I can understand ignoring the pundits. And I agree that Obama talks a good game a lot of the time. Frequently when I am listening to him discussing issues, I find myself nodding at his description of the problems and their antecedents. Then he gets to the conclusions, and I cannot help but marvel at the cognitive dissonance.
I agree that he wants to extend the safety net, but disagree that the things being done will have that net effect. In fact, there's a great deal of evidence building that they will have relatively near-term and extremely severe negative consequences.
Obama *does* get a lot of flack for things that legitimately are not his fault. There's no meaningful doubt that regardless of who the president was, we'd still be running major deficits at this time. Nor is there any particular way that a president right now could have prevented the continued loss of jobs. So I agree with you that a lot of the pundit and republican bashing is bogus.
What I am not understanding, still, is why, specifically, you think that he's got any interest in reducing corporate power, moving to a more sustainable consumer regime, or doing basically any of the things that you've described here as being important?
Specifically, the healthcare legislation was a *huge* boon to the health insurance and healthcare providers industries, while safeguarding the legal industry's ambulance-chasing, and is unlikely to improve any of the conditions that it was purportedly intended to alleviate. In fact, according to the medicare actuary, not a pundit, but the actual operator of medicare, the PPACA will *tripple* the growth rate of medical