Liars to the Right of Me, Jokers to the Left

Really? Obama is failing? Because from where I sit, he seems to be doing pretty darn well under the circumstances.

I see a lot of gratuitous reference to race here - but in all honesty, Obama's racial background had precisely nothing to do with most voters' choice to support him. He could have been any race - that's not what determined who earned the nomination. It was about policy - and it still is.

As far as policy, Obama seems to be doing pretty well. Democrats managed to get a pretty substantial piece of health care legislation passed, which is already improving access to care for millions. They also succeeded in preventing a massive depression with some timely economic stimulus, and rescued the US car industry. Democrats have also restored full funding to the Veterans' Administration, taken effective action to manage the foreclosure crisis, provided some tax relief to low income earners, and fully committed to success and eventual withdrawal in Afghanistan.

In fact, there is very little that Obama can be said to have "lied" about, if anything. In comparison to the previous administration, the current one is a vision of purity and wholesomeness.

In what sense is Obama failing? None that I can see. He is experiencing the push-back that progressive reformers always face from entrenched corporate interests. Of course his popularity has dropped since inauguration. However, Obama remains one of the most popular politicians nationally, and has been doggedly pursuing his policies in spite of complaints from both the right and the left. In reality, Obama has worked hard to embody the vision of post partisan, pragmatic progressivism that he promoted as his platform. He has been met by unprecedented levels of partisan opposition and obstruction, and in spite of this he has accomplished more than most Presidents achieve in 4 years before he has been in office for 2.

If this is failure for the Democrats, then I must have missed something...

Liar, liar: Why Obama is failing

Banning Burqas is Bad

So now, instead of a war on terror, we should start a war on Islamic fashion?

Is this really the current thinking in the shallow end of the pool?

This is an issue of the most fundamental freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution. Banning the garb of a specific religious sect with no rational justification is a frontal attack on civil liberties.

I believe each and every person on the planet should have the right to choose what they want to wear - or not to wear. Banning the burqa is not the answer.

Religious garb should not be subject to discriminatory laws. If you don’t like the burqa, don’t wear one. But grow up and face the fact that some do choose it, and show some respect for that choice.

Why Palin Will Fail - Jennifer Rubin is Right (for once)

The central message is that serious times require serious candidates.

I couldn’t agree more.

Tea Party Cancellation

This is just a simple case of a business owner defending his interests. Simon apparently has a legal right to refuse access to this property, and that right trumps the protest.

The Tea Party should be held on property that belongs to the public. The irony would only be too delicious.

Marriage for Procreation, or Recreation?

Marriage vows don’t typically say anything about children. The purpose of marriage is the union of two persons in a legal bond. Regardless of the gender of the spouses, supporting long term relationships is the proper role of the government in sanctioning marriage.

There is no special reason the government should prefer that people raise their biological children rather than adoptees. The argument on grounds of procreation is quite strained, and ultimately fails because it is clearly not reflective of the current practice of hetero marriage.

Gay marriage is not a threat to anyone, and is pretty clearly being resisted for religious reasons that have no place in public policy.

Union Renaissance?

I think it’s about time that workers got their right to organize back.

When an employer can refuse to certify a union, regardless of the workers’ decision, that’s a failure of democracy.

Card check is one thing that could very much improve the lives of lower income workers, who have been losing ground for decades now. If the Democrats can make it happen, they deserve their rewards.

Hate Speech and Conservative Vigilantism

The big problem is that so much of what passes for political discourse now depends on hyperbole. “Baby Killer” would be the recent pertinent example. Talking points and language are important.

The choice to use inflammatory, violent and hateful imagery is a conscious one, with predictable outcomes. It is possible to have civil discourse without so much frothing at the mouth, or at least without the deliberate provocation.

Violence in the service of religion or politics is a very dangerous tool. When in the service of both, it is decidedly deadly. I don’t see this dynamic as a significant part of the left wing - this violence is a conservative and reactionary response to liberal society.

So long as belief in imaginary omnipotents continues, the deranged adherents of such ideologies are likely to find cause to spread the word by the sword. The only long term solution is secular government and education.

Bumpy road for card check?

I don’t see this as any big difficulty for Democrats. Passing some version of card check is a “pro worker” bona fide that is not likely to be a net loser for the Democrats. Labor has supported the left through a long stretch of GOP governance, and they will extract a reward of some kind. Whether card check and arbitration survive in the final bill is hard to say - but labor will get a bill.

