How's Obama Doing?

[Michael]

Okay, we're past the 100 day honeymoon period when I think it is just foolish to make substantive criticisms of the new Administration. Now it is six months past the election and we've all had a chance to see what Obama is up to and how he's going to approach some of the problems on the table.

So what do you think? Is Obama meeting your expectations? If not, why not? Is he doing okay? What could he be doing better?

Please keep in mind that a deaf, dumb and blind donkey would look good when compared to the former holder of the office, so lets keep things in perspective here.

[wphelan]

I'd be inclined to vote for the 'lousy' option, except for the part about wanting George Bush back. In the meantime I will abstain. I haven't seen any significant change in our lousy foreign policy. I disliked Obama's bailout package as much as Bush's 'stimulus.' Obama is hell bent on reforming health care this year, and not only do I dislike the plan, I think the timing is terrible. I don't see any reason the budget situation will improve.

On the plus side, he's a White Sox fan and a Bears fan, but that's not going to get him very far.

[dilettante]

I'm going with a hesitant "Pretty Good." "Could be better" was tempting, but I'm not sure enough stuff has played out to make that judgment yet. I'm quite curious to see how things play out in replacing Souter on the Supreme Court; Obama's comments about "empathy" distress me a little bit.

On another note, that poll does look remarkably biased (though I suspect unintentionally, since Michael created this thread) with that George Bush comment in there; as it stands the only way to be strongly critical of Obama is to be laudatory of Bush. That's hardly fair.

[Evangeline]

Pretty good I say. It would be excellent, but for a few constitutional issues....so sad.

[Margot]

During the campaign I was furious at Obama for about a trillion different reasons (continuation of the Faith Based Initiative and FISA were the two biggies). I wrote letters to him, to his campaign, to everyone I could think of about exactly what he was doing wrong. I felt like he had failed us, and was becoming more and more like John McCain(=Bush=Cheney=Devil incarnate) every day. Yet I found myself in a lesser-of-two-evils situation and wound up campaigning for him: *Bang Bang Bang* "Hi, have you heard the good news?!"

I don't see him that way any more.* Yes, he's still making compromises, and that sucks the balls of whatever vicious metaphorical beast I feel so inclined to ascribe to the situation. However, and I know that this may be pure and utter conjecture on my part, he's making up for it. He's laying the groundwork for a lot of changes that I approve of. He knew EXACTLY what he was doing on the National Day of Prayer. It's those things that are getting me. Yeah, he has honored so many of his campaign promises (but that's like being excited over graduating High School. Good job, asshole, you did the bare minimum. You did exactly what you were expected to). It's what he's doing on top of all of his promises that get me.

I know that this is going to sound idealistic and naive, but while he's a politician I also think he actually has the well-being of regular citizens (Joe Sixpack!) in mind. I mean, what other reason is there for things like the White House Council on Women and Girls? We got along fine without it before, why give a shit now? Even if this is nothing more than cogs in a political machine, I think I like what this beast is being built to do.


*I reserve the right to be furious at him at any future point on finding it necessary and/or find myself in an extremely belligerent mood.

[aaronssongs]

Okay, we're past the 100 day honeymoon period when I think it is just foolish to make substantive criticisms of the new Administration. Now it is six months past the election and we've all had a chance to see what Obama is up to and how he's going to approach some of the problems on the table.

So what do you think? Is Obama meeting your expectations? If not, why not? Is he doing okay? What could he be doing better?

Please keep in mind that a deaf, dumb and blind donkey would look good when compared to the former holder of the office, so lets keep things in perspective here.

Hi forum...this is my second post, being new here.
I'm an "old-schooler". I was 8 years old, when I watched JFK give his inaugural speech, and it resonated with me, somehow. So, 2 years later, I cried long and hard, when he was assassinated. But I remember "Camelot".
This all seems strangely "Camelot-ish", romantic, and for lack of a better word, "hopeful".
I think Obama is fresh air. I'm not 100 % happy with 100 % of the things he's done. I think he should have been more hands on with Geithner, tougher with N. Korea and Iran, more proactive in pursuing a case against the former administrations' wrongdoings, and stoic about his choice to replace Souter. Other than that, I think he has been brilliant, steady, cool, calm and collected. It's fascinating to watch.

[Americano]

I'm very disappointed with what seems to be a continuation of long-standing US ME and Asian foreign policy, signaling to me the military industrial complex is still fully in charge.

