The NY Times headline highlights the risky new path scheme emphasized by Obama in his convention speech:
Obama Makes Case for 2nd Term: ‘Harder’ Path to ‘Better Place’
Oh, please, saddle up the unicorns! A harder path to a better place, led by a guy who has never accomplished anything other than getting himself elected President (but got lots of the asbestos out of Altgeld Gardens!)? Is that really the bet someone wants me to take?
And isn't Obama's vision of this "new place" pretty much the Europe of the last forty years? Big busted bets on alternative energy, crushing taxes, unaffordable health and pension promises, absurd over-regulation of everything, lackluster job creation, no ability to absorb immigrants - I know that emulating Europe was the fashion in his Columbia days, but has anyone alerted Obama that the world has changed a bit and Europe is no longer widely viewed as a roaring success? That said, as late as January 2010 Nobel Laureate and laugh track contributor Paul Krugman was declaring that "Europe is an economic success", so maybe Obama has missed the latest.
Joe Biden assured us Obama is the man for the job:
“Bravery resides in the heart of Barack Obama,” he said. “This man has courage in his soul, compassion in his heart and steel in his spine.”
That's so great - Obama has all the qualities of the Cowardly Lion, the Scarecrow, and the Tin Man. Hmm, maybe he really can get us to Oz.
THE BUCK STOPS WHERE? Obama picked an interesting time to make his speech about something other than himself:
So you see, the election four years ago wasn't about me. It was about you. My fellow citizens -- you were the change.
Sports teams typically fire the manager because it isn't practical to fire all the players. But now we learn that, in keeping with the Dem notion that we are all in this together, it wasn't Obama that failed, it was us. Gee, thanks for sharing, but I still want to fire the manager.
I should add that David Brooks liked that passage, which does not exactly change my mind.
We've got the Bobby Valentine president.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 10:38 AM
I am going to repost here because Kurtz' analysis is right on the money.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316225/are-republicans-fooling-themselves-stanley-kurtz
The two of us may have spent more time in the last 4 years doing battle with the real nature of the ideas that surround Obama's real vision. It is genuinely frightening and dangerous to regard him as merely misguided. Obama is genuinely an idealogue in a tradition that has consistently led to tragedy. I believe he hates the idea of individual excellence.
Posted by: rse | September 07, 2012 at 10:41 AM
Why do I have flashbacks of the Braves of the 80s with Ted Turner in the dugout? At least Crazy Ted knew enough to get his ego out of the dugout and let an experienced manager take over the team.
Posted by: Stephanie | September 07, 2012 at 10:42 AM
Keep at that chicken, it's growing on you, NYT.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 07, 2012 at 10:42 AM
Since TM invoked the stormtrooper I'm reposting this bit of fantasy:
BTW
Krugman has officially donned his stormtrooper uniform...
"The headline number came in a bit below expectations, but that’s probably just the noisiness in the data. The best hypothesis about the US economy this past year and more is that it has been steadily adding jobs at a pace roughly fast enough to keep up with but not get ahead of population growth. Today’s report was consistent with a continuation of that story. Nothing to see here."
LUN
Posted by: Stephanie | September 07, 2012 at 10:44 AM
Yeah rse...that is a great Kurtz article.
Posted by: Janet | September 07, 2012 at 10:50 AM
rse, I was gonna respond to your link in the last post. Romney and his people have to offer a clear contrast to the JEF. This "oh he's a nice guy who is just a bit misguided" runs the risk of creating another McCain disaster by giving people an out for voting for the collectivist. The Tea Party helped the Repubs to record gains in 2010 by confronting exactly what he's doing.
Dear God, Michael Steele is on Laura Ingraham and I am sooooo glad Reince Priebus is in charge now. Michael's a nice guy and is actually making some good points but he was in way over his head heading the RNC and sounds better being away from it.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 10:51 AM
Algo attacks Natural Gas futures market, called "a glitch".
