. The generic name for this kind of person is "troll", but you know who I mean. A troll is a person who basically cannot conduct himself in any way but the most vulgar and disrespectful manner.

That kind of person, I once believed, could never rise to the office of President of the United States. History, however, has proven otherwise. We've had jerks in the Oval Office before, self-possessed morons who cared more for their image than the nation's welfare. We've even had a few whose mental balance was, at times, quite possibly in question. Yet for all of that, until now every President has believed that what he said and did was in the best interests of the people of the United States, and that the way in which he conducted himself in public, especially in public debate, was to be exemplary. That has changed with Barack Obama. President Obama cares nothing for anyone but himself, and even the welfare of the United States of America is a distant second to getting his way. There is no one he will not attack, malign, defame, bully or extort to get what he wants. The target selection ranges every so often, from blaming former officials to his own underlings, to his role models, to the Congress, to business leaders, bankers, doctors, accountants ... pretty much a cross-section of America whenever he thinks a cheap shot will advance his plans. And like all trolls, President Obama is impervious to logic, recognition of the failure of his plans and the irrational character of his rhetoric and vulgar flavor of his behavior. The difference between a blog and the White House, of course, is that you can read a different blog or tune out the troll on the blog; we have to put up with the White House Troll until 2012.



TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/38551.

Comments (55)

Maybe he's just following o... (Below threshold)
davidt:

Maybe he's just following orders.

Obama cares nothing for any... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Obama cares nothing for anyone but himself. Right. How many ways can you guys come up with to baselessly deligitimize this president, who you just can't seem to accept as the duly elected leader of this/your/my/our country?

The majority of this country elected him. Sorry you're having trouble accepting that.

To opine that there is some selfish self-gratification motive in Mr. Obama that supersedes the well being of this country is ignorant. Vulgar behavior? What the fuck are you talking about?

Neither you nor I know where this country is headed. Let's hope for the best, eh?

Groucho, what in the heck a... (Below threshold)
kathie:

Groucho, what in the heck are you talking about? Nobody knows where this country is going! Are you kidding? If you don't know where you're going or what you're doing, or what the out come is for 300 million people......STOP.

little stevie is a weirdo. ... (Below threshold)
Michael:

little stevie is a weirdo. I wonder if he is on a watch-list where he lives.

Lame duck coming in Novembe... (Below threshold)
G.:

Lame duck coming in November. In History as worst OTP ever in 2012 (poor Jimmy loses his title). Can you say: repeal, roll back, rescind? groucho that.

Just because it is enacted ... (Below threshold)
Michael:

Just because it is enacted does'nt mean it can't be repealed. The Dimo's Achilles Heel is the fact that it does not enact until 2014. More than enough time to take it down before people get used to it. Especially if the Reps in big in 2010 and 12. Here is a scenario. In 2010 the Reps take back the House and almost the Senate. In 2012 with the the fact that many more Dim Senator's are up for re-election than Reps, the Reps take back control of the Senate with a near or a filibuster proof majority. In the House, the Reps increase their seats and a Republican prsident is elected. On Jan. 21st, 2013, the House and Senate pass legislation revoking Obamacare and that day the new president signs it. And maybe just maybe the Reps Senate uses reconcilation.

That's pretty good, the tro... (Below threshold)
exceller:

That's pretty good, the troll president. lol
It's true that he maligns one group after another. If you add it all up and step back to see the big picture, what I have felt all along is that Obama has a deep disdain for America, and a great love of himself, and he really talks and acts like a bully. It's no mystery why his popularity has plummeted. By far he's the biggest presidential mistake in history. November can't get here soon enough.

"President Obama cares noth... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"President Obama cares nothing for anyone but himself"

Nailed it. Can ANYONE (Groucho, BryanD, Stevie) recall a president who has called for the congressmen and senators of HIS party to vote for a piece of legislation opposed by a majority of citizens and sure to result in their being voted out of office?