For the rest of it I view current administration as inheriting enormous economic and social problems with little hope of resolution in the near future.
About all it can do is put band aids on the economic problems for a limited cushion effect while watching the social problems (such as highest per-capita incarceration rates in the developed world) continue unabated and fueled by economic decline.

[Dominick]

I've decided I'm not able to vote. The options are either too congratulatory or a bit silly (GWB and all).
People, especially Europeans, called me a cynic when I said "Remember, he's an American politician, the foreign policies will not fundamentally change". And they haven't or won't, will they ? As for local American issues, I can't really judge that, nor should I.

And I'm not going to forget that Obama was chest beating towards Pakistan during his campaign no less than GWB did towards Iraq . The chance that we'll all have to say "That's another fine mess you got us into, Obbie" is still real.

[Americano]

I've decided I'm not able to vote. The options are either too congratulatory or a bit silly (GWB and all).
People, especially Europeans, called me a cynic when I said "Remember, he's an American politician, the foreign policies will not fundamentally change". And they haven't or won't, will they ? As for local American issues, I can't really judge that, nor should I.

And I'm not going to forget that Obama was chest beating towards Pakistan during his campaign no less than GWB did towards Iraq . The chance that we'll all have to say "That's another fine mess you got us into, Obbie" is still real.

Is Obbie a European word for Ollie?

[Michael]

Is Obbie a European word for Ollie?
I think he's substituting Obbie to represent Obama there.

[Americano]

I think he's substituting Obbie to represent Obama there.

Ahh, thanks.

[Dominick]

I think he's substituting Obbie to represent Obama there.
Indeedy .

[Michael]

Overall, I'm not very pleased at all with Obama's performance. I think he looks good ONLY in comparison with G.W. Bush's Administration.

On his own merits, it seems like he's failed on every important issue he campaigned on or is in the process of backtracking.

And while I'm a big proponent of a universal healthcare initiative, I think Obama is a fool to push for it this year. I certainly do not support the idea at the expense of caving to the Republicans on torture, Gitmo, rendition and the national security defense in lawsuits.

And I certainly don't support Obama's policies on the economy at all. He's approaching this issue from 'inside the beltway' - meaning like a good toady of Wall Street. I think he's made a bad situation worse. And five years down the road, the moral hazards that Obama has rewarded so generously will be back with a vengence. Capitalists are no fools and they know a good milk-cow when they find one. Profits are pretty regardless of whether they come as a gift from the taxpayer or from actual returns on investment. Wall Street doesn't care where the profits come from at all.

Obama hasn't moved an inch on addressing the massive regulatory failure of the financial regulatory apparatus. Indeed, Obama has promoted or rewarded many of the people who are most to blame for involvement in that regulatory failure (Bernake and Summers in particular). And all of Obama's policies with respect to Wall Street have apparently one goal only - restoration of the previous bubble-driven economy.

Like Dominick, I'm horrified by Obama's rhetoric on Pakistan and his consistently aggressive position there.

So overall, I just don't see much to be enthusiastic about other than the fact that he's not GW Bush. I'm just not a fan of "Bush-lite" which is what it seems we are getting from Obama. Better diction, better speaker, but a game that is way too similar for my liking.

[The Drunk Guy]

I voted for him for two reasons:
1) A change in foreign policy and the "War of Terror"
2) Economic recovery

He has failed those both. Bombing Pakistan was stupid. Gitmo is shitting on his face. The bailouts filled the pockets of the already filthy rich. GM cars still aren't in my price range.

Also, universal healthcare looks disastrously silly compared to the massive hole he dug for the bailouts and black folks still get called "******s." Not the results I expected.

Moderator's Note: This forum does not permit usage of that term.

[aaronssongs]

I voted for him for two reasons:
1) A change in foreign policy and the "War of Terror"
2) Economic recovery

He has failed those both. Bombing Pakistan was stupid. Gitmo is shitting on his face. The bailouts filled the pockets of the already filthy rich. GM cars still aren't in my price range.

Also, universal healthcare looks disastrously silly compared to the massive hole he dug for the bailouts and black folks still get called "******s." Not the results I expected.
Uh, drunk guy....I just left a forum because folks were determined to write out the n-word..
Could you please refrain from doing that, as I find that the most offensive thing one can post publicly, IMHO????

[The Drunk Guy]

Uh, drunk guy....I just left a forum because folks were determined to write out the n-word..
Could you please refrain from doing that, as I find that the most offensive thing one can post publicly, IMHO???? Sorry that that offends you. I'm just not one for censorship. "N-word" just seems elementary to me. I take my words seriously and sometimes spend twenty minutes debating a three sentence post.

