The wonderful thing about an election is that you can construe the results to mean anything you want. For example, from this last one, you can see
– Coakley was simply a bad candidate
– Coakley wan’t liberal enough
– Coakley was too liberal
– Democrats were overconfident
– Republicans brought in lots of out-of-state money, which wouldn’t be the case in a normal election
Choose your prejudice, and pick you reason. This is the same thing (from the other side) that California Republicans have been doing for a couple of decades – generally picking the “not conservative enough” option. Which is why the only Republican to win recently is one who got to run in a free-for-all to replace a recalled Governor. And they are a serious minority in the Legislature.
What was the most liberal thing that Obama and the Democrats did? Nationalizing the banks? Immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan? Enacting single-payer health care? Expanding Medicare? Larry Tribe’s nomination to the Supreme Court? Forcing churches to perform gay weddings? Enacting the Fairness Doctrine, thus eliminating right-wing radio? Card check?
Arrogance is in the eye of the beholder. If you go looking for it, it’s easy to find, especially in politics, where the humble don’t survive.
I’m not opposed to the idea that there are some — many even — in the current administration who are arrogant. But I can’t pretend that this is a new phenomenon, unshared by previous administrations.
If you’re looking for profiles in arrogance, I would have to nominate Dick Cheney. This is a guy who was asked to help Bush select a VP, and he concluded that he was the best person for the job.
In the end, what matters are actions, not the feelings of those who made the decisions, and not the feelings of those who were opposed to those decisions.
If you want to convince me that this administration has acted with arrogance, show me decisions that seem to be rooted in arrogance.
I’ll give you an example: Rumsfeld’s refusal to plan for a post-invasion occupation of Iraq strikes me as being rooted in arrogance. This is documented by someone who was in the room when Rumsfeld threatened to fire the next aide who raised the issue of planning for the occupation, mirrored in Rumsfeld’s public statements about the likely duration of the conflict, and demonstrated by the incoherence of the post-invasion occupation.
Clinton’s top-down health care reform effort, headed by his wife, is another example of an arrogant approach to policy.
The attempt to ram through health care has been arrogant, but perhaps the arrogance is more Pelosi’s than Obama’s — I thought Krauthammer described the tone of it well:
[S]omething is going on beyond personality.
That something is substance — political ideas and legislative agendas. Democrats, if they wish, can write off their Massachusetts humiliation to high unemployment, to Coakley or, the current favorite among sophisticates, to generalized anger. That implies an inchoate, unthinking lashing-out at whoever happens to be in power — even at your liberal betters who are forcing on you an agenda that you can’t even see is in your own interest.[Emphasis added]
Democrats must so rationalize, otherwise they must take democracy seriously, and ask themselves: If the people really don’t want it, could they possibly have a point?
“If you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call,” said moderate — and sentient — Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, “there’s no hope of waking up.”
Krauthammer, of course, would prefer that they not wake up.
Obama didn’t prep a health care reform bill and hand it to Congress. He asked Congress to work on it, and bent over backwards to invite Republicans to join the process. The part demonized as “death panels” was proposed by Republican Senator Johnny Isakson.
Over and over again, Obama signaled that he’d be willing to sign the bill even if parts of it that he campaigned for (such as some sort of public option) were dropped.
In the end, the bill looked a heck of a lot like the plan Romney established in Massachusetts. You might be able to argue that Massachusetts voters decided they didn’t like their plan, and thus didn’t want to see a national version of their plan enacted, but you’d have to ignore the fact that Scott Brown supports the Massachusetts health care plan.
Yes, Obama signaled early on that the public option was optional. I read somewhere a conservative claim that the plan itself was essentially single-payer using private companies as fronts (I guess because there was so much government regulation?) I am not equipped to evaluate that claim.
Some conservatives are trying hard to claim Brown. Others are already suspicious of him.
Obama didn’t prep a health care reform bill and hand it to Congress. He asked Congress to work on it, and bent over backwards to invite Republicans to join the process.
Obama can’t both tell Congress to handle writing the legislation AND invite the other party to the talks. He gave the responsibility to Pelosi and Reid sometime late last spring, and having done so he gave away the power to invite anyone else to the table.
Prior to doing that Obama had been cutting deals with drug companies and insurance companies in closed sessions at the White House. How can you claim that Obama invited the Republicans to the table when he had already slammed the door in their faces? And, for that matter, in the faces of the public to whom he had claimed everything would be done above board and in public?
Furthermore, Pelosi and Reid have compared all opponents of their plans to Nazis. Did Obama ever step in to ask them to cool the rhetoric? No, which means he has tacitly accepted that strategy. Claiming now that Obama extended the hand of friendship when he has constantly claimed that Republicans are on the side of the EVIL insuirance industry and the EVIL drug industry and the EVIL doctors (who are cutting people open and removing stuff for no good reason) is bullshit, Peter. You can’t compare the opposition to Nazis and then claim you’ve extended the hand of friendship and cooperation.