There may be some temporary setbacks in isolated elections, but success on this issue is not likely to bite the left very hard. Opposition to unions is weak because of a depressed labor market and faltering economy. Job security and stable wages are starting to look a lot more attractive to the right-to-work folks that are now standing in the unemployment line.

Sonia Sotomayor is likely to be confirmed before the end of August, and big labor will probably get their bill in time for Thanksgiving. It will be a merry xmas for the Dems.

Economic justice is still justice

Steele can frame the issue however he likes. He will still be wrong. This is about equal treatment under the law. If gays can’t marry, nobody can.

Marriage as a religious institution is not at issue here, and even if it were, homosexuals have just as much right to marry as anyone else.

Civil marriage is the institution at issue, and equal protection will eventually overturn restrictions based on the gender of the applicants. It is simply a matter of time, as the younger generations have no qualms about extending marriage rights to all. The older generations will begin to die off in large numbers in about fifteen years, and quaint restrictions on marriage will go the way of miscegenation.

If you believe in marriage, and you don’t want to “share” with homosexuals, that’s too bad. It’s a word, and it’s an idea, and it’s free to all. You can deny them their civil rights for a time, but in the long run marriage will not survive as a civil institution unless all have equal rights to it. It’s the law of the land, at the most fundamental level, being a consequence of our Constitution.

It matters not if Steele can reframe the issue - the issue has already been practically decided, and the franchise will be open to all within the next few years. Demographics are key here.

GOP retrenching

Colin Powell represents what the Republican Party could have been if it had stuck to the rule of law and properly administered the government. That opportunity was wasted, but driving him from the party is nothing but a gift to the left. He was one of the few principled and respected Republicans left - that’s why he could not endorse McCain-Palin.

Independents are the only way to win elections - if even Colin Powell cannot be accorded a conscience, then woe be to the party. It will indeed be a long road home.

GOP not entertaining enough? That's laughable...

Apparently some folks here are too close to the comedy to see that the GOP itself has become an incredibly "entertaining" organization. I don't think this is the big problem that the GOP needs to address - as many other posters noted, there is lots of entertainment being produced with a right-wing perspective.

What is lacking is any principled opposition or constructive alternative to the Democratic agenda. The GOP is not losing in virtually all demographic groups because of a lack of entertainment value. It is losing because it does not speak to the very real concerns of the citizens of the USA.

The closing paragraph of this column encapsulates the GOP confusion:

If conservatives want to win this battle, they need to put more energy into creating entertainment that strikes a responsive chord with the majority of Americans who are “sick of politics” because they don’t see how government and public policy matter to their lives. I believe that a majority of Americans, if they get a chance to see both sides of the argument presented in a way that entertains them, will come over to the conservative side in a decisive way. But conservatives have to make the effort. Right now, the left is winning the battle because they are creating entertainment — and the other side is just boring them.

Americans are "sick of politics", but not because they don't see how government and public policy matter - in fact, you have this one exactly backwards. People are sick of politics because they see precious little attention payed to governance and public policy, and far too much energy spent on divisive personal politics. A majority of Americans, when given the opportunity, have already demonstrated no desire to "come over to the conservative side in a decisive way". It is not because they are bored with the GOP. It is because the GOP has willfully and repeatedly failed to address the very real imperative to govern and manage public policy in keeping with the welfare of our nation.

Jon Stewart is not a news source for the youth of the USA solely because his show is entertaining. His show is also informative and insightful when it comes to the major policy issues of the day. The GOP has no answer to an honest debate on the issues. Focusing on the superficial has been the big problem, and will continue to be the problem, so long as the GOP fails to recognize political reality and address the very real concerns of voters.

Levity on Torture

Pardon the levity. True torture is, in fact, a serious issue. In the few instances where torture was committed — Abu Ghraib, for instance — the United States was correct in punishing the culprits. But that was an exercise of individual juvenility and cruelty, not official, state-sanctioned intelligence gathering of high-value targets.

This paragraph leads me to believe that you have not familiarized yourself with the nature of the activities carried out under Bush. The documents that are publicly available clearly show that torture was an exercise of official, state-sanctioned power, in direct violation and contravention of the law. Torture was used with official approval from the highest levels of the government, despite valid objections that it was illegal. True torture is a serious issue, and torture with direct approval from government agents demands punishment for the culprits.