The reason I choose to write that word out is to convey the gravity of the word. "N-word" conveys, to me, a sense of censorship and hand-holding. I like it here at DWF because we, as a majority, are adults who realize the true effects of situations and their outcomes. To spell out a very real word is to point out the levity of it's power.

That said, I recommend that you look at the usage of the word rather than the word's existence. I used it to point out that racism, and the power of that word, still exist in the corrupt and defunct form that they were created in. Others, however, will use words to attack members of a race in order to inflate the artificial power of their own race. The usage can be very defining of the posters intent.

[partofme]

Sorry that that offends you. I'm just not one for censorship. "N-word" just seems elementary to me. I take my words seriously and sometimes spend twenty minutes debating a three sentence post.

The reason I choose to write that word out is to convey the gravity of the word. "N-word" conveys, to me, a sense of censorship and hand-holding. I like it here at DWF because we, as a majority, are adults who realize the true effects of situations and their outcomes. To spell out a very real word is to point out the levity of it's power.

That said, I recommend that you look at the usage of the word rather than the word's existence. I used it to point out that racism, and the power of that word, still exist in the corrupt and defunct form that they were created in. Others, however, will use words to attack members of a race in order to inflate the artificial power of their own race. The usage can be very defining of the posters intent.

I subscribe to the George Carlin outlook on words. They are meaningless on their own. It's the context that matters.

[aaronssongs]

Sorry that that offends you. I'm just not one for censorship. "N-word" just seems elementary to me. I take my words seriously and sometimes spend twenty minutes debating a three sentence post.

The reason I choose to write that word out is to convey the gravity of the word. "N-word" conveys, to me, a sense of censorship and hand-holding. I like it here at DWF because we, as a majority, are adults who realize the true effects of situations and their outcomes. To spell out a very real word is to point out the levity of it's power.

That said, I recommend that you look at the usage of the word rather than the word's existence. I used it to point out that racism, and the power of that word, still exist in the corrupt and defunct form that they were created in. Others, however, will use words to attack members of a race in order to inflate the artificial power of their own race. The usage can be very defining of the posters intent.


That is precisely the same bullshit defense that was used at the forum I left. Seems to me that if someone was offended by something that I said, I would hardly defend myself in continuing the offense. If you cannot abide me, I will go elsewhere. I have my pride and standards, as well. Just let me know, if it's more important to you to say whatever, unabated, or to choose to not offend others...the onus is hardly on me. It's racist in any context.

[Evangeline]

I think we can agree that if someone is offended by an offensive word we should respect that, and not use it.

No?

[Dominick]

That is precisely the same bullshit defense that was used at the forum I left. Seems to me that if someone was offended by something that I said, I would hardly defend myself in continuing the offense. If you cannot abide me, I will go elsewhere. I have my pride and standards, as well. Just let me know, if it's more important to you to say whatever, unabated, or to choose to not offend others...the onus is hardly on me. It's racist in any context.

I think we can agree that if someone is offended by an offensive word we should respect that, and not use it.

No?
We're currently discussing the policy regarding issues like this.

[The Drunk Guy]

That is precisely the same bullshit defense that was used at the forum I left. Seems to me that if someone was offended by something that I said, I would hardly defend myself in continuing the offense. If you cannot abide me, I will go elsewhere. I have my pride and standards, as well. Just let me know, if it's more important to you to say whatever, unabated, or to choose to not offend others...the onus is hardly on me. It's racist in any context.
Well, now you've offended me by calling me a racist. Guess we're at an impasse. :p

[The Drunk Girl]

That is precisely the same bullshit defense that was used at the forum I left. Seems to me that if someone was offended by something that I said, I would hardly defend myself in continuing the offense. If you cannot abide me, I will go elsewhere. I have my pride and standards, as well. Just let me know, if it's more important to you to say whatever, unabated, or to choose to not offend others...the onus is hardly on me. It's racist in any context.

I'm just curious as if you have ever referred to one of your black friends as your "*****"? I'm black as well and the word is thrown around the black community like it is nothing.

I don't think The Drunk Guy was being racist or intending to sound that way. As he said nothing has changed. And on top of blacks still being called ******s, whites are still called rednecks, anyone who is tight with their money is a "Jew", and the list goes on.

[Michael]

That is precisely the same bullshit defense that was used at the forum I left. Seems to me that if someone was offended by something that I said, I would hardly defend myself in continuing the offense. If you cannot abide me, I will go elsewhere. I have my pride and standards, as well. Just let me know, if it's more important to you to say whatever, unabated, or to choose to not offend others...the onus is hardly on me. It's racist in any context.
A new rule has been instituted that usage of the "n-word" is no longer permitted at this forum.

