General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Right-wing obstruction could have been fought: An ineffective and gutless presidency’s legacy [View all]joshcryer
(62,287 posts)When was SS cut? You seem betrayed by a talking point, by a political maneuver, rather than reality. And that's precisely how ratfucking works. You look at Warren "running away from" the I/P question that a far right winger threw at her. Total smear job without any basis.
How does a capitalist President handle TPP? TPP is a symptom of the capitalism we enjoy, it is not a cause and nor will it perpetuate it (if anything it will weaken it by creating disproportionate trade relationships; but policy-wise that's what we want, cheap labor, for cheap goods we no longer make on our soil).
So looking at the BRICS moves today, and how Russia, China, and Brazil are all getting cozy on 17% of the worlds trade, it is only logical for a capitalist President to seek the TPP which covers 40% of global trade. It's a geopolitical incentive to keep us one step ahead of our competitors.
And so it follows, there's no need to "normalize" the language, this is the reality, posts on a message board will not change that reality. You don't have to accept the reality, but if you want to be taken seriously, you need to provide solutions.
You talk about the NSA. The NSA is empowered by the Patriot Act. If you want to get rid of the spying you should be calling for the Patriot Act to be dismantled. Instead, what we have are people pumping Snowden and Greenwald and literally talking about how they ushered in these grand reforms, when literally nothing has happened to reform the NSA. And, I should condition this, it's not like Obama supporters also support the NSA's overreach. We don't. But if you're going to get rid of it don't place the onus on a President as if they're a dictator who can magically stop enforcing laws arbitrarily.
Of course, that's precisely what those who think that they are political players want, they want a President, like Bush, who implements the laws how he sees fit. Telecom immunity was one such area where a President illegally tapped calls. He should've been impeached over that. And of course, our Presidential candidate voted to give out that immunity. Before he was elected, mind you. And yet you pretend like we are out of touch or something or trying to deflect when we're merely showing you how Washington works.
Anyone can say whatever stupid shit they want to say, that's fine, but if it's not truthful or if it's twisting things, then they're not really ready to have a coherent policy discussion. Before we voted for him Obama said he'd cut the deficit, drill for oil, build Keystone (he campaigned specifically on it in fact the second time around), increase the drone war, etc. These are all things Obama said he'd do before anyone cast the first ballot to elect him.