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 07, 2012 at 10:52 AM
I don't associate "gone to a better place" with something I find particularly desirable.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 07, 2012 at 11:02 AM
Seems to me the only thing missing from Barry's speech was;
"Mr.
ReaganRomney will raise taxes, and so will I. He won't tell you. I just did."May Barry's electoral fortunes mirror Walter's.
Posted by: Ignatz | September 07, 2012 at 11:13 AM
The GOP convention served up wholesome cake with marshmallow creme topping. Very palatable, but not nutritionally sustaining for any length of time. Kurtz makes a valid point - if Obama isn't defined realistically and brutally from now 'til November, the Dems will manufacture enough votes to overcome those precious Indies who weren't convinced of the dangers posed by Barry, and our worst nightmare remains in office.
Posted by: OldTimer | September 07, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Loved this line from the Times editorial:
The president and his tight inner circle were oblivious to the Republicans’ explicit warning that he would not get the slightest cooperation from a party and a Congressional caucus driven by an implacable hatred of Mr. Obama that is mostly ideological but also fueled by his race. It took nearly three years for the Obama team to recognize that central fact.
Racism. took Obama three years to recognize it.
Posted by: peter | September 07, 2012 at 11:23 AM
--The president and his tight inner circle were oblivious to the Republicans’ explicit warning that he would not get the slightest cooperation from a party and a Congressional caucus driven by an implacable hatred of Mr. Obama that is mostly ideological but also fueled by his race.--
Anyone else long for the days when this type of execrable calumny would be settled by a duel?
Posted by: Ignatz | September 07, 2012 at 11:26 AM
didn't Obama win 52% - 48%? That seems like a very reversible number. With all of the feel good and the token race guilt and the anger with Bush/Cheney and the economy crashing, the man got just 52% of the vote. No landslide. No mandate. A simple majority.
Since then he and his allies have done their best to alienate a large proportion of the population.
As to race, I think there were enough reasons to mistrust Obama from the outset other than his color. What a bunch of assclowns. But we knew that already, didn't we?
Posted by: matt | September 07, 2012 at 11:29 AM
Republicans’ explicit warning
Where are the direct quotes to back up something "explicit"?
that central fact.
Does anybody at the Times know what a "fact" is?
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 11:32 AM
--As to race, I think there were enough reasons to mistrust Obama from the outset other than his color.--
I'm not sure that sentence reads quite the way I know you meant it, matt.
Posted by: Ignatz | September 07, 2012 at 11:33 AM
I skipped the freakshow last night and went to eat at my favorite diner, run by a Greek immigrant.
I was accosted by him before I got to the door, with a "Deed you see theese Beel Cleenton on the teevee? Theese man does not tell thee truth!"
This guy is completely apolitical, probably voted for Obama because he liked the pretty speeches, and is 100% anti-Obama, anti-Democrat now. Hates them. This is in the Charlottesville Socialist Workers' Paradise.
Everywhere I go these days, nobody has anything good to say about Obama. Nobody but the true believers, that is. Everyone else ranges from Meh to outright Contempt.
Romney has willing ears out there, and Clint has given people permission. All that remains is to tell people what they need to do to improve their lives: Let him go.
Posted by: Soylent Red | September 07, 2012 at 11:34 AM
The NYT and Race-- they and Bam got nothin'. The NYT Slags know it, and 'Bam is beginning to realize it. So they all crawl under their rock and scream RACIST. The NYT is already doing it, Bam will do it after he loses. I can hear Bam now saying: I'm shocked to learn that America is still so racist and unsophicated, I'm too good for America, they don't deserve me."
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 11:36 AM
NYT-- PS-- I cannot describe the passionate disgust I have for the NYT.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 11:39 AM
It is depressing to read the NYT, Brooks and the Brooks thread. So many intelligent minds so deeply deluded.
Anyone else long for the days when this type of execrable calumny would be settled by a duel?