Bueller? Bueller?

groucho - you're wrong....t... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

groucho - you're wrong....the majority did NOT vote for him. It was the people who voted up to 23 times using different names put together by ACORN that elected him. Did you forget about all the nasty ACORN voter fraud the MSM turned a blind eye to? Come into the real world and see what is actually happening.
Madalyn

The majority didn't vote fo... (Below threshold)
Roy:

The majority didn't vote for him. The liberal media deemed him to be president and that was it.

Just think, millions of tax... (Below threshold)
TexBob:

Just think, millions of taxpayers getting to pay higher taxes for years for this abortion of a bill, each year the anger grows as Washington steals more and more money that they use to buy votes.

The problem is they aren't delivering anything with the stolen money to the mooches.

The mooches will be mad too. This will be repealed and the libtard dems will lose the house & senate and Comrad Obamski will be targeted, marginalized, ridiculed, and kicked out of office as the worst precedent in history.

Good job Hussein, as the first "half white, mostly arab, and little bitty black" president. You have made history, but it will be remembered with derision, scorn, and laughter.

Damn near EVERY single thin... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

Damn near EVERY single thing I would say about the Putz-in-Chief would result in a DHS investigation.

So I'll just say: 2012 cannot come soon enough! But it may be too late when it DOES come!

"The majority of this count... (Below threshold)
davidt:

"The majority of this country elected him. Sorry you're having trouble accepting that."

False.

Obama got about 53% of the 58% of the electorate who voted, which is about 31% of the electorate.

"...tune out the troll on t... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

"...tune out the troll on the blog... "

Sounds like good advice.

Wimpish trolls every... (Below threshold)
914:


Wimpish trolls everywhere like our own horny toad variety Steve "bullshit" Green will whine and sob when Barakulus Lord of the lowly trolls descends from yon rainbow colored unicorn dream to slap them awake with purple impeached lips crying for thier worship.

Will you tear his 8'x10' half-nude poster off your grandma's basement wall then lil' stevie?


Can ANYONE (Groucho, Bry... (Below threshold)
john:

Can ANYONE (Groucho, BryanD, Stevie) recall a president who has called for the congressmen and senators of HIS party to vote for a piece of legislation opposed by a majority of citizens and sure to result in their being voted out of office?

Are you kidding? That describes most of Bush's second term. To wit:

25 May 2007
President George W. Bush signed a bill on Friday providing $100 billion to pay for the Iraq war... Bush had vetoed an earlier bill that would have required him to begin withdrawing soldiers from Iraq by Oct. 1, and he had vowed to kill any legislation carrying restrictions on troop deployments.... Republican support was nearly unanimous in both chambers

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N25188728.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/24/AR2007052402570.html

"Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?"
5/4-6/07 Favor: 34 Oppose: 65

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

"Do we want Osama bin Laden... (Below threshold)
bobdog:

"Do we want Osama bin Laden to start funding a secret campaign to sway public opinion polls and as a result write US policy? Of course not."

No, Stevie. Do we want George Soros to start funding a secret campaign to sway public opinion polls? Do we want the SEIU and the UAW to start funding a secret campaign to sway public opinion polls? Or ACORN? Or Organizing For America? Do you think they'll all just stop now that you raised the issue?

-------------

Personally, I don't think that Obama's driven by malignant narcissism or even shallowness. He's a creature of his entire political career as a political activist (or political arsonist, which may have a touch of truth to it). His world view is based on the petty grievances of the urban Gimmee Class and the hard left political pariahs and academics he's associated himself with for most of his life. It's not really vanity that drives this man, but an extremely limited exposure to the rest of America where most of us live.

He hasn't learned that history requires that he lead the entire country, and not merely the pencil-necks on the left. I despise the man as president because of this weakness and the harm he has done, but I don't hate him for it. He just doesn't hear what we hear. He's tone deaf, not evil.

