Political Roundtable - Part VI

[hands11]

Lastly the most sickening portion of coverage today was Belgium's coverage of US CNN's attempt to "shock" the public with a "default" countdown 24/7. Their message was this isn't a game and impacts all world currencies. Irresponsible and childish not only in government but US media as well.

Like it or not, Obama.....as a leader/face of a governmental institution is labeled a monumental failure globally.

It was not the US attempting the shock the world, it was a wing nut joke political party doing it. They did it once before as well. The other side outlining the impact of this nonsense and specifically say it wouldn't just hurt the US, but all the world.

Your claim that Obama is viewed as a failure globally is a total joke and more propaganda. You discredit yourself again. The person and party that was a failure was Bush, his cronies like Darth Channey, and the Rs that feel in line with him.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com ... -or-obama/

Europeans have had a four-year love affair with Barack Obama: 87 percent of Germans, 86 percent of French and 80 percent of the British have confidence in Obama, according to a 2012 poll by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes project. In each case this is higher than public confidence in their own national leader. And 92 percent of the French, 89 percent of the Germans and 73 percent of the British want Obama reelected.

In the long run, if Romney wins, none of this may matter, as Europeans get to know him. But, in the short run, it could matter. A 2005 Pew Research Center survey found that in Britain, France, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, strong majorities said the 2004 re-election of George W. Bush led them to have a less favorable opinion of the United States. A newly-elected Romney administration may have to contend with a similar European reaction if the popular Obama is defeated in what will come to a surprise to many of them.

[Induveca]

Lastly the most sickening portion of coverage today was Belgium's coverage of US CNN's attempt to "shock" the public with a "default" countdown 24/7. Their message was this isn't a game and impacts all world currencies. Irresponsible and childish not only in government but US media as well.

Like it or not, Obama.....as a leader/face of a governmental institution is labeled a monumental failure globally.

It was not the US attempting the shock the world, it was a wing nut jock political party doing it. They did it once before as well. The other side outlining the impact of this nonsense and specifically say it wouldn't just hurt the US, but all the world.

Your claim that Obama is viewed as a failure globally is a total joke and more propaganda. You discredit yourself again. The person and party that was a failure was Bush, his cronies like Darth Channey, and the Rs that feel in line with him.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com ... -or-obama/

Europeans have had a four-year love affair with Barack Obama: 87 percent of Germans, 86 percent of French and 80 percent of the British have confidence in Obama, according to a 2012 poll by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes project. In each case this is higher than public confidence in their own national leader. And 92 percent of the French, 89 percent of the Germans and 73 percent of the British want Obama reelected.

In the long run, if Romney wins, none of this may matter, as Europeans get to know him. But, in the short run, it could matter. A 2005 Pew Research Center survey found that in Britain, France, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, strong majorities said the 2004 re-election of George W. Bush led them to have a less favorable opinion of the United States. A newly-elected Romney administration may have to contend with a similar European reaction if the popular Obama is defeated in what will come to a surprise to many of them.

Not taking about election year perceptions. Post NSA scandal fallout, Snowden drama, halting Evo Morales over western Europe. Halting journalists and seizing their equipment on European soil.

Last evening in Brussels they showed a poll in Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Portugal and sweden. Obama's approval rating as a world leader were down 15+ percentage points in each country and dropping during the perceived childish monetary debacle threatening the stability of world currencies.

Yes, at one point in Belgium last year Obama was at a 70% approval rating. He's now below 50.

Ironically US side Obama is at 37 percent, which puts him at the level of the worst president in my lifetime, George W. Bush.

[W. Unseld]

Yes there are consequences to every action and inaction but I think they've been a tad hyped up by both parties. R's more at fault for this one and God knows they've predicted the end of the world for every Obama action but D's predicted end times over sequester and while there were consequences the 7th circle of h*ll predictions did not come to pass. I'm confident everyone thinks "but this time it's different!!!!"

They did ? I don't recall them saying it would hurt right away.

Yes Hands, they did:
Obama Portrayed The Sequester Cuts “As A Parade Of Instant Horrors – Hellish Waits At Airports, A Quick Cascade Of Private Job Losses Resulting From Voided Federal Contracts, Teachers Immediately Sacked.” “Over the past few days, Obama and his team have pulled back from a kick-off strategy that portrayed the $84 billion in automatic cuts this year as a parade of instant horrors – hellish waits at airports, a quick cascade of private job losses resulting from voided federal contracts, teachers immediately sacked.”

