4 thoughts on “Dissent is Patriotic, Mr. President”

  1. You might amend that to “Admiral Blair” to bely confusion with former (and currently embattled) British PM Tony Blair.

    Politicking security (which is what this asinine approach of conflating the US judicial branch with the military amounts to) is irresponsible. What I see here is an administration that campaigned on not being the previous administration and yet has carried on many of the practices of it’s predecessors (likely due to the shift from the ideology of a political campaign to the reality of leadership and the hefty amount of information that leadership is afforded) to such a degree that they are flailing about for any smidge of an opportunity to divide themselves and look as fresh and “hope” as they’d promised. They’re attempting populism and realism at the same time. Reagan pulled that off but only because conditions afforded him such latitude. The Obama administration is caught in a painfully naked situation of choosing between making good on their lofty political promises and the topography of reality. A statesman would sacrifice for the latter, an essential obligatory welfare recipient, career politician would cling, screaming, to the former.

  2. Nice assessment Munro. In my opinion, Obama has already made the sacrifice toward “the topography of reality”, which has caused him some serious damage with both political parties and the public. Ultimately though, I think this will benefit him greatly, whether folks like it or not.

    Congress has defined itself as unwilling, incapable and impotent toward the nation’s problems. Every time Obama shows up, whether it’s a simple press conference or a Q&A, he effortlessly fills the void of being the only rational adult in Washington, which allows him the benefit of being viewed and judged separately. If he continues these direct confrontations that he’s been doing for the last week he’ll continue to reap the benefits.

    The Tea Party opposition has become officially hi-jacked by the Republican Party, rendering them a confusing and hypocritical movement of emotions. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a more delusional or mean-spirited speech from a politician as Sarah Palin’s keynote address. Who on Earth would ever want to be represented by that? That was a death blow to the Tea Party as far as I’m concerned. A confirmation of all the worst suspicions about it. They’d do well to drop Palin and start championing Ron Paul – but most Tea Partiers are so confused about what they believe in, that they’re actually running candidates against him in Texas.

    I’ll take Obama’s attempts and failures over that hot mess every day of the week. So will the majority of Americans. Obama’s opponents have afforded him the unique opportunity to be both a populist and a realist. He’ll likely pull it off.

  3. Wow, nice blog. And nice collection of Hillary pictures. She used to be a Rockefeller Republican ya know, how ironic.

    I just did a Google search and found your post on the Neocon-Theocon axis. I just finished writing my own post on that topic that I’m publishing tomorrow. I was unaware anyone else wrote on it from that viewpoint. I’m glad I found such a like-minded blogger!

  4. Mike,

    Thanks for the discussion! It’s very cool to read. like the phrase, “the Neocon-Theocon Hegemon”! [1]

    Tim,

    “Every time Obama shows up, whether it’s a simple press conference or a Q&A, he effortlessly fills the void of being the only rational adult in Washington”

    Nice rhetoric, though of course I understand no one should take your comment literally, or seriously. In the future, try to stick to substantive remarks on this blog.

    Munro,

    Well said! Especially as a much simpler comment would have been Fire John Brennan! [2]

    [1] http://purecommonsense.net/2010/02/15/the-ideological-evolution-of-the-republican-party
    [2] http://www.northstarnational.com/2010/02/21/fire-john-brennan/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *