Oct
9
-Obama apparently slept in an Holiday Inn Express…
-A prize given to those who say so little, so well…
-in the grocery business, one might say, “he’s all yak, and no stack.”
-when real peace, better living conditions, and personal freedoms don’t matter, platitudes will do…
-it was awfully racist of the IOC to deny Obama his glory. We felt sorry for him…
-doesn’t Chavez get a share of the prize, he says bad things about America also…
-Obama is to real peace, as David Letterman is to real fidelity.
2 Comments to “Obama’s Nobel”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URL for this post: http://thevirtuousrepublic.com/blog/wp-trackback.php?p=4483
Well, it’s nice to see the drug-addelled gasbag finally admit whose side he’s on…”I agree with the Taliban and Iran.”
Too bad wingnuttia only believes in patriotism when they’re in power. How many of us on the left celebrated when President Bush failed to win the Olympics for NYC? How many of us on the left wrote opinion pieces encouraging a military coup as a means to deal with “the problem” in the White House? That kind of rhetoric sounds awfully America-hating to me.
I was initially surprised when Obama won the prize. On reflection though, it shouldn’t have been too shocking. Let’s see, the previous administration continually ignored the international community and mocked it (John Bolton as U.N. Ambassador? Are you kidding?), pursued policies of American hegemony/imperialism, instinctively preferred military threats or conflict over diplomacy, and destroyed America’s credibility and moral standing throughout the world. Was that the “real peace” that you spoke of? Anyone pursuing slightly different policies no doubt would be welcomed with open arms by the international community. Gee, I wonder why Bush couldn’t appear virtually anywhere in world without massive protests in the streets, but Obama’s popularity level exceeds that of many of those same nations own leaders. Is it because he’s some kind of peacenik? Hardly, given that Obama has advocated going after the our real enemies (Al Qaeda and the Taliban) through a build-up of troops in Afghanistan.
I must also say it’s reassuring to see a President and Congress committed to honesty, reestablishment of civil liberties, and economic recovery. It’s true, not enough of the stimulus package went to infrastructure projects. Approximately 40 percent was wasted on tax cuts designed to win the support of “moderate” Republicans and blue-dog Democrats. Did it increase the deficit? Sure, in the short term. On the other hand, we didn’t try to hide it by budgetary slight of hand (as was done with the tax cuts or war spending under Bush). Is the package a failure? No. Such “conservatives” as Moody’s and Bush’s own Assistant Secretary of the Treasury have observed that without the stimulus has stabilized the economy. Without it, we would be looking at negative economic growth (in reality, we have slight positive growth) and much larger job losses (the current estimates by these conservatives are that the stimulus with create 2.5 million jobs). Most of the money hasn’t even gone out yet, and it’s already have a positive effect.
The long-term economic and deficit situation would also be helped by health care reform. The CBO confirmed last week substantial saving with the Baucus Plan, and the savings would be even greater with the addition of a vibrant public option. Imagine that, government regulation forcing the for-profit health insurance companies to stop screwing us, a public option forcing them to compete (remember how conservatives used to love talking about choice and competition?) and a long term reduction in the deficit. Sounds like making people’s lives better. Oh well, I guess we could scrap all that and wallow in platitudes like “government isn’t the solution to our problems, government is the problem.”
Oh, BTW, Happy Birthday!
Correction: The sentence defending the stimulus should read: such “liberals” as Moody’s and Bush’s own Assistant Secretary of the Treasury agree that the stimulus has helped the economy.