I just wish he'd open his ears and do the job right. We'll see what happens when he gets bitch-slapped next November in the mid-term elections. He'll either come around or face two lonely years as a crippled and impotent president. In the meantime, the question is how much more damage he can do.

Ah, somebody's not getting ... (Below threshold)
Jake:

Ah, somebody's not getting his way and throwing a temper tantrum about it.

So sad.

groucho - "How many w... (Below threshold)
Marc:

groucho - "How many ways can you guys come up with to baselessly deligitimize this president"

How many ya want, we can come up with a buttload.

But honestly, it would be a hard task considering nitwits like you spent 8 years wearing "selected, not elected" T-shirts.

Yes, but hovering around Ob... (Below threshold)
Don L:

Yes, but hovering around Obama in spirit are a bevy of demons who not only urge him on but seek, in their hatred of what is good, even more despicable destruction of America. Like demons -they are everywhere-they work next to you hating the very company that provides their livelyhood. They sit next to you in Church, demanding their God support the slaughter of even more of His most perfect creations. They have far more passion and concern about whales and snail darters than precious humans, loathing the humans who dare behave as if they have more rights than these inane lowly creatures. They despise the succesful and seek to pull them down. Their entire constuct is to destruct that which is good. They hate their neighbors for having more wealth, a successful marriage, good kids who achieve, and learn to convince themselves that the planet would be better off without them. They hate America so much they begin to support its enemies. Diabolically driven they loathe one thing more than any other -the truth -and so they live a life of deceit and demand that we too, join them in their lies and falsehoods. You can label them anything -trlls, progressives, liberals, marxists,fascists -it matters not, but we all know who they are -and they are now in charge, destroying whatever they can, while barely pretending that what they do, they do for the good. It will take a God to purge them, for they zealously want their evil, more than we want our good to prevail.

Say hello to all the good f... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Say hello to all the good folks at Westboro Baptist Church for me, Don L.

Steve Green wrote:<b... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Steve Green wrote:

Obama knows the nation needs health care reform - and that the opinion polls are wrong . . . We don't want or need a president who is a slave to the polls.

Are you trying to compare Bush's not firing Rove to the Dems forcing legislation that the country doesn't want? People can see through the trickery of the "Slaughter Rule" and the real price for this fraud will be paid in November and in 2012.

See, Steve Green, the "consent of the governed" still has some meaning to Americans. But not to Barry--where we were memorizing the Declaration of Independence in grade school, he was learning the Muslim call to prayer in Jakarta.

These days, thanks to the Supreme Court, foreign interests can exercise freedom of speech and finance campaigns.

1. The Citizen United case says nothing at all about financing campaigns. It doesn't say anything about "foreign interests" either. Maybe you should read the case instead of getting your information off of DU.

2. It's the First Amendment of that Constitution thingy that gives freedom of speech. Corporations have been entitled to freedom of speech for the last 100 years.

3. What the hell does this have to do with the topic anyway? Please try to stay focused.

So let me be clear about th... (Below threshold)
Sky Captain:

So let me be clear about the implications of this thread:

Steve Green is actually Barry Soreto.

Cool.

Explains a whole lot about Steve Green, none of it good.

The dems expect that once t... (Below threshold)
jim m:

The dems expect that once they have this through that people will become accustomed to the entitlement and than the debate will be how to run healthcare and the 10,000s of jobs that the government controls directly through it and the 1,000,000s of jobs it controls indirectly.

Take Masscare for instance. It is way over budget, but it hasn't bankrupted the state...yet. People who use it love it. They get the benefits of a market based system without having to pay anything.

A great example of how this system is distorted is one of my coworkers. He pulls down $90k per year. His girlfriend is a student and earns nothing. So when she got pregnant there was never any consideration of getting married. It was so much more beneficial to keep her poor, unwed and unemployed.

This works as long as there are private plans to cover the system and make up for what Masscare won't pay. You could never run the whole system on Masscare. It doesn't pay enough to keep the hospitals open and the doctors and nurses and others employed.