Peter, when i mentioned arrogance, it was w/the thought of ~It’s not what you do, but how you do it~ kinda mentality. Not his policies inasmuch as his “fighting” words and tone. W/two freaking wars going on and AlQ knocking at the door, would someone inform our President, please- that Conservatives are not the enemy!!!
IMhumbleO- Obama is a very heavy-handed operator, constantly harping on what we(those who don’t agree) should know and apparently are too thick& stubborn to see– so we must be nagged all the way to the H2Ohole.
I’m sure it’s a part of what i’m looking for(as Obama is total opposite of my beliefs), but the man’s tone grates so on my nerves. I would much prefer the stumbling, grasping twang of W– i didn’t think anything could be worse than that. Yet, give me the halting humility of W to the loud,open arrogance of Obama any day.
O/T thoughts:
1………. isn’t it ironic that the economic talking heads are all about the new regulations Obama is going to put into place to halt the gluttony of banks since the Glass/Stegall Act of 1934 was imposed WHEN the very dude who is responsible for the dis-assemblement(a word?) of that very ACT that kept these banks in check since 1934- Larry Summers– is working for the current Administration? I find that very curious.
2………. in VT our Governor- an (R)- is whittling down our budget to make up for projected red ink. One way to cut spending- for every two teachers that retire- hire one to replace them. Since the kid-base is shrinking and the teachers have not adjusted down, as well- there are a lot of adults in elementary school these days.
Obama- OTOH- says we are falling behind rapidly i math/science and – here’s a 250million$$ grant to educate and hire 1million more teachers throughout the country, so we can catch up. ~sigh~
“Bayh Warns “Catastrophe” If Dems Ignore Massachusetts Senate Race Lessons.” What I hear in the media was the vote was a referendum on Health care. But I don’t remember Brown or the Massachusetts calling for an end to Massachusetts universal health care.
Karen, would someone inform the far right that liberals are not the enemy of God and country like you think they are. But then again, if you read Gateway Pundit…………..
Ambiance 
Randy said,
January 22, 2010 at 12:37 am
Being hit over the head with a sledgehammer does tend to concentrate one’s attention.
amba12 said,
January 22, 2010 at 12:39 am
Most Dems don’t seem to want to admit that’s what happened! Except insofar as they can blame Bush . .
wj said,
January 22, 2010 at 11:06 am
The wonderful thing about an election is that you can construe the results to mean anything you want. For example, from this last one, you can see
– Coakley was simply a bad candidate
– Coakley wan’t liberal enough
– Coakley was too liberal
– Democrats were overconfident
– Republicans brought in lots of out-of-state money, which wouldn’t be the case in a normal election
Choose your prejudice, and pick you reason. This is the same thing (from the other side) that California Republicans have been doing for a couple of decades – generally picking the “not conservative enough” option. Which is why the only Republican to win recently is one who got to run in a free-for-all to replace a recalled Governor. And they are a serious minority in the Legislature.
Peter Hoh said,
January 22, 2010 at 8:51 pm
What was the most liberal thing that Obama and the Democrats did? Nationalizing the banks? Immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan? Enacting single-payer health care? Expanding Medicare? Larry Tribe’s nomination to the Supreme Court? Forcing churches to perform gay weddings? Enacting the Fairness Doctrine, thus eliminating right-wing radio? Card check?
karen said,
January 23, 2010 at 9:09 am
— how about their arrogance, Peter?
wj said,
January 23, 2010 at 11:32 am
Nah, arrogance is not a monopoly of either end of the political spectrum.
Peter Hoh said,
January 23, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Arrogance is in the eye of the beholder. If you go looking for it, it’s easy to find, especially in politics, where the humble don’t survive.
I’m not opposed to the idea that there are some — many even — in the current administration who are arrogant. But I can’t pretend that this is a new phenomenon, unshared by previous administrations.
If you’re looking for profiles in arrogance, I would have to nominate Dick Cheney. This is a guy who was asked to help Bush select a VP, and he concluded that he was the best person for the job.
In the end, what matters are actions, not the feelings of those who made the decisions, and not the feelings of those who were opposed to those decisions.
If you want to convince me that this administration has acted with arrogance, show me decisions that seem to be rooted in arrogance.
I’ll give you an example: Rumsfeld’s refusal to plan for a post-invasion occupation of Iraq strikes me as being rooted in arrogance. This is documented by someone who was in the room when Rumsfeld threatened to fire the next aide who raised the issue of planning for the occupation, mirrored in Rumsfeld’s public statements about the likely duration of the conflict, and demonstrated by the incoherence of the post-invasion occupation.