Top Congressional Democrat Aide: “They Spent Two Weeks Building Up Sequester As A Horror Show And Then Got Fact-Checked A Dozen Times And Were Forced To Back Off Their Own Claims…” “One top Democratic Congressional aide offered this bit of advice to Obama: ‘Don’t accentuate a fight you don’t intend to wage [and] can’t win. … They spent two weeks building up sequester as a horror show and then got fact-checked a dozen times and were forced to back off their own claims of it being a disaster once they were forced to acquiesce to the cuts happening.’”

I've got about 50 more quotes that I don't feel like pulling from democrat sources saying the adminstration over-hyped and over-sold and over-hyped the negative effects. Both parties do it, just acknowledge it and move on rather than creating another full thread page with multiple postings.
(Glenn Thrush and Carrie Budoff Brown,Politico, 3/6/13

[Zonkerbl]

http://www.thenation.com/blog/176586/gr ... der-obama#

"Today the Committee to Protect Journalists unveiled a detailed, sober assessment of press freedom in the United States during President Obama’s tenure. The report concluded that far from fulfilling his campaign promise to improve transparency, the president has instead presided over an unprecedented campaign to contain leaks and to control media coverage of government operations."

[Zonkerbl]

I, for one, am particularly thankful that the French do not get a vote in the U.S. presidential elections.

[barelyawake]

Indy again with your twisted stats. This is the Fox News argument. If more people watch Fox News, then it must be right. So, I'll tout Fox News numbers as an argument to show I'm right (and most people agree with me). Of course, we know the folly of that stat because there are more democrats than republicans.

So, Obama's approval rating has dipped internationally. Of course, the YEARS he had the highest approval rating of any President in history in Europe didn't count right? I'm certain if I had said, "Well, Obama is wildly popular in Europe," that argument would have carried weight here. That said, his approval rating in Europe is still greater than every single Republican president in modern history. Bush's approval rating was in the single digits.

Speaking of single digits, Congress' approval rating is single digits. So, if you are pitting approval ratings against one another, Obama towers over the opposition. And btw, Reagan's worst approval rating? 35. Bush's? 27.

Again, this is what the party of no wanted. They came into office saying that if we merely say no to everything, the economy won't improve, and then we can blame Obama. Same thing with this shutdown. They are banking on low information voters with ADD not understanding how this started. And meanwhile, if we had all democrats in office, the economy would be booming (because we wouldn't have the uncertainty caused by tea partiers threatening the world economy every few months).

Finally, unlike Bush, history will treat Obama very well, especially as Obamacare expands and engraves itself into society.

[barelyawake]

Speaking of polls, from Maddow blog today about new polls:


Let's put it this way: if this poll were a campfire story, it'd leave Republicans shaking uncontrollably in their sleeping bags. The GOP wasn't in especially good shape before, but the shutdown crisis and the threats to crash the economy on purpose have been an unmitigated disaster for the party, causing the sort of collapse in public support pollsters simply don't see very often.

What's the good news for Republicans in the poll? There is no good news.

* Approval ratings: While President Obama's approval rating improved after GOP lawmakers shut down the government, Republican support has collapsed. In the new poll, 70% of Americans disapprove of the way in which GOP lawmakers are doing their jobs. Republicans have reached a level of unpopularity unseen in the history of the poll.

* Shutdown: Asked who bears responsibility for the shutdown, a 53% majority blame congressional Republicans. Less than a third (31%) blame the president.

* "Obamacare": Despite the difficulties the Affordable Care Act has encountered since the open-enrollment period began, support for the law has increased.

* Generic ballot: Democrats enjoy an eight-point advantage in the congressional midterm elections (47% to 39%), as compared to a three-point advantage last month (46% to 43%).

* Government activism: By a 52% to 44% margin, Americans believe the government should do more, not less, to solve problems. In June, the results were evenly split.

* Patriotism: A 70% majority believe congressional Republicans are "putting their own political agenda ahead of what is good for the country."

Republican pollster Bill McInturff added, "These numbers lead to one inescapable conclusion: The Republicans are not tone deaf; they are stone deaf."

Reince Priebus' "rebranding" campaign hit a few potholes in recent months, but it's now fallen into a deep sinkhole.