Not really. When Father Merrin confronted the demon in Exorcist, the girl inhabited by the demon said some pretty nasty things to him. This didn't make him angry at her.
It's just sad to see the breadth of this social disease. We're headed towards a brick wall, Greece leading the way.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 07, 2012 at 11:47 AM
TM-- Bravo Zulu. this was a seriously insightful and funny post. One thing: baseball metaphors? How about a post about the great Yanqui collapse of 2012?
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 11:47 AM
So, on the report that "journalists" were giving fake names in order to purchase Obama campaign material at the DNC...
Isn't that fraud? Isn't that a federal crime?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | September 07, 2012 at 11:49 AM
If commies are a race, I'm racist. I hate commies.
Posted by: Bill in AZ sez it's time for Obama/Holder murder trial in Mexico | September 07, 2012 at 11:50 AM
Made my day.
Posted by: Voldemort WILL BE defeated ! Sandy Daze | September 07, 2012 at 11:51 AM
Clint has given people permission.
The other actor that is wonderful is Andy Garcia. He puts out tons of great posts everyday on FB. Some of the same things we highlight here. A lot of his posts are brutal in their mocking of President 404 too.
Posted by: Janet | September 07, 2012 at 11:52 AM
On a side note, has anyone seen former Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm's speech from the DNC? The headlines have called it a barn-burner and exciting. I can only imagine what they'd have called it if she were a Republican.
The word I'd use for it is "embarrassing," but that's just me.
Posted by: nextcube | September 07, 2012 at 12:04 PM
CH, that's an insult to Bobby Valentine, who has exercised better judgment and more measured temperament with the 2012 Flops than Obama has with 2009-2012 America! :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 07, 2012 at 12:05 PM
She was a rising star ten years ago. ("It's too bad she's not eligible to run for president!") They loved her and Howard Dean. Then, finally, The One came along.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 07, 2012 at 12:09 PM
--The word I'd use for it is "embarrassing," but that's just me.
Posted by: nextcube | September 07, 2012 at 12:04 PM--
Yeah, I noted in the last thread how the poor dope had me cringing on her behalf even as she was lying through her teeth.
Posted by: Ignatz | September 07, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Summary of Obama speech
Posted by: Neo | September 07, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Test
Posted by: Frau Steingehirn | September 07, 2012 at 12:19 PM
Employing the Positive Power of Rationalization I will bet that it is a crime if they give a false name to make a campaign donation but OK if they had to let themselves be put on some email list in order to buy gift items.
Far from over. The O's have awakened a sleeping giant.
I just about had an aneurysm when I read the Times editorial but HotAir just posted some survey where libs were asked about Republican opposition to Obama.
IIRC 50% said race was a part of it, 40% said race was a big part, 8% said it was mostly racism, and 2% said it had no effect.
So the Times is actually taking a mainstream, moderate left position on this. Kudos!
It does lead to an Sally Fields like revelation, however. It's not just that libs and conservatives disagree on the size/role of government of national defense or what have you - they really don't like us.
To Be Fair, I have no doubt that many libs are in the "Love the America that could be, hate the America that is (and especially the rubes in it)" camp, so one might infer I don't like them either.
Oh, well - Cory Booker explained that paying more taxes is patriotic, so now I guess Republicans don't love America, either. This growing national divide is not helpful.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | September 07, 2012 at 12:19 PM
Mr. Cube:
The word I'd use for it is "embarrassing," but that's just me.
Bath salts. It's the only explanation I can come up with.
Posted by: Soylent Red | September 07, 2012 at 12:23 PM
"I believe he hates the idea of individual excellence."
rse, It is not just him, it is also the godless horde that keep him in power.
http://www.thepiratescove.us/2012/09/07/many-democrats-think-we-should-ban-all-corporate-profits/
Posted by: pagar | September 07, 2012 at 12:30 PM
CH:
Where are the direct quotes to back up something "explicit"?