[Michael]

I'm just curious as if you have ever referred to one of your black friends as your "*****"? I'm black as well and the word is thrown around the black community like it is nothing.
Yes, that term is thrown around the black community, but this isn't a black community here - it is a public community where people don't really know what color your skin is unless you say so.

Similarly, that word has different meanings to different people.

I don't think The Drunk Guy was being racist or intending to sound that way. As he said nothing has changed. And on top of blacks still being called ******s, whites are still called rednecks, anyone who is tight with their money is a "Jew", and the list goes on.
I agree. In the context Drunk Guy used the term, it is clear that there was no racist intent.

But the word itself is considered offensive to a substantial number of people as its usage outside of the black community is primarily as an insult.

[Americano]

I'm just curious as if you have ever referred to one of your black friends as your "*****"? I'm black as well and the word is thrown around the black community like it is nothing.

I don't think The Drunk Guy was being racist or intending to sound that way. As he said nothing has changed. And on top of blacks still being called ******s, whites are still called rednecks, anyone who is tight with their money is a "Jew", and the list goes on.

Many rednecks bask in pride at being included in that social demographic group (I see bumper stickers proclaiming that pride) and my wife, a Jew, has no problem with being identified by her religious affiliation. Context is everything.

[aaronssongs]

I'm just curious as if you have ever referred to one of your black friends as your "*****"? I'm black as well and the word is thrown around the black community like it is nothing.

I don't think The Drunk Guy was being racist or intending to sound that way. As he said nothing has changed. And on top of blacks still being called ******s, whites are still called rednecks, anyone who is tight with their money is a "Jew", and the list goes on.

This is amazing. It's the exact same argument that was presented at the forum I left.
To answer your question....in good conscience, NO. I have referred to my black friends as "Negro" or "negroes", but never as *****, or the n-word.
I think that blacks who use the word show how little class and education they possess.....knowing full well how pervasive the use of the word is in the black community.
After the Michael Richards incident, and his subsequent apology to the African American community on the Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson radio shows, he met with comedian Paul Mooney, who, after using the word, profusely, in his comedy act, pledged publicly, to never use the word again.
I'm almost sure that The Drunk Guy, was not intentionally being "racist" or demeaning....however, it is my belief that anyone, especially anyone "non-black" using the word, is inherently racist, as the word only has negative connotations and history attached to it.
In my estimation and view, there is no other word in the English lexicon which has the significance or the gravitas, as the n-word. Not "redneck", or Jew, or any on the list you referred to.

[aaronssongs]

Well, now you've offended me by calling me a racist. Guess we're at an impasse. :p

Well, just like your intent wasn't to offend, mine was not either. But I would have been disingenuous and a coward not to point it out....and I am neither of those. In my mind it is a racial pejorative, and anyone using the term in any context automatically makes the conversation "racially charged".

[aaronssongs]

Many rednecks bask in pride at being included in that social demographic group (I see bumper stickers proclaiming that pride) and my wife, a Jew, has no problem with being identified by her religious affiliation. Context is everything.

With all due respect, the argument that "context is everything' is nothing more than rationalization.
I am a fan of America's Next Top Model...and Tyra Banks, often refers to the competing girls as "the b-word". If a girl came to her and told her she was offended by the use of that word, she couldn't very well tell that girl to "get over it"....she would have to consider that the word is, in fact, "derogatory", and the very term used to describe " a female dog", and be forced to either apologize, or to at least re-think her use of the word.
What offends is different to different people....when in doubt, ask.

[Michael]

What offends is different to different people....when in doubt, ask.
Not a bad idea that. Not always practical, but certainly a good way to eliminate most of it.

[Evangeline]

We're currently discussing the policy regarding issues like this.

I take it you're a moderator?

How come it doesn't say so, next to your name?

Who else is a mod, besides Michael, the admin?

[Michael]

I take it you're a moderator?

How come it doesn't say so, next to your name?

Who else is a mod, besides Michael, the admin?
I am the only moderator right now. Dominick is the Technical Administrator. He isn't a moderator (and doesn't want to be one), but he's a good source of information about the running of the forum if I'm not around! :)

[Evangeline]

OK thanks!

[Dominick]

I take it you're a moderator?

How come it doesn't say so, next to your name?
I'm an anarchist, I couldn't possibly publicly enforce rules :eek:
I'm the local Rasputin who concocts his evil schemes behind the curtains :sneaky: