Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » Parker CA Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Parker CA's Journal
Posted by Parker CA in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Sun Sep 13th 2009, 01:11 PM
attempts at pursuing the current agenda would slip off-track and they would be forced to parse every statement to define racism since they were the ones to bring it up.

At the rate things are going, Obama can sit back, continue leading this country forward, and let the race debate evolve more organically through selected media outlets and editorials that decide to take it on.

As he is doing with the constant calls for bi-partisanship, he will convey the message necessary to move his agenda forward, knowing full well that the truth of the matter is quite different; he doesn't truly believe or expect that his calls for bi-partisanship will work, nor does he truly believe that the hate from the right is void of racist motivations.

Both strategies allow for the GOP to further unravel on their own and to continue placing their cards onto the table for all to see, thus diminishing their efforts and creating a track record on which their game plan becomes more predictable.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Parker CA in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Sun Sep 13th 2009, 12:57 PM
comment about how polarized Obama and his admin have made our nation, but continue un-phased with their display of faux emotion.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Parker CA in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Fri Aug 28th 2009, 03:44 PM
being against the greater good, in this case Obama's safety, is always a wise strategic move.

I can just hear the reasons the GOP would refuse to hold accountable such actions, 'It's freedom of speech,' 'It's only because Obama is such a polarizing figure,' 'These are just the most fringe elements of our party.' The list goes on.

Regardless, I think that putting GOP members of congress on the spot and demanding that a position be taken in regards to their support of these actions will only make them look like greater enablers to the radical nut jobs in their party and will continually establish and strengthen the Dems as the party of moral high ground and pragmatism.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Parker CA in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Aug 27th 2009, 12:43 PM
he was lying to himself or to others. Immediately after this statement he pauses and looks down, the only downward glace during the 1:30 clip, a clear sign of shame, because he knows he's still doing it now, lying every day to his audience only for personal financial gain.

This man is selling himself for fortune and he's clearly disgusted with himself. I don't think he's quite on the brink of a mental breakdown, although I never watch his show and am only basing that comment on the posted clip, but he clearly harbors deep-rooted issues about how he feels toward his role as the 'disinformer' and seems to be leaning very heavily upon the crutch of piety in an attempt to reconcile his faults and personal shortcomings.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Parker CA in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Feb 26th 2009, 01:09 PM
strategy.

Obama may never have intended to institute this ban at all. Such a ban coming right now seems very random and makes not a whole lot of sense to me. Why would he purposely derail his forward progress and momentum in hist first 100 days with such a hot-button issue that the GOP loves to preach about and which has the potential to be a sure loss if pursued?

A couple things to note. The WH has not made any public statement on this, rather, Holder is the person who brought it up, has put the issue into the public arena, and who stated that Obama has not yet decided on a firm ruling due to the amount of issues on his desk. That makes perfect sense, he doesn't need to meddle in this right now. But, if this is somewhat of a preemptive tactic to create a publicly perceived rift between the WH and Holder/Justice Dept. then it does makes sense.

Obama may benefit from having some distance, real or perceived between he and Holder when it comes to sensitive issues such as torture charges, previous administration crimes, and issues down the road where Obama will have a tough time playing the bad-cop and would greatly benefit from being able to remain at arm's length or further from the decision makers in these cases.

The fact that Pelosi was not consulted on such a big issue is a sign to me that this could be a tactic orchestrated amongst only a few behind the curtains. Holder can distance himself a bit from both Pelosi and the WH and move forward with any issue posing potental GOP backlash without entangling Obama and the Dem congress in the mess more than what will be absolutely necessary.

The timing of this is very suspect to me and makes zero sense, unless, like the GOP has done many times, the Obama administration is using some smoke and mirrors to achieve multiple goals at once, the largest, regarding public perception, being that Obama has truly measured the public temperature on this issue and decided to compromise and go against what the administration iniitially suggested it would do. This also puts Pelosi in a position of being able to publicly support a very controversial issue for the GOP and may stem some further commentary that she is tied to the hip of Obama in her decision making process.

Read entry | Discuss (3 comments)
Posted by Parker CA in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sat Feb 14th 2009, 09:18 PM
As he lays the issues out on the table, often in ways that can only be interpreted in comedic light, it is clear that the pukes will only continue to counsel one another to stay the course, and that they truly believe their strategy and tactics will lead them down the road of success rather than down the one which they are actually traveling, that toward miserable irrelevance.

May 2010 be a similar bloodbath for the GOP in both the House and Senate as was the era which followed the New Deal.
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by Parker CA in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Thu Oct 02nd 2008, 01:44 PM
debate, is that the Moose's history of debates that are receiving all of this praise and gushing admiration were conducted on a stage so far from that on which she will be performing tomorrow night that the speculation that she will be a formidable opponent has no reasonable basis.

The commentary as it exists is akin to saying that if the local high school basketball team can defeat all of their opponents within the district, that they could realistically enter into a game against the Celtics at the Garden in Boston after only a few months of intensive practice and conditioning. The notion is absurd. Those debates literally have Palin sitting around a large dinner table with other potential candidates in an Alaskan gubernatorial race. Not to discount all AK politicians, but the point is that the stage is so far removed and so isolated from the national stage in the lower 48 let along the stage for the VPOTUS that the comparison is laughable. The physical audience in the room is tiny compared to what the Moose will face tomorrow. The friendly AK way of speaking and her snide and undercutting way of commenting will not play well on the large national stage to the majority of viewers.

She did well in the convention because she was reading directly off of a rolling script, a diatribe produced by handlers. People responded only to her character's ability to act. She exhibited zero true definable substance. Tonight, she is, for better or worse, unplugged. She can cram, cram, cram all she can for this exam of her life, but the reality at the end of the day before she walks onto that stage is that she is woefully unprepared.

Her tactic to attack Obama might have been a good one had been allowed to avail herself to the press and to more than three very controlled interviews. Even though the Couric episode was an epic failure, she was in a controlled environment and had only to answer to Couric. She has no credibility when she attempts to go it alone. Her attacks will seem baseless and contrived.

Her single biggest issue though, is that before an election has even taken place, before she has had a chance to even achieve a position in office long enough to provide adequate fodder and demonstration of her true character, she has become the butt of endless comedic mockery, satire, and humiliation on nationally televised programs. She has her fan base, but the majority of the public will not, repeat, will not support a candidate that is literally a joke. Will not.

Tonight will be a blip on the radar regardless of the outcome. The vote on the bailout/rescue bill will come quickly on the heels of this debate, completely overshadowing the previous night's episode much like Obama's speech was swept under the rug by the hate fest. The pukes, the handlers, the Liar, and the Moose will all be left further back in the polls, more demoralized, and with a direct view of only the backs of their opponents and the democratic party continually distancing themselves for the next four weeks.

Read entry | Discuss (7 comments) | Recommend (+3 votes)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.