If we didn't have digital video, Dems would have burned through the tape of Mitch McConnell saying Republicans' number one priority was denying Obama a 2nd term.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 07, 2012 at 12:33 PM
TomM-- it's a revalation that UWS Libs "don't like" conservatives? It's been obvious for decades that LibDems detest anyone and anythng that doesn't share their worldview-- and those they detest the most are American conservatives and Believers in the Book of Abraham and the New Testament of Jesus Christ. So they loathe people like me. I admit, I don't respect LibDems, and I detest what they do to the Nation. You say that political divide is "not helpful"? Perhaps. But it is a political fact, and the political resolution will be mostly zero sum. I am determined to see out conservatives winning out politically over the LibDem worldview.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 12:33 PM
Ignatz:
"Anyone else long for the days when this type of execrable calumny would be settled by a duel?"
Yes.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 07, 2012 at 12:40 PM
pagar-if you want to see genuine hatred and rage in someone's eyes I get it when I am in a public meeting and accurately describe something I am not supposed to know. The fact that some people can understand things no one ever told them is excruciating to some people.
When my kids were younger I used to get frustrated with the parents who thought a bright kid took something away from someone else. Many things in life are not zero sum games. Trying to limit what the brightest kids can do really hurts the average kids who could piggyback some on their higher aptitudes. Now the bright kids are mostly insanely bored or, like the Diva, somewhat intrigued by the overt psychological targeting. She showed her tutor/She will Learn College Prep English no matter what that she has seen once a week starting in 6th the mental mapping exercises they are doing in 9th Grade Honors Lit.
Posted by: rse | September 07, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Michael Graham...
For Democrats, “defeat” is the new victory. Because Obama has failed, failure must be defended, even celebrated. That was the message of the Democratic National Convention this week as the Man from Hope and the Hero of Hope and Change each took the stage to tell America to abandon all hope.
Things are just lousy, don’t blame us, and don’t even think that somebody else can do better. Because they can’t.
Boston Herald
Posted by: Rocco | September 07, 2012 at 12:53 PM
nextcube:
I read a jaw dropping piece Jennifer Granholm wrote a month or so ago, opining about Republican extremists. If you've got a villainous right wing conspiracy to sell, give her a call. She has truly embraced teh crazy.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 07, 2012 at 12:54 PM
Malaise. Carter.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 07, 2012 at 12:58 PM
TM-- "Far from over. The O's have awakened a sleeping giant." Perhaps. Or perhaps the only giant thing about the Yankees right now is the payroll, debt service and Brian Cashman's alimony bill. Been a Met fan since 1963, so I know mediocre/losing baseball when I see it. The Yanks are not making the playoffs this year, not even the second wildcard.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 01:01 PM
rse, I don't know how you do what you do. May god bless your efforts.
Posted by: pagar | September 07, 2012 at 01:05 PM
the tape of Mitch McConnell saying Republicans' number one priority was denying Obama a 2nd term.
That's a far cry from the accusations which are being made.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 01:07 PM
I take it that in my absence Duda has failed to provide a link to the manifestly b.s. report about the Reps giving up on Pa and MI .
Posted by: Clarice | September 07, 2012 at 01:27 PM
the tape of Mitch McConnell saying Republicans' number one priority was denying Obama a 2nd term.
What really bothers me about this - and the left uses it constantly, is the dems said that about George Bush every single day - and no one called them divisive.
Posted by: Jane - Get off the couch your country needs you! | September 07, 2012 at 01:32 PM
What's wrong with a strategy of limiting Obama to one term? It's the only reasonable strategy for those who think an Obama presidency will destroy the economy. Yes, that's right. Conservatives are focused on limiting him to one term. And that's good.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 07, 2012 at 01:36 PM
Sorry, Jane, but that's not quite right.
The Dems talked about murdering Bush every single day -- and no one called them divisive.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | September 07, 2012 at 01:38 PM
CH:
"That's a far cry from the accusations which are being made."