But like any good dem social program it does have significant negative effects on the family. Just like welfare it pays for couple to have kids and never marry. It encourages people to game the system by allowing the family members who require the most care (the mother and infant) to remain on the state funded system rather than have the father take the appropriate responsibility for them.

DERP... (Below threshold)
derp:

DERP

The 9:24 to Crazytown will ... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

The 9:24 to Crazytown will be stopping at:

Bitterville

Clinging Manor

Denial Hills

Psychotic Visions Village

Manifesto Heights

and

Crazytown

All aboard!

Steve Green wrote:<b... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Steve Green wrote:

According to President Obama, the SCOTUS ruling opens the door to foreign interests funding US election campaigns.


Which further demonstrates how stupid Obama is. The ruling does no such thing.


Actually, you're 100% wrong. Before this ruling corporations DID NOT have 1st Amendment rights. See the NIKE ruling - back in the 90s.


Actually, I'm 100% right. Here's a quote from the Citizens United case:

The Court has recognized that First Amendment protection extends to corporations. Bellotti, supra, at 778, n. 14, 98 S. Ct. 1407, 55 L. Ed. 2d 707 (citing Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Willingboro, 431 U.S. 85, 97 S. Ct. 1614, 52 L. Ed. 2d 155 (1977); Time, Inc. v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448, 96 S. Ct. 958, 47 L. Ed. 2d 154 (1976); Doran v. Salem Inn, Inc., 422 U.S. 922, 95 S. Ct. 2561, 45 L. Ed. 2d 648 (1975); Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad, 420 U.S. 546, 95 S. Ct. 1239, 43 L. Ed. 2d 448 (1975); [***55] Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 95 S. Ct. 1029, 43 L. Ed. 2d 328 (1975); Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241, 94 S. Ct. 2831, 41 L. Ed. 2d 730 (1974); New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 91 S. Ct. 2140, 29 L. Ed. 2d 822 (1971) (per curiam); Time, Inc. v. Hill, 385 U.S. 374, 87 S. Ct. 534, 17 L. Ed. 2d 456 (1967); New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S. Ct. 710, 11 L. Ed. 2d 686; Kingsley Int'l Pictures Corp. [*900] v. Regents of Univ. of N. Y., 360 U.S. 684, 79 S. Ct. 1362, 3 L. Ed. 2d 1512 (1959); Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495, 72 S. Ct. 777, 96 L. Ed. 1098 (1952)); see, e.g., Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC, 520 U.S. 180, 117 S. Ct. 1174, 137 L. Ed. 2d 369 (1997); Denver Area Ed. Telecommunications Consortium, Inc. v. FCC, 518 U.S. 727, 116 S. Ct. 2374, 135 L. Ed. 2d 888 (1996); Turner, 512 U.S. 622, 114 S. Ct. 2445, 129 L. Ed. 2d 497; Simon & Schuster, 502 U.S. 105, 112 S. Ct. 501, 116 L. Ed. 2d 476; Sable Communications of Cal., Inc. v. FCC, 492 U.S. 115, 109 S. Ct. 2829, 106 L. Ed. 2d 93 (1989); Florida Star v. B. J. F., 491 U.S. 524, 109 S. Ct. 2603, 105 L. Ed. 2d 443 (1989); Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767, 106 S. Ct. 1558, 89 L. Ed. 2d 783 (1986); Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia, 435 U.S. 829, 98 S. Ct. 1535, 56 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1978); Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc., 427 U.S. 50, 96 S. Ct. 2440, 49 L. Ed. 2d 310 (1976); Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., [**784] 418 U.S. 323, 94 S. Ct. 2997, 41 L. Ed. 2d 789 (1974); Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Assn., Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6, 90 S. Ct. 1537, 26 L. Ed. 2d 6 (1970).


Now, you may think that you and the meatheads over at DU understand the law better than the SCOTUS, but you don't. As you can see from the dozens of cases cited in the opinion, a corporation's First Amendment right has been solidly established in US law for decades.