We will never have a mature national discourse regarding proper interrogation and what does and does not constitute torture until we can differentiate between the two, embrace the “slippery slope” dilemmas as necessary points of contention, and move past the slanderous pastime of political posturing.

There is not a debate about what constitutes proper interrogation, and what constitutes torture. These are well established categories, which the Bush administration knowingly and wantonly violated. Claiming that the techniques are not torture is simply ex post facto justification for illegal activity. There may be some debate about the details, but there is clear evidence that torture was used under direct authorization from the Executive, and the government must be held accountable for this activity.

Tea Parties - Back to the Dark Ages?

The consequences are predictable and could be catastrophic: a collapse of faith in the leadership classes, a massive anti-intellectual uprising, the beginnings of which we may be already witnessing.

Now I understand the Tea Party movement. It is simply the advocacy movement for a return to the Dark Ages. Thanks for making that crystal clear!

Bureaucrats from here to eternity...

In the near future, a nameless bureaucrat may determine what kind of medical treatment you receive.

I hate to be the one to tell you this: they already do. They work at the HMO.

Why should I prefer a bureaucrat with a profit motive, rather than one with a public health motive?

That's the question I want a clear answer to.

Dramatic Licenses for Drivers

Driving for efficiency is really not difficult, but where are the “cars that people want to buy?” All I see is Jazz giving a trip report on his tour of Manhattan.

Hyper-milers have been refining the techniques of fuel efficiency for some time, starting with the very basic things you have noted, and rising to fairings and tailpipe modifications, along with computer tweaks and other more involved modifications.

Still, I don’t see much evidence here that this was an “Eco-Friendly Auto Show”…

Debating the Bottom Line in Health Care

The bottom line in the health care debate is that America collectively spends too much money on health care, and does not get the best care possible. A large portion of the public has not been served by the current market in health insurance, and one would expect this problem to continue under any plan that does not mandate universal coverage. Depending on employers (and hence employment) to secure health coverage is a poor model for health coverage, and it is past time that cradle to grave coverage be part of every American’s birthright. Our health system is broken, and the market is not going to fix it.

Tea Party Fever

I still don’t see any clear description of what the Tea Parties represent aside from a protest against government taxation. Meeting on tax day and using the tea party metaphor make that connection pretty clear.

Obama & Co. can’t really be faulted for spending - it is exactly what they promised to do. What the Tea Parties seem to me to represent is a frustrated fringe of the GOP that is politically disenfranchised and unable to contemplate cooperation with Obama.

Tea Parties apparently have been all about tax cuts for the rich and cutting government spending on social programs. These are not popular policies with voters. I encourage the Tea Party movement as a way to expose the shallow, naive and incomplete policy program that the GOP has been flogging since 1980.

A Tempest in a Teacup

I’m not sure where Jennifer learned the definition of “massive”. This outpouring was anything but. Take Columbus, OH for example. 7,000 show for the Tea Party - but 60,000 showed up for an Obama rally in November. The Tea Party attendees were even outnumbered by McCain turnout (10,000), which was never termed “massive”.

This was a modest protest, over-hyped and overplayed in the media, and truly nothing to get excited about unless you are part of the 24-hour news cycle.

How Dangerous is the Truth?

I’m sure you would love to have history and culture white-washed for your consumption, with no critical perspective on any aspect of our nation. What you call “revisionist” culture is really just a diversity of views being represented. Picking on the perspectives you don’t like is fine, but calling them “revisionist” and “poison” is just hyperbole.

There is an equally troubling trend to pretend that America can do no wrong, and should not be subject to criticism. This is much more troubling to me than the idea of a play or movie that calls into question American actions.

As Socrates might say, the unexamined life is not worth living. Culture is a big part of how we examine the life of our nation. “Revisionist” or not, examining our history with a critical eye is an important part of helping America fulfill her promise.

Tea Party Pooper

Have fun at the “Forth of July” event. I’m glad to see people being politically active, but not expecting these events to make any significant impact. Idaho is a very reliable state for Republicans that is moving slowly toward supporting Democrats as demographics change.

What strikes me as rather silly is pretending that there is some similarity to the original Tea Party in Boston. There is no taxation without representation to object to here, and the tax rates for most Americans have just been cut. The lack of a focus for these events is very clear - there are many different agendas represented, and the only common theme is that the GOP is out of power.

Unless the GOP can articulate a common theme, a central message, or at least a general idea of where they want to take America, there will be no impact on electoral politics from these Tea Parties.