It's also 100% more evidence than they have for the charge of racism, or, per the President, that we believe, "If a company releases toxic pollution into the air your children breathe, well, that’s just the price of progress." At this point, "Where's the beef" is really a rhetorical question, isn't it?
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 07, 2012 at 01:39 PM
What's wrong with a strategy of limiting Obama to one term?
Isn't this sort of the point of party politics? I mean, if we're not supposed to get our guys in and theirs out, why have parties at all?
Jeebus, these people are beyond Venezuelan.
Posted by: Soylent Red | September 07, 2012 at 01:51 PM
McConnell wants Bam out? just further evidence that they got nuthin'.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 02:08 PM
NK @2:08
Who is "they"?
Posted by: Agent J | September 07, 2012 at 02:14 PM
The morons @ AoS are making a very good point: The JEF has been running ads in Ohio, and I assume elsewhere, that Romney was in favor of letting the Detroit auto manufacturers go bankrupt. In fact, under the JEF's bailout they *did* go bandrupt and were reorganized.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 02:15 PM
bandrupt == bankrupt
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 02:17 PM
'They' = the Dems complaining about McConnell's statement; voters realize it's politician's duty to try to take back power from the opposition, especially where they believe the opposition is harming the nation. The Dems complaining about this proves they got nuthin' to say.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 02:18 PM
In fact, under the JEF's bailout they *did* go bandrupt and were reorganized.
This is important. The only question was whether the bankruptcy went through the courts (namely, in front of a judge), or was mediated by the government. The former: the rule of law. The latter: protection of cronies and union interests.
I have little doubt that a President Romney would have provided DIP financing, or at least guaranteed it, if that became necessary.
Posted by: DrJ | September 07, 2012 at 02:19 PM
CaptH-- the difference between Romney's 2008 NYT op ed recommending s Structured Bankruptcy, and what Bam's crew actually did was Bam's crew corrupted the Stuctured Bankruptcy process by strong arming Chrysler Bondholders to give up rights to priority (thereby violating contract rights) and putting extra pain on NON-union GM/Chrysler emloyees and dealers so that the UAW was exempt from any big contract give backs. But the Obamaniacs did use a Structured Bankruptcy to get what they wanted-- the difference from Romneys proposal was they used it to payoff political pals, rather than making the companies' labor cost structure long-term viable.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 02:26 PM
Btw, in Ohio Josh Mandel has to up his game. Whoever produces his ads are doing a terrible job of making him sound like a lisping Opie the Pinhead and just talking in dipshit generalities. He has to drop the hammer on Sherrod Brown and point out how the GM bailout screwed every non-UAW member in Ohio to the benefit of the union humps. Failure to drop the hammer will have a very bad effect.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 02:26 PM
[email protected]:26-- that's absolutely true. Mandel has got to pound Brown for the Dems screwing nonunion workers as part of the corrupt 2009 UAW bailout. NonUnion workers paid for the bailout with their jobs or lower pay and taxpayers are paying for it because we hold worthless --almost-- GM stock
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 02:30 PM
NK, some of Mandel's recent ads have just been horrible; whoever's producing them is right out of the Schmidt & Wallace Assassination of a Campaign from Within school and should be horsewhipped. For starters.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 02:41 PM
Truely a shame. I was impressed by the Mandel kid when I saw video of his primary appearances. Sharp, well spoken, sincere. What does he need to do to win?
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 02:43 PM
What does he need to do to win?
He has to tie Brown to everything that Bammy did, specifically BammyCare and the bailouts, and point out how badly Ohio did in employment when Brown and Twitch were both in office.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 02:49 PM
If a company releases toxic pollution into the air your children breathe, well, that’s just the price of progress.
According to Bam's EPA, your child's breathing is releasing toxic pollution into the air my company uses. That's just the position of Progressives.