Away from politics, let's also note that the Republican-imposed crisis has taken a severe toll on the public's general outlook. Only 14% believe the nation is headed in the right direction -- a low unseen since the economic crash five years ago. Over the next year, only 17% expect the American economy to improve, which is also down sharply.

In other words, Washington has effectively punched the nation in the gut, for reasons Republicans have not fully explained and fail to fully understand themselves.

The crisis is not yet over, but even when it's resolved, it's going to take some time to recover from this one.

[Zonkerbl]

The nice thing about refusing to negotiate is you don't have to say anything. Republicans have to repeatedly be seen in public pleading their case.

So Republicans are seen on tv talking about the shutdown, and so the public associates them with it. All democrats have to do is quietly refuse to engage.

[Zonkerbl]

You know, if they were to go back to the "grand bargain" that was the main alternative to the sequester before the Tea Partiers started this whole mess that would be totally fine with me.

[Induveca]

Don't forget the poll stating 60% approve of all members of the house and Senate being fired...

It's not about the **** parties, it's a broken process which can only be resolved through prolonged soul searching and compromise.

It's readily apparent there hasn't been enough compromise from either side...

[barelyawake]

The two phrases that always let you know someone is losing:
"Hey, we're both wrong" or "It's all so confusing."

I could sitdown right now with Nate and compromise to create a budget we both agree to:
Public option
Keystone pipeline (oil must stay in America)
Debt ceiling raised for two years
Closing loopholes in tax code
Immigration reform
School vouchers for only non-religious institutions
No oil subsidies
Expansion of drilling in Alaska (oil must stay in America)
Decriminalization of Mary Jane
Retirement age raised by two years
Minimum wage raised to $10.00

That's where I would start. But, that's negotiating with Nate, not Michelle Bachman. And Obama has been giving and giving in negotiations. The ACA was a compromise believe it or not. The other side is a minority party and won't compromise on anything. That's the problem. They want to act as though they represent a larger body of the American populace than they do. Most people have wanted national healthcare for decades.

[Induveca]

E"Someone is losing"? Don't understand the gamification here.

----
Monthly Rasmussen Reports tracking of partisan trends found that in June 2012, 35.4% identified as Republicans, 34.0% as Democrats and 30.5% were unaffiliated. These numbers changed only slightly from the previous month.
----

Until those numbers above change drastically (hopefully with a significantly rising number of independents) the play by play of who is "losing" is completely pointless. The population of the US had lost faith in the ability for the federal government to function. How does anyone "win"in that scenario?

This will end with compromise and negotiation. No option for either side no matter how much they pout about being "right". Both sides will give ground on the impasse, and both sides will lose ground in the next round of elections due to their inability to find common ground.

This has become a bigger childish fight for the next elections.....and it's backfired for both parties.

After Obama's departure the generation of young Americans will have lived through 16 years of ineffectual (Obama) and/or borderline evil administrations (Bush).

[Zonkerbl]

Don't forget the poll stating 60% approve of all members of the house and Senate being fired...

It's not about the **** parties, it's a broken process which can only be resolved through prolonged soul searching and compromise.

It's readily apparent there hasn't been enough compromise from either side...

That's not fair. Obama made significant concessions in his discussions with Boehner leading up to the sequester, including cuts to medicare. That's a fact. The Tea Partiers vetoed it. That's a fact.

Would we be in this position if the Tea Partiers hadn't butted in and tried to hijack the democrat process to impose the preferences of their billionaire patrons on us? No.

Blame for this current mess clearly, clearly falls on the Tea Party. Full stop. People are blaming both sides because they have NO IDEA WHAT IS GOING ON. Which is also a large part of how we got into this mess in the first place.

[Zonkerbl]

Although, interestingly enough, the Koch brothers are disavowing any involvement in the current mess:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... -democrat/

[hands11]

"Away from politics, let's also note that the Republican-imposed crisis has taken a severe toll on the public's general outlook. Only 14% believe the nation is headed in the right direction -- a low unseen since the economic crash five years ago. Over the next year, only 17% expect the American economy to improve, which is also down sharply.

In other words, Washington has effectively punched the nation in the gut, for reasons Republicans have not fully explained and fail to fully understand themselves."

American is right to be skeptical about things getting better over the next year. Why ? Those people in the house that can't govern and can't get on board with policies that would help, are still there. Only thing I know right now is we get a 6 week reprieve. The terrorist have given us a 6 weeks of seize fire. Thats all. What will they do any different moving forward ? I have no idea yet. In the short term they are still a treat. Longer term, they will be removed from power. Its only a matter of when. If Obama stands strong like he just did, its will be sooner rather then later.