You may also think that ignoring the public will as to this disasterous health bill is a good thing, but you're wrong again.

Stevie, Bryan, Groucho, JOH... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Stevie, Bryan, Groucho, JOHN;

Still waiting. What other president has asked his party members to commit political sepeku "to save his presidency"?

Like I said, STILL WAITING.

PS - Not even close John.

s green - "Accordin... (Below threshold)
Marc:

s green - "According to President Obama, the SCOTUS ruling opens the door to foreign interests funding US election campaigns. "

Yeah you believed Obummer wouldn't sign any bill with earmarks.

Yeah you believed Obummer wouldn't allow any lobbyists in his admin.

Yeah you believed Obummer would close Gitmo before the end of Dec. 2009.

Yeah you believed Obummer would hold a civilian trial for KSM and cohorts.

Yeah you believed Obummer would hire any tax cheats after Turbo Tax got a pass.

Yeah you believed Obummer agreed to public financing of the presidential election if his GOP opponent did the same.

Yeah you believed Obummer when he's stated he's against single payer health care. ("I happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage. That's what I'd like to see."At the debate, Obama stated: "I never said that we should try to go ahead and get single-payer (healthcare)."Single-payer healthcare is an euphemism for socialized medicine - Obummer June 2003)

And that's a SHORT list!

li'l stevie green: "Accordi... (Below threshold)
Drago:

li'l stevie green: "According to President Obama,..."

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha (ad infinitum).......

You have to understand that to the Steve Green's of the world, President Obama, like Chavez's and Castro's minions, the very defintion of "truth".

Think about it.

Instead of addressing the case law, actual history, or the meaning of the language used in the ruling, li'l stevie's first salvo is simply to say "according to President Obama.."

Thus, the cultists are exposed.

Thoroughly revealing.

This is why li'l stevie becomes a voice-actuated automaton on other issues (like supposed AGW, now climate change, tomorrow: who knows?). He's just following his directives from his betters. There are no principles involved. It's all about the power and whatever cudgel will work today.

Case in point: When was the last anti-war march in Washington DC?

Just think back to the 30's and early 40's when the left was clamoring for a "second front NOW" prior to our entry in the second world war (because the communist fascists were in competition with the national socialist fascists. Yet, the second, the very SECOND, the the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, those same American leftists did a 180 and began clamoring for the US to leave Europe alone (and stop supporting Britain).

Some of the most entertaining anecdotes about that time can be found amongst the memoirs of Hollywood's elites and how confused they got when what they had been saying for years was rendered, within seconds, moot and reversed. It led many to leave the CPUSA.

All factual.

All revealing.

And nothing has changed for our little alinsky-ites today.

Except now, they've been exposed.

November is just a handful of months away.

You know, as I ponder our i... (Below threshold)
Rich Fader:

You know, as I ponder our incumbent president, I find myself missing the humility, good manners and integrity of Bill Clinton.

Still waiting. What othe... (Below threshold)
john:

Still waiting. What other president has asked his party members to commit political sepeku "to save his presidency"?

I gave you an example of what you asked for. There's no point in continue to engage with you, since you apparently plan to just keep adding qualifiers to your questions until you find one that can't be answered.

And with his dry, subtle an... (Below threshold)
Drago:

And with his dry, subtle and ironic (British-like) observation and comment, Rich Fader wins the thread.

Assuming we are not deluged by flooding from a melting glacier before Rich can receive his prize.

the Dems forcing legisla... (Below threshold)
john:

the Dems forcing legislation that the country doesn't want

That's a nice myth that the Republicans have been very good about perpetuating.

while a majority of Americans say they oppose Obama's plan, a majority actually support the key features of the legislation.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233890

This is akin to how the electorate usually wants to "throw the bums out" as a whole, but on an individual level favor their own representatives.

