Waiting to Exhale. Thoughts on the day before the 2008 Election.

[Driven1]

Agreed Driven...

I definitely don't see Obama being very bi-partisan especially if the reports are true that he has offered the chief of staff position to Rahm Emanuel who of course has told the republicans "to go f*** themselves."

read the same report about Emanuel.  yeah, did Pelosi REALLY think anyone believed her when she said they would be MORE bi-partisan if we gave them 60 senate seats!?!? 

and what happened to Rahm's finger, btw???

[Driven1]

I know.  He certainly didnt have to follow Cheney's example on the 'go f#%& yourself remark.

I agree, he could've been the bigger man.  Just shows that politicians are politicians, regardless of the current party label they wear.

[uptowngirl]

Well weve got 8 years to look forward to bigger men.  Luckily thats not a very high bar.

8 years? I thought it was four?

[RiversideGator]

Some of the popular vote (NC, MO, OR) is still out, but at the moment Obama has 52%.  That is more than Reagan got in 1980 (51%) and Bush got in 2004 (50.7%).  Bush-41 got 53% in 1988.  1992,1996 and 2000 neither winner won even 50%. 

You forgot to mention that Reagan got 58.8% of the vote and won 49 states in 1984. 

With this election, basically Obama managed to drive up the racist vote for him, bring out the welfare types in droves and fool enough suburbanites into thinking that he was a moderate.  The stock market meltdown/credit crisis in Sept/Oct also put him over the top.  As President, he will not have the benefit of being able to lie about his record or finesse his extremist views.  It should be interesting and helpful to the Republicans in Congress in 2 years.

I think in his heart and mind, Obama is much more moderate than he is perceived to be.  I believe he is a true uniter as well.

This would be great if it were true but NOTHING in his record suggests this.

[Driven1]

As President, he will not have the benefit of being able to lie about his record or finesse his extremist views.  It should be interesting and helpful to the Republicans in Congress in 2 years.

wait...he has a record? 

[77danj7]

stephen your post is right...blank

his record is pretty blank of anything meaningful and important

[chris]

god, this election is over... crawl into the bunkers and prepare for apocalypse if you must.

but i'm buying my tickets to the inauguration.

[RiversideGator]

Enjoy it.  The party's almost over.

[David]

Hey what's with all the president-elect bashing? It's very un-american.

Only the daily show can only sum up the past few days events with a single quote:

"Sarah Palin was tagged and released back into the wild" ahhhh, so soothing on the ears.

Don't hate on your president-elect people, that means you're a terrorist.

[RiversideGator]

Hey what's with all the president-elect bashing? It's very un-american.

Only the daily show can only sum up the past few days events with a single quote:

"Sarah Palin was tagged and released back into the wild" ahhhh, so soothing on the ears.

Don't hate on your president-elect people, that means you're a terrorist.

According to the Democrats circa 2005, dissent is patriotic.  So, I am just being very patriotic.   
http://www.cafepress.com/1stamendzone

[JaxByDefault]

Dissent is an essential aspect of the American political system. Have at it.

It is the "you are either with us, or you're against us,"  or the "if you don't like the president/ praise the government/wear a flag pin/or say the pledge/etc, then you are not patriotic" attitude that most betrays the American commitment to free speech.

I don't have to like what you say--and believe me, most of the time I do not--but I will defend your right to say it. I would argue, however, that dissent in this forum is most effective when it is well reasoned, deftly and logically argued, and civil in tone.

[GatorDone]

"and Barak's first words were of praise for his opponent"


Actually his first words were...

If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

He praised his opponent several paragraphs into the speech

I get so tired of hearing him talk about things such as "the dream of our founders" and the "power of our democracy." I am not sure he is even qualified to be an attorney. When I took my oath, I had to swear to uphold the US Constitution and I am confident he did as well. Given that, I am not sure how you can stand on a platform and spout patriotic rhetoric and then outline policies which destroy the very things our founders desired to protect. His 2001 interview is very telling. In that interview he stated he is disappointed that the US Supreme Court has not overcome the restraints the US Constitution placed on government. First, let us remember the Supreme Court was created by the power granted in Article III of the Constitution. Second, the Supreme Court was created to uphold the Constitution. I am not sure if Obama missed that day in law school but it is pretty simple stuff. To sum that up for everyone, the US Supreme Court was created to ensure the Government was restrained. Maybe Obama and Thomas were playing hooky together as they both seem to have missed some key points to our legal history.

Another contradiction to his rhetoric is that the founders carefully drafted the Constitution to limit government involvement in personal affairs. The founders were tired of being taxed to death, nor did they want to have their guns taken away, their religious rights diminished, etc., etc., etc., etc. If you want rights taken away, Obama is your man and I have 4 words for you ... "Employee Free Choice Act," read it, understand it, and watch the Democratic congress pass it by Valentines day. If that happens, 6.1% unemployment will be a thing of the past as blue collar work leaves America faster that than you can say “Oprah.” 

He may be the president elect of America but that does not make him my president. Now to be fair, I do hope he is every bit as successful as most Americans thinks he can be. If he is, that means he has proven me wrong which would be a great thing for all Americans.

[RiversideGator]

Dissent is an essential aspect of the American political system. Have at it.

It is the "you are either with us, or you're against us,"  or the "if you don't like the president/ praise the government/wear a flag pin/or say the pledge/etc, then you are not patriotic" attitude that most betrays the American commitment to free speech.

I believe the phrase was "you are either with us or you are with the terrorists" and you are therefore using it out of context.

I don't have to like what you say--and believe me, most of the time I do not--but I will defend your right to say it. I would argue, however, that dissent in this forum is most effective when it is well reasoned, deftly and logically argued, and civil in tone.

Will do.   

[David]

Hey what's with all the president-elect bashing? It's very un-american.

Only the daily show can only sum up the past few days events with a single quote:

"Sarah Palin was tagged and released back into the wild" ahhhh, so soothing on the ears.

Don't hate on your president-elect people, that means you're a terrorist.

According to the Democrats circa 2005, dissent is patriotic.  So, I am just being very patriotic.   
http://www.cafepress.com/1stamendzone

Nope. According to republicans anytime they're in power, questioning your leader means you're unamerican and you're an evil doer.

Stop being a terrorist and support your president sir.

[JaxByDefault]

I am not sure he is even qualified to be an attorney.

I abhor the idea of test for bar admission based on legal philosophy. Whose do we use -- mine or yours? Who decides if originalism, letterism, or living constitutionalism carries the day?

Differences in legal philosophy have existed since the era of the founders. They continue today. I find Scalia's school of constitutional interpretation lacking in many ways, but I do not think his adherence to originalism mitigates his competence as an attorney. I vehemently disagree with his interpretation of many constitutional provisions, but I assume that as a justice and a legal scholar he sincerely loves the constitution.

Obama will have to swear a second oath to uphold the constitution when he is sworn into office. In all, I have confidence that he will uphold the constitution better than his predecessor's early administration and the 2001-era legislature.