All-Purpose NuILX thread for American Politics

under President Newt our empty posturing will be fuller & more vital, worthy of the greatest nation on earth

god-emperor newt, thank you very much.

FUNDAMENTALLY fuller and more vital

yeah good speech, albeit composed entirely of empty posturing

I'm not sure what would constitute non-posturing. He can't exactly say "I promise to do this" without 60 votes in the Senate.

lol

have you not noticed how this rhetoric is completely different from the rhetoric he was using just 12 months ago. I mean, it's ALL rhetoric whenever a President makes a speech, but in terms of legislative priorities this stuff is basically meaningless. Non-posturing would involve staking out a specific legislative goal and then following through on it.

I mean it's pretty hilarious for him to cite regulators falling down on the job or whatever when you consider how he's handled the SEC

for example

or letting the Bush tax cuts get extended as part of a lopsided deal with the GOP (I dunno about you but tax cuts expiring >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gays in the military)

The president's getting frisky because he thinks he can adeptly manipulate public opinion for the first time in ages.

^^^

there's also some sort of election coming up

In terms of specifics, there's the current proposal for extending the payroll tax cut for the middle class and paying for it with a tax surcharge on incomes over $1 million. But that's not going anywhere without Republican support. There are also things that have already been passed but are still in the implementation stage, such as Dodd-Frank. I guess we'll have to wait and see if further specific policies come out of this, but in general I think Obama tends to lay out the philosophy in broad-strokes first and then work out the specifics.

he is, as Z S reminds us, in election mode now, so he makes like Moses lifting his staff and rallying Dems behind him.

The president's getting frisky because he thinks he can adeptly manipulate public opinion for the first time in ages.

he's feeling frisky? how cute.

let it out shakey!

?

hi k3vin!

you just seemed righteously unhinged and i was genuinely enjoying it! xp

well I want Obama to win, given the alternatives. And I am not quite as cynical as some in regards to his overall goals and ideological bent - but dude is a centrist and a pragmatist at his core, and that handicaps his legislative priorities and tactics, the results of which are not always things I agree with. The payroll tax cut thing currently going on is small potatoes and the GOP will cave so I'm not really worried about it. Dodd-Frank bill is allright, but the SEC is totally falling down on its job and has for years. Federal climate change/energy policy legislation is dead in the water (even tho this is exactly the kind of thing that could restructure the economy, create jobs, and have vast long-term benefits). Bush tax cuts are still in place. Troops are still in Afghanistan. etc.

i agree with all that post, well said

I expect Obama to make a big show of drawing down troops in Afghanistan within the next 12 months but imho Bin Laden's dead time to cut our losses

but imho Bin Laden's dead

my opinion too

i need to see an official death-certificate or i don't believe it.

this doesn't seem to matter to most people. it matters to me. not to most.

I agree with the spirit of Shakey's remarks but at this point still won't vote for the man, mostly because his foreign policy consists of extending most of the Bush era's most heinous positions and his arrogance in assuming he could coast on his empyrean cool last winter. Renewing those Bush tax cuts was the kind of catastrophe that a man with his acumen should have seen; how could it not have led to this summer's impasse?

oh I probably won't vote for him either

"his foreign policy consists of extending most of the Bush era's most heinous positions"

69 with Condi?

save it for the ILX slash fic thread

if you want Obama (or a Republican) to win, you still don't get it

yeah as i've said i won't vote for obama and face absolutely no moral quandary in not doing so, thanks electoral college!

if you think there are currently other viable options...

xp

I want Obama to win, & I think I do "get it", & as I've said before, it's as much about identity politics for me as it is about economics & foreign policy.

how do we define "identity politics" in 2011? No snark -- I'm curious!

I mean that he is biracial, & that we can elect such a person president, twice! reaffirms my hope in America. of course there are lots of axes of hope for this "land of opportunity", & this is just one, but I'll take it, since I gather we're all on the same page that on other axes, he's not made much progress over Little Bush.

Fair enough, but we are reducing him to a symbol -- a brand, if you will.

and maybe that's all he'll be remembered for. We'll know in fifteen years.

we already know that America's not really run by the president, & indeed that's what "the founders" wanted. the president's a symbol & that's fine, that's all that person needs to be in a republic like ours. I think maybe that's where I differ from a lot of you, esp. Morbius, who expect more out of the Great Leader: I want a Great Government, but the presidency is just a small part of that.

yay, a biracial man can be Imperial War Criminal. He's proven it!

I expect shit out of the Great Leader, and more out of us.