We are still in the middle of this mess. I wouldn't expect the polls to reflect any positive view of the future until there is more certainty of when the TPs will lost power. Until they see something substantial regarding the Rs figuring out a different approach to politics then what they have been doing we won't see it in the polls. They have been very crazy and abusive. Like anyone on the other side of a relationship like that, it takes time to repair the damage. Major trust has been broken. They need a lot of therapy to learn what they have done and how they need to change.

All I expect right now is Rs seeing if they can spin this enough to mitigate the huge damage that has been done to the R label which they reside under. I don't expect they have come to terms with their problem.

They have a huge challenge. I predicted this is where they would end up. Estab Rs need to cut the TPs lose to save their brand. Let the TP spin off on their own and take a big chuck of the bat sht crazy reputation with them. That will help. But lets not forget the Est Rs were nuts before the TPs showed up and they were the ones that gave power to the TPs. That is on their hands. While they are separate in some sense, the Rs are to blame for this group and this way of doing politics.

They really have a lot of work to do. I don't see how they get their without going throw a phase where they have very little influence. And in that phase, if the dems get to implement their plan and it works, hard to see how they have an opening to gain more influence for a long long time. I predicted this was the end of a cycle for the Rs that lasts 20-25 something years. I can still see that happening. Dems will only lose if they over step their power and start to drift to fair left. I expect that will happen over time but it will take many years if it does. We are about to enter a generational shift that will grow up with a more functional government where people no longer are taught to hate it. They will understand what it is and how it works. They will understand its their board of directors for their company. And that is a large generation that will influence things like the Baby Boomers did, only they are going to be much better stewards because they will have balance.

I have great hope for the phase we could be entering. A lot of things that could finally come together. An integration of ideas and experiences. Government, Corporate and personal balance. Current and future. Nature and industry. 60s freedom and equal right of women and minorities and traditional ways. Tradition one parent at home families and non traditional. A better balance of money goals and free time for family, friends and fun. Much of this will echo what women of today have to figure out as a balance with their new rights.

This is what I believe the Millennial's will be when they merge with the Gen Xers to over take the baby boomers as the new political force. This is what I believe is happening socially in our country. I think it about to all come together. That is the future I see.

[Zonkerbl]

Directly contradicting this article, I guess:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a- ... 1&_r=2&hp&

"The billionaire Koch brothers, Charles and David, have been deeply involved with financing the overall effort. A group linked to the Kochs, Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, disbursed more than $200 million last year to nonprofit organizations involved in the fight. Included was $5 million to Generation Opportunity, which created a buzz last month with an Internet advertisement showing a menacing Uncle Sam figure popping up between a woman’s legs during a gynecological exam."

[Zonkerbl]

Man. If at the end of all this we basically end up back at the "grand deal" that Obama and Boehner worked out during the sequester negotiations, the "I TOLD YOU SOs" from Boehner's office will be audible from the moon.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... ml?hpid=z1

[hands11]

Yes there are consequences to every action and inaction but I think they've been a tad hyped up by both parties. R's more at fault for this one and God knows they've predicted the end of the world for every Obama action but D's predicted end times over sequester and while there were consequences the 7th circle of h*ll predictions did not come to pass. I'm confident everyone thinks "but this time it's different!!!!"

They did ? I don't recall them saying it would hurt right away.

Yes Hands, they did:
Obama Portrayed The Sequester Cuts “As A Parade Of Instant Horrors – Hellish Waits At Airports, A Quick Cascade Of Private Job Losses Resulting From Voided Federal Contracts, Teachers Immediately Sacked.” “Over the past few days, Obama and his team have pulled back from a kick-off strategy that portrayed the $84 billion in automatic cuts this year as a parade of instant horrors – hellish waits at airports, a quick cascade of private job losses resulting from voided federal contracts, teachers immediately sacked.”

Top Congressional Democrat Aide: “They Spent Two Weeks Building Up Sequester As A Horror Show And Then Got Fact-Checked A Dozen Times And Were Forced To Back Off Their Own Claims…” “One top Democratic Congressional aide offered this bit of advice to Obama: ‘Don’t accentuate a fight you don’t intend to wage [and] can’t win. … They spent two weeks building up sequester as a horror show and then got fact-checked a dozen times and were forced to back off their own claims of it being a disaster once they were forced to acquiesce to the cuts happening.’”