In any case, since when did Republicans adopt the requirement that any legislation must have majority support amongst the populace? (And is this a temporary belief, or will it be a driver of the Republican platform for the future?) The legislation has majority support within the Congress, which is all the Constitution requires.

Speaking of Myths John, i.e... (Below threshold)
Marc:

Speaking of Myths John, i.e. the Myth you answered the question which included this caveat:

"recall a president who has called for the congressmen and senators of HIS party to vote for a piece of legislation opposed by a majority of citizens and sure to result in their being voted out of office?"

Your 2 examples, a war appropriations bill and a poll on Bush popularity are nonsense.

The appropriations bill was passed on a bi-partisan basis (to say nothing of it not affecting Bush or any congress critters staying in office) and.... golly... just how are poll results related legislation?

So no... you didn't come close to a correct answer.

I gave you an e... (Below threshold)
I gave you an example of what you asked for.
If you believe that, your parents need to demand a refund from the school district that taught you how to read.
CWHIf you belie... (Below threshold)
Marc:

CWH

If you believe that, your parents need to demand a refund from the school district that taught you how to read.
I suspect that education was free.

Along with a guaranteed job, Borshch in every pot, and a Lada in every garage.

Well, you get what you pay ... (Below threshold)

Well, you get what you pay for.

Your 2 examples, a war a... (Below threshold)
john:

Your 2 examples, a war appropriations bill and a poll on Bush popularity are nonsense.

How so? Legislation that was opposed by a majority of the population, and called upon by the President for passage by his own party. Exactly what was asked for.

The appropriations bill was passed on a bi-partisan basis

So? That wasn't part of the request. Irrelevant.

(to say nothing of it not affecting Bush or any congress critters staying in office

Really? The war wasn't a factor in the 2008 elections? Golly.

just how are poll results related legislation?

The question was for legislation (that's the "legislation" part) opposed by a majority (that's the "poll results" part). I previously believed you to be sincere in your disagreement, but with that last question I have to assume you're now just being argumentative.

If you believe that, you... (Below threshold)
john:

If you believe that, your parents need to demand a refund from the school district that taught you how to read.

Insult without substance = ignored.

So john, when your poor rea... (Below threshold)

So john, when your poor reading comprehension renders you incapable of seeing the point of a criticism, you deem it to be without substance.

My days of not taking you seriously have definitely come to a middle.

Exactly what wa... (Below threshold)
Exactly what was asked for.
I think what Marc and I are saying is, "No, it wasn't."
Say Marc -- did you know Bu... (Below threshold)

Say Marc -- did you know Bush was running for re-election in 2008, and that the Republicans were still the majority in Congress at the time? That's what john seems to think.

john - "Insult without ... (Below threshold)
Marc:

john - "Insult without substance = ignored."

And whining like a school girl after an utter failure to provide a coherent & correct answer to the question posed is lacking in substance. Not to mention troll-like.

But hey, I'll give you a second chance, how is a poll on Bush's popularity or lack thereof relevant to anything asked?

So john, when your poor ... (Below threshold)
john:

So john, when your poor reading comprehension renders you incapable of seeing the point of a criticism, you deem it to be without substance.

Since when does insulting my education or my parents' negotiating skills constitute criticism of substance? If that's where you're coming from, then we have nothing more to discuss.

did you know Bush was ru... (Below threshold)
john:

did you know Bush was running for re-election in 2008, and that the Republicans were still the majority in Congress at the time? That's what john seems to think.

Not anything that I said, nor anything related to the question I was responding to. To recap, the question was:

and sure to result in their being voted out of office?

Republications lost seats in both the House and Senate in 2008. If you weren't aware, that happens when those members are voted out of office.

Equating Obama to a troll i... (Below threshold)
wildman:

Equating Obama to a troll is a great disservice to the trolls. Obama is merely a puppet. you need to find out who is the puppeteer.

how is a poll on Bush's ... (Below threshold)
john:

how is a poll on Bush's popularity or lack thereof relevant to anything asked?