Posted by: bgates | September 07, 2012 at 02:50 PM
NK, Mandel should also conentrate on the Delphi fiasco which is a major deal in Ohio. The non union workers were jobbed out of up to 70% of their pension.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 02:57 PM
I've passed your suggestions on CH.
Posted by: Clarice | September 07, 2012 at 03:01 PM
Thanks C; if the JEF loses and Brown wins, I'll still be very depressed.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 07, 2012 at 03:06 PM
CaptH-- all of that seems doable, because it's all true-- even I know that 500 miles away. The Delphi screwing was part of the way Bam's auto crew bailed out UAW workers in 2009. Even Ratner admits that.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 03:17 PM
Even Andrea Mitchell knows it's just not good enough!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU_u74LZexs&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: OldTimer | September 07, 2012 at 03:19 PM
"Anyone else long for the days when this type of execrable calumny would be settled by a duel?"
I believe it would have been settled by tying the editor to a tree and horsewhipping him. Dueling was the province of gentlemen; newspapermen need not apply.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | September 07, 2012 at 03:22 PM
"Now if he had some lead in his pencil, we'd be all set."
Posted by: mojo | September 07, 2012 at 03:28 PM
SPEECHWRITER 1: ...towards the end of the speech.
SPEECHWRITER 2: Yes, it should go over fairly well.
OBAMA: What about my flagship achievements - the stimulus and health care. The speech really doesn't talk about those.
SPEECHWRITER 1:
SPEECHWRITER 2: Um....
SPEECHWRITER 1: Sir, we think you really shouldn't bring those up in the speech.
OBAMA: Shouldn't bring them up?
SPEECHWRITER 1: Right...
SPEECHWRITER 2: Yeah. Those really aren't....um....
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 07, 2012 at 03:31 PM
You know how much I like Josh. I don't know if I can get thru to him on this, but, of course, I have to try.
He's not rolling in $$$ and s no new he might have had trouble getting a better ad agency.
Posted by: Clarice | September 07, 2012 at 03:32 PM
* is so new* (damned old fingers and eyes.)
Posted by: Clarice | September 07, 2012 at 03:33 PM
Good point DoT, although I'll note that in JMH's link Zell Miller challenged Chris Matthews to a duel, who (Matthews) would be lucky to scale the heights to the lowly gutter inhabited by newspapermen.
Posted by: Ignatz | September 07, 2012 at 03:36 PM
NBCnews.com (former MSNBC.com) puts up this gem:
Weak jobs growth beyond government's control
I'm waiting to hear that Bush 43 is asking for an apology.
LUN
Posted by: Neo | September 07, 2012 at 03:56 PM
Listen, NK, since you've been a Met fan since '63, you know how to suffer, so I will refrain from any retort. Still 24 games in the season left, and parity rules, so even the Mets could make the wild card at this point. Ya' gotta believe.
Posted by: peter | September 07, 2012 at 04:04 PM
peter-- 2012 is no different than almost any year for Mets fans. In fact, for three months up until the all-star break the Mets played like the Orioles are doing right now, and it was fun. Met fans need no sympathy. Ah -- but for yankee fans, especially those younger than 50 who are drunk on 1996-2009, a new day is here. No playoffs this year, next year CC, A-Roid, Jeter, Tex, are all a year older, and the Steinbrenner boys demand to make money every year (unlike their dad), so no more luxury tax and stupid contract prices won't be bid for every free agent. revenue is huge, but so is the debt overhang. A new day.
Posted by: NK | September 07, 2012 at 04:28 PM
Michelle creates he next generation of anti-Democrats:Meet the brown baggers.http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/19478263/kids-begin-brown-bag-boycott-of-healthier-school-menus
Posted by: Clarice | September 07, 2012 at 04:52 PM
Have to agree with the Kurtz write-up.
When I caught admitted and committed Communist Van Jones being interviewed on CNN at the close of the Convention he stated that he was very pleased with the direction the Dem Party was heading in.
Posted by: daddy | September 07, 2012 at 04:52 PM