Posted on 01/21/2010 12:13:37 PM PST by Schnucki
The Democrats’ disastrous defeat in Massachusetts will allow the President’s opponents to claim credit for the recovery
Why can the Left never win? Around the world, the election of Barack Obama inspired the hope of a new era of progressive politics, coming as it did after the spectacular failures of extreme conservatism under George W. Bush. But on Tuesday night, only one year after his inauguration, these hopes were suddenly destroyed.
The crushing defeat of the Democratic candidate to succeed the late Edward Kennedy as senator for Massachusetts, does not only wreck Mr Obama’s hopes of signing a health reform Bill this month, the main objective of his first year as President; far worse, as Massachusetts is the most solidly Democratic state in the union, it portends defeat for Democrats all across America in November’s congressional elections.
Massachusetts was the only state to vote Democrat in the most lopsided election in US history, the 1972 re-election of Richard Nixon. So the import of this defeat is undeniable even to the most Panglossian of left-wingers: if the Democrats could not hold Teddy Kennedy’s seat, no Democratic legislator anywhere in the US is secure.
The implication is that America and the world must now prepare for the longest lame-duck presidency in history, lasting at least until the 2012 election and, perhaps, until 2016 in the quite possible event that Mr Obama is re-elected alongside a Republican Congress determined to obstruct every idea that he represents. At a time when the need for effective government within America and the challenges for US global leadership are greater than for a generation, this is a potential disaster.
There is one hope. Left-of-centre parties the world over might learn from this electoral disaster. They might start to understand why conservatism has an inbuilt advantage in all
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
The “...failures of extreme conservatism under George W. Bush...” Unbelievable. Er, that is INCREDIBLE, not unbelievable. The left just lives in its own little universe.
The liberals have devolved into puking and mewling since “blame Bush” didn’t work in MA.
This is one funny article...I bet the guy drafted it in crayon! If he thinks GWB was extremely conservative, does that make Obama center right in his eyes?
Talk about a looney...........
Why can the Left never win?" And you need to ask after 13 years of Labour!
The Left "knows best" and seeks to promote and impose its own narrow, absurd views and needs with no interest in the needs and wishes of the People. It is a destroyer not a builder, a recycler of the tried and failed, a vehicle for the grubby ambitions of surly, not very clever, self-serving elitists. It works to limit freedom and liberty because doing the "right" thing cannot be left to the ponderous process of democracy, individual endeavor and "stupidity" of the People.
The inevitable result is authoritarian regime - viz, USSR, China, N Korea, Cuba, European Union. That is why.
Sure but then someone may have started looking into HOW MUCH THE BANKERS PAID HIM OFF STARTING AS A JUNIOR SENATOR. Now we know why obama said the bailouts were his most important accomplishment.
In his year-end interviews with friendly news outlets like The Washington Post and National Public Radio, President Obama had a curious choice for his biggest accomplishment of the year: the bailout of the financial sector.
While the Troubled Asset Relief Program is surely the least popular initiative of President George W. Bush among conservatives, it is also widely reviled by many liberals and moderates.
Read more at the Washington Examiner:
http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/09/21/baracks-wall-street-problem-is-now-americas/
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/07/jpmorgan-ceo-jamie-dimon-donat.html
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31234647/obamas_big_sellout
Go back and see my reply
Republicans could still blow it.
Instead, Mr Obama effectively exonerated the Bush Administration by accepting personal responsibility for the crisis from the moment of his inauguration.
Referring to the promise of 8% unemployment? Obama is still trying to blame Bush for everything. The Dem talking heads on TV all repeat the talking point that Brown won in Mass. because voters were still angry at Republicans. They probably are, but that would not be a sane reason to vote for a tax-cutting, anti-jihadist, 41st vote to kill healthcare and a lot more.
What's this "extreme conservatism" you speak of?
C'mon, surely you'd acknowledge: anyone to the right of a staunch conservative like Arlen Specter has to be an extreme conservative.
My first thought after first read: Anatole’s on crack. Surely not. But I wish he’d get his facts straight: IIRC Bush warned about FAnnie Mae and Freddie Mac years ago but Barney Frank blocked it. Is that right?
Back a year ago (December 08 -January 2009) I warned many liberals here that within 6-8 months the voters won’t want to hear about Bush excuses anymore, that the Bush party was over. I swear they all told me they would blame him for eight years.
You can imagine how much fun I had wednesday morning. One of them, the worst said “I lost faith in America. Why are voters so impatient?”. I replied, “wait till November”
RE :”Go back and see my reply”
This thread? Which comment? #24?
RE :”While the Troubled Asset Relief Program is surely the least popular initiative of President George W. Bush among conservatives, it is also widely reviled by many liberals and moderates”
Exactly and Obama became the owner of bailouts and unemployment, after beating up Bush for the same.
other than leftist solidarity, what possible reason could an English newspaper have for wanting the U.S. to adopt Obamacare.
Seems like he hit the banks simultaneously with their earnings announcements. It was a deliberate move to take down their shares and the markets.
RE :”Republicans could still blow it. “
It will be near impossible to blow it from now till November. But after November it’s another game, as with 2013.
A load of horse apples otherwise, but let us hope this part comes true (except for the "quite possible" fantasy):
The implication is that America and the world must now prepare for the longest lame-duck presidency in history, lasting at least until the 2012 election and, perhaps, until 2016 in the quite possible event that Mr Obama is re-elected alongside a Republican Congress determined to obstruct every idea that he represents
“what possible reason could an English newspaper have for wanting the U.S. to adopt Obamacare.”
So we can suffer the same fates as they do.
Jealousy.
They’d rather bring us down to their level than work to raise up themselves.
The pampas British accent just drips off this article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.