I expect Obama to make a big show of drawing down troops in Afghanistan within the next 12 months but imho Bin Laden's dead time to cut our losses

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 6 December 2011 22:49 (Yesterday) Bookmark Permalink

this terrible pedantic post is going to be awesome because i get to step into john mccain let's listen to our generals on the ground shoes for a lil minute, but: afghanistan is so complicated, & there are a p diverse range of pro- and anti- opinions re: continuing US involvement from people in afghanistan (or there were around a year ago, idk how things have changed), those being the people who we should be at the service of & considering our decisions based on, having already got so involved in fucking w/their country without a great plan, etc etc etc. i'm not even saying that we should or shouldn't pull out, but framing the decision wrt 'our losses' is nagl i think. like if the best thing - as in safest, I guess, rather than 'thing that inches us closest to something we can put a flag in & call victory' - was to be there in a five hundred year long agonising drawdown then that would be the thing to do.

i'll vote for Obama only if Gingrich somehow manages to win the GOP nomination. but such a vote would be in the spirit of French voters a decade ago voting for Jacques Chirac simply because Jean-Marie Le Pen was that odious (and Newt is also that odious) and not b/c they all of a sudden fell in love w/ Chirac (who certainly didn't deserve it otherwise).

but Newt won't win the nomination.

I promise you this: Newt can't win the nomination without winning the presidency, but he can only win the presidency if America gets back to fundamentals, to what gives our nation its vitality, men like George Washington, Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich, & women like Condi Rice & Sarah Jessica Parker too. This election, this nomination, are the dawn before Morning In America, or at least the night before that Morning, & the presidency depends on someone being the alarm clock waking up the nation for that Bright Morning, an alarm clock I like to call Newt Gingrich.

I expect Obama to make a big show of drawing down troops in Afghanistan within the next 12 months but imho Bin Laden's dead time to cut our losses

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 6 December 2011 22:49 (Yesterday) Bookmark Permalink

this terrible pedantic post is going to be awesome because i get to step into john mccain let's listen to our generals on the ground shoes for a lil minute, but: afghanistan is so complicated, & there are a p diverse range of pro- and anti- opinions re: continuing US involvement from people in afghanistan (or there were around a year ago, idk how things have changed), those being the people who we should be at the service of & considering our decisions based on, having already got so involved in fucking w/their country without a great plan, etc etc etc. i'm not even saying that we should or shouldn't pull out, but framing the decision wrt 'our losses' is nagl i think. like if the best thing - as in safest, I guess, rather than 'thing that inches us closest to something we can put a flag in & call victory' - was to be there in a five hundred year long agonising drawdown then that would be the thing to do.

― Never translate German (schlump), Tuesday, December 6, 2011 8:39 PM (19 minutes ago)

cool can we do this for free though?

we already know that America's not really run by the president, & indeed that's what "the founders" wanted. the president's a symbol & that's fine, that's all that person needs to be in a republic like ours. I think maybe that's where I differ from a lot of you, esp. Morbius, who expect more out of the Great Leader: I want a Great Government, but the presidency is just a small part of that.

― by (mennen), Tuesday, December 6, 2011 8:35 PM (24 minutes ago)

pretttttty sure he's got some important jobs dude, and btw the office of the presidency if you haven't noticed doesn't much resemble what "the founders wanted" these days

http://i.usatoday.net/news/gallery/2010/n100405_whegg/obama1pg-vertical.jpg

cool can we do this for free though?

― k3vin k., Wednesday, 7 December 2011 01:59 (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink

yeah but c'mon i just- like i am not practical with this but i sorta feel like our obligation began when we got involved, rather than expired when we had problems - obviously that's part of a larger conversation about how we need to work out what we need to pay for & then raise the appropriate funds, rather than just work out that we don't really wanna spend money and argue over what we're gonna cut, &c.

but yes, i feel like if i come & smash up your house then i am obliged to either split, if being there is just gonna annoy you further, or clear up what i did, having trashed the place. i am dumb w/this & not pragmatic but i just feel like the money issue is that it should have been financed not we can't finance it

sorry i feel like an asshole making this point, i know it isn't like either of y'all are looking for a satisfying exit, i just think it's a weird obligation thing. wasn't the us obliged to pay vietnam a gazillion dollars, after the war, only to renege a year later & be all 'we're not gonna do that', leaving it the poorest country on earth? we are invested there in a lot of ways, leaving and cutting ties just feels so unconscionable to me, like equal investment in rebuilding would ~morally~ be the appropriate coda to being engaged in warfare. but yeah i know that doesn't exactly fit with how things are

I'll give'em credit for this move.

re: payroll tax cut extension

House leaders are hoping to entice conservative support by packaging the payroll tax extension with other priorities, such as a provision that would make it more likely that construction would begin soon on a controversial oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast.

hahah oh fuck off you idiots

leaving and cutting ties just feels so unconscionable to me, like equal investment in rebuilding would ~morally~ be the appropriate coda to being engaged in warfare

the problem is no amount of imperial meddling is going to make Afghanistan a better to place to live. I dunno if you could even say we're leaving it WORSE off than it was before, it's pretty much the same as far as I can tell - riven with sectarian conflict and aggro nutjobs who want to fight among themselves indefinitely, with no interest in being anything resembling a modern nation.

Presidents often outlive us, study shows.

it's the socialist healthcare they get

They all need to eat more pretzels.