Making a silk purse out of a sows ear

[whosinpower]

Let's not forget what Obama inherited the day he took office.

A catastrophic economic crisis.

An automotive crisis unseen in modern times.

Two wars, both unwon.

An erosion of goodwill towards America that spanned the entire globe.

An erosion of civic liberties thanks to the Patriot Act.

American torture.

You know - George did not exactly give him a strong stable position to work within.

He can't turn back the clock, pretend the last 8 years never happened.

Now, there are those here and on other sites that are complaining that Obama intends to finish the job in Afghanistan. I get it. We all had high expectations of a resurgence of the golden era of America. Maybe there were those that thought this would be a big change, and it is not big enough. I get that too.

But you know....cleaning up some one elses mess is never easy. Obama did not start the Afghan war. Bush did. I strongly disagree with the position that Bush should not be prosecuted, but that is another story and it does not change the position the US finds itself in right now.

I dunno.....thinking of the horrible stinking pile of cr@p that Bush left - it is a wonder anyone would want the job. I am kinda grateful that Obama is there rather than Palin in the wings as vice. Something to think about.

[noiretextatique]

1. i know i will be voicing my gratitude that mccain is not in the white house

on thanksgiving. :scared: palin as vp is beyond frightening.

[Cleita]

3. Especially someone that close to the President

who likes to shoot things.

[noiretextatique]

7. a female version of dick cheney eom

[HopeOverFear]

2. K & R

[Avalux]

4. K&R. It's easy to forget what Bush destroyed and set in motion during those 8 years of hell.

Obama is faced with a near impossible task and I will continue to support his efforts; maybe dissagree at times but when I consider the alternative....

[mike_c]

5. and "change" was just a campaign slogan....

Hook, line, and sinker.

[jefferson_dem]

8. Of course, it was a campaign slogan.

That's normally what candidate put on bumper stickers, posters, backdrops, etc.

A brilliant one too, I might add. Without that, you just might be whining about President McCain and Vice President Phalin.

[elehhhhna]

6. okay, thank you. I needed that.

[Cha]

9. Yeah "history is not a dirty word"..

Thank you for the refresher course, whosinpower.

By Eric Alterman | November 19, 2009

Last week, Mike Allen and Jim Vandehei at Politico reported that the White House planned on making deficit reduction a centerpiece of the next State of the Union address. Allen and Vandehei called the decision “practical” saying that “Obama has spent more money on new programs in nine months than Bill Clinton did in eight years, pushing the annual deficit to $1.4 trillion. This leaves little room for big spending initiatives.” This fact is taken completely out of the context of the recession. The title of the article refers to the White House's “spending binge.” The deficits, tax cuts, and spending of the previous administration are ignored entirely.

It’s not exactly news that most members of MSM are almost purposely amnesiac. There is no greater insult to a reporter than to call his story “history.” And yet once upon a time, it was only yesterday that was old news. Nowadays, with the new neverending cable/talk-radio/blogosphere-driven news cycle, we are all supposed to have forgotten the past fifteen minutes. (There is actually a headline on the Drudge Report as I write this that the Associated Press went to the trouble of looking at the record and seeing whether any of the outrageous claims made in Sarah Palin’s memoir are true. The idea appears to be if it says so in a book, it’s wrong of a journalist to actually check the record. The (surprise, surprise) Fox News story contains no link to the AP story, further making the point that the record is really irrelevant to the story.)

So back to Obama’s “spending binge.” Even if the Politico editors are not interested in what may have happened in the past eight years to cause some of the deficits with which the Obama administration is forced to deal, we are. And here are just a couple of examples we found:

snip//

"Afganistan: The legacy of Bush’s runaway military spending and his tax cuts is doing more than just destroying the fiscal health of our government—it is also endangering our security. Look at Afghanistan. According to a recent report in The New York Times, “Some administration estimates suggest it could also cost up to $50 billion over five years to more than double the size of the Afghan army and police force, to a total of 400,000. That includes recruiting, training and equipment.”

David Broder, dean of the national press corps, has actually written that Obama’s “urgent necessity is to make a decision—whether or not it is right.” That is how far we’ve come. Never mind that six years of a failed strategy by the Bush administration, to say nothing of rushing into a catastrophic war, and busting the budget with a giveaway to the rich tax cut, should be considered in the context of the decision. “Just do something” says Broder, regardless of whether it makes sense. Learn nothing from history. Repeat our mistakes over and over, regardless of the cost in blood and treasure to our country and our soldiers. Forget not only Iraq, but Vietnam as well.

It’s hard to believe, I know, but there it is in black and white….

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x9239

[ShortnFiery]

10. Then why are we continuing to feed the BEAST that is the MIC?!?

This is wrong - he's lost me if he doesn't WITHDRAW from both nations before 2012.

[whosinpower]

12. I don't like war either

But I would think that Obama would weigh the consequences, not only of your vote, but unforeseen consequences of pulling out now.

What do you think the republicans would do? Think about that as you weigh the consequences of not voting for Obama.

Do you think they would withdraw? Do you think they would be better stewards than Obama? I completely understand your position, but am not quite sure if you understand that withdrawing now changes nothing - except it makes matters worse. That is the lot that Bush left. Because Bush never prosecuted the Afghan war the way he should have. Because Bush gave away tax cuts to the wealthy while draining away treasure to feed the wars. 2 TRILLION dollars of lost revenue just for the tax cuts - add another 2 TRILLION dollars for the wars, and you are no more secure now than you were before. Afghanistan is broken. Iraq is broken. America is flat out broke.

Obama has a monumental, almost impossible task to fulfill and you would give up on him, and in doing so, allow the republicans back into power. If he pulls out of Afghanistan, as you wish, the taliban gain control - that is a consequence that not only says America's one great deterrent, its military, is a paper tiger. He is not re elected that way either. If he stays in Afghanistan and tries to find a solution to exit peacefully, he has lost your vote and is not may not be re elected. It is a dilemma that I am sure he is weighing carefully.

[ShortnFiery]

13. Very similar arguments were made for us to stay in Vietnam. Look how that turned out? eom

[Dr Robert]

11. Obama is a master seamstress.

;)

[yurbud]

14. he could have done to Wall Street what he did to GM

and make it clear he's the boss.

[yurbud]

15. By not taking more decisive action toward some of the bad actors

he is risking the return of another Bush-like regime that will snuff out the last dying embers of our democracy.