I've got about 50 more quotes that I don't feel like pulling from democrat sources saying the adminstration over-hyped and over-sold and over-hyped the negative effects. Both parties do it, just acknowledge it and move on rather than creating another full thread page with multiple postings.
(Glenn Thrush and Carrie Budoff Brown,Politico, 3/6/13

I guess maybe we are splitting hairs. Did they every do it ? In the beginning they framed it one way. They just spoke about the total effect of it. Which still hasn't been felt. Later as it started to look like it would actually happen, they started to focus more on how it would be felt less right away and more over time. Which is true. I just heard some folks talking about what is going to happen to the military over it. Again, that is why neither side was supposed to want it to happen. Its sucked as a solution.

And that didn't happen because Rs were never willing to sign their name to giving up any sacrifice cows. Cowards. No Rev. Not even 1 dollar to 10 dollar of cuts. They have been unwilling to negotiate. Obama tried. That why he didn't budge just now. There was nothing and no one to negotiate. Rs already proved that. Obama was smart to sit back and watch them hang themselves.

Rs, like they tried with the shut down budget, are trying to just pass funding for part of sequester that were things they had to give up. Well it only worked that way if the Dems let them get away with it. I don't think they are going to. If they want to renegotiate sequester, then everything is on the table. Just like it was when they set up a committee to work it out before it kicked in.

Eventually Rs are going to have to put everything on the table. This montra of we have a spending problem not a revenue problem is get blown up as a working construct. The truth is we have both and its debt problem isn't an immediate problem, its a long term structural problem. It can and will get fixed. We did it before. We can do it again. We actually know how.

[hands11]

http://www.thenation.com/blog/176586/grim-report-press-freedoms-under-obama#

"Today the Committee to Protect Journalists unveiled a detailed, sober assessment of press freedom in the United States during President Obama’s tenure. The report concluded that far from fulfilling his campaign promise to improve transparency, the president has instead presided over an unprecedented campaign to contain leaks and to control media coverage of government operations."

He should contain leaks over curtain things. Slippery topic. Not sure any of us have enough information to debate the full scale of this. This will always be a tough one. I don't think any of us want everything exposed right away. But we also don't want everything hidden.

Best of my knowledge, he doesn't do what Bush did which was screen people that were allowed in the room to such as scale that it was a puppet reporting group. As for reporters, I think they have been a huge part of what we have gone through. They have been so soft. They let any view get echoed equally. Well at some point, all views a not equal and they need to call out the bat sht crazy. If not, our people get confused and end up ignorant.

I will be happy to get past these false crisises so we can address legitimate concerns of drones, Patriot Act, NSA, etc. Under an environment of less right wing nut jobs, I think we can reverse some of these polices.

Looks like Afghanistan should be winding down throughout 2014. Finally, after 10 years we should finally be done with these wars. Once the war footing to done, we can look more inward. Hopefully we make more progress with Iraq, and Syria continues to get debt with. Things are heading in the right direction.

They have been since Obama took office. But its a battle and their are bumps in the road.

[W. Unseld]

http://www.thenation.com/blog/176586/grim-report-press-freedoms-under-obama#
"Today the Committee to Protect Journalists unveiled a detailed, sober assessment of press freedom in the United States during President Obama’s tenure. The report concluded that far from fulfilling his campaign promise to improve transparency, the president has instead presided over an unprecedented campaign to contain leaks and to control media coverage of government operations."

Zonk, credit for posting against what appears from the message board to be your party. I like the independent/objective streak on your part and this shows why it's no good to simply assume one side is always the bad guys, and the other is always the good (often they're both bad).

“Barack Obama has pursued the most aggressive “war on leaks” since the Nixon administration, according to a report published on Thursday that says the administration’s attempts to control the flow of information is hampering the ability of journalists to do their jobs. The author of the study, the former Washington Post executive editor Leonard Downie, says the administration’s actions have severely hindered the release of information that could be used to hold it to account.”
When you combine that with this--it starts to get freaky:
The U.S. government charged former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden with three felonies, including two under the Espionage Act. He now becomes the eighth person to be charged under the Espionage Act under Obama, according to Firedoglake. That is more than double all previous presidents combined. Prior to Obama’s administration only three people who leaked information had been charged under the 1917 statute that was never really intended for leakers.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... e_act.html