Clinton’s top-down health care reform effort, headed by his wife, is another example of an arrogant approach to policy.
amba12 said,
January 23, 2010 at 12:54 pm
The attempt to ram through health care has been arrogant, but perhaps the arrogance is more Pelosi’s than Obama’s — I thought Krauthammer described the tone of it well:
Krauthammer, of course, would prefer that they not wake up.
Peter Hoh said,
January 23, 2010 at 1:11 pm
Obama didn’t prep a health care reform bill and hand it to Congress. He asked Congress to work on it, and bent over backwards to invite Republicans to join the process. The part demonized as “death panels” was proposed by Republican Senator Johnny Isakson.
Over and over again, Obama signaled that he’d be willing to sign the bill even if parts of it that he campaigned for (such as some sort of public option) were dropped.
In the end, the bill looked a heck of a lot like the plan Romney established in Massachusetts. You might be able to argue that Massachusetts voters decided they didn’t like their plan, and thus didn’t want to see a national version of their plan enacted, but you’d have to ignore the fact that Scott Brown supports the Massachusetts health care plan.
amba12 said,
January 23, 2010 at 1:37 pm
Yes, Obama signaled early on that the public option was optional. I read somewhere a conservative claim that the plan itself was essentially single-payer using private companies as fronts (I guess because there was so much government regulation?) I am not equipped to evaluate that claim.
Some conservatives are trying hard to claim Brown. Others are already suspicious of him.
Icepick said,
January 23, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Obama didn’t prep a health care reform bill and hand it to Congress. He asked Congress to work on it, and bent over backwards to invite Republicans to join the process.
Obama can’t both tell Congress to handle writing the legislation AND invite the other party to the talks. He gave the responsibility to Pelosi and Reid sometime late last spring, and having done so he gave away the power to invite anyone else to the table.
Prior to doing that Obama had been cutting deals with drug companies and insurance companies in closed sessions at the White House. How can you claim that Obama invited the Republicans to the table when he had already slammed the door in their faces? And, for that matter, in the faces of the public to whom he had claimed everything would be done above board and in public?
Furthermore, Pelosi and Reid have compared all opponents of their plans to Nazis. Did Obama ever step in to ask them to cool the rhetoric? No, which means he has tacitly accepted that strategy. Claiming now that Obama extended the hand of friendship when he has constantly claimed that Republicans are on the side of the EVIL insuirance industry and the EVIL drug industry and the EVIL doctors (who are cutting people open and removing stuff for no good reason) is bullshit, Peter. You can’t compare the opposition to Nazis and then claim you’ve extended the hand of friendship and cooperation.
Peter Hoh said,
January 23, 2010 at 5:43 pm
Icepick, what fine, fiery rhetoric you have there. I give up.
karen said,
January 25, 2010 at 9:50 am
:0)- ahhhhh.
Peter, when i mentioned arrogance, it was w/the thought of ~It’s not what you do, but how you do it~ kinda mentality. Not his policies inasmuch as his “fighting” words and tone. W/two freaking wars going on and AlQ knocking at the door, would someone inform our President, please- that Conservatives are not the enemy!!!
IMhumbleO- Obama is a very heavy-handed operator, constantly harping on what we(those who don’t agree) should know and apparently are too thick& stubborn to see– so we must be nagged all the way to the H2Ohole.
I’m sure it’s a part of what i’m looking for(as Obama is total opposite of my beliefs), but the man’s tone grates so on my nerves. I would much prefer the stumbling, grasping twang of W– i didn’t think anything could be worse than that. Yet, give me the halting humility of W to the loud,open arrogance of Obama any day.
O/T thoughts:
1………. isn’t it ironic that the economic talking heads are all about the new regulations Obama is going to put into place to halt the gluttony of banks since the Glass/Stegall Act of 1934 was imposed WHEN the very dude who is responsible for the dis-assemblement(a word?) of that very ACT that kept these banks in check since 1934- Larry Summers– is working for the current Administration? I find that very curious.
2………. in VT our Governor- an (R)- is whittling down our budget to make up for projected red ink. One way to cut spending- for every two teachers that retire- hire one to replace them. Since the kid-base is shrinking and the teachers have not adjusted down, as well- there are a lot of adults in elementary school these days.
Obama- OTOH- says we are falling behind rapidly i math/science and – here’s a 250million$$ grant to educate and hire 1million more teachers throughout the country, so we can catch up. ~sigh~
Spud said,
January 28, 2010 at 5:48 am
“Bayh Warns “Catastrophe” If Dems Ignore Massachusetts Senate Race Lessons.” What I hear in the media was the vote was a referendum on Health care. But I don’t remember Brown or the Massachusetts calling for an end to Massachusetts universal health care.
Karen, would someone inform the far right that liberals are not the enemy of God and country like you think they are. But then again, if you read Gateway Pundit…………..
karen said,
January 29, 2010 at 7:27 pm
Hey- Obama made it to Baltimore today and did exactly that– not that i believe him…