It isn't. Nor is it relevant to anything I said. That doesn't seem to matter to you, though.

Still waiting for an explan... (Below threshold)
Marc:

Still waiting for an explanation on a bi-partisan passed appropriations bill had any effect on Bush or congress.

If you want to claim overall support for the war or how it was conducted I'll bite, but that bill is nonsensical in the context of the election.

And BTW, while a majority of Americans say they oppose Obama's plan, a majority actually support the key features of the legislation.

That BS is where you fly off the rails. You can whine and piss your panties all you care to, the anti-obummer health care people DO NOT want what is being offered, they in fact would except certain parts of it AND those being activated over the course of 2-3 years and NOT as some ginorumous bill PLUS another 200 mil that makes the dems claim of deficit reduction a sad joke.

Not to mention glomming onto it a takeover of the student loan business.

i don't understand how tryi... (Below threshold)
ausdem:

i don't understand how trying to pass a bill that he feels helps people in this country makes him self-serving?

You may disagree with him in that it will not work the way that he and the Democratic party say it will, but it doesn't mean that they are being self-serving.

In fact, a common phrase I hear from Repubs is that this bill will doom the Democratic party in November. If the Democratic party was being self-serving, why would they do something that will doom them in the polls?

If the people don't like this, they will be voted out, which is what should happen in a democracy. People elect representatives, and if they don't like their performance, they'll elect someone else. Its not that difficult to understand I would've thought?

And as to a President leaning on members of Congress to get things done, I don't have a problem with that. People routinely say that members of Congress are useless, so maybe they NEED to be pressured to actually take a position on something, and enact legislation that will make a difference (again, you may disagree, but so what, if you do, work hard on the ground, raise money and vote someone in who will do what YOU want).

ausdem - Big difference bet... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

ausdem - Big difference between leaning on Congress to get something done and what is going on here. There is bribery, threats, and promises going on. Not exactly classy or lawful. Obama relies on Chicago thuggery to make sure things are done his way. BTW - Obama does not care one whit about the American public. All he cares about is seeing himself on TV and going on endlessly with the blah blah blah he spews. UGH!!!
Madalyn

John and ausdem:Yo... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

John and ausdem:

You will only frustrate yourselves trying to argue with Marc, Drago, and madalyn.

Marc and Drago will split hairs until you need a microscope to find the point again, then move the goalposts to the next state. Or, as they have done in this thread, simply ignore what you have written and deny that you have made your point. You know, the "No, you didn't" defense.

Madalyn labors under the delusion that ACORN stole TEN MILLION VOTES in the last election to give Obama his victory, so therefore he's not a legitimate President. So you can see what arguing with her will lead to.

Bruce Henry - How many frau... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Bruce Henry - How many fraudulent votes did ACORN come up with for the "election" of BHO? Since you know so much, please provide the EXACT number. You want people to assume you know so much. Will patiently await your answer.
Madalyn

Bruce Henry was called out ... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Bruce Henry was called out and now he is MIA. Typical of liberal retards who fling insults then runs and hides.
Madalyn

ausdem wrote,In... (Below threshold)
Scalia:

ausdem wrote,

In fact, a common phrase I hear from Repubs is that this bill will doom the Democratic party in November. If the Democratic party was being self-serving, why would they do something that will doom them in the polls?

The self-serving element of this is their tactical decision that it is better to go into an election having accomplished something as opposed to nothing. If you are working for the people, partisan tactical decisions are irrelevant.

Moreover, the Democrats want their bill, with all the special interest goodies, signed into law. They were not willing to put together a bipartisan package, and when it became clear the public (not just the GOP) disagreed, they forced it through anyway. This allows them to appeal to their base that they "stood on principle" and asserted their majority muscle ("we are leaders").

The president's lofty bipartisan language proved to be a facade. In the face of principled opposition and public opinion, they rammed it down everybody's throat. Ok, they've gotten their way. We'll see in a few months how the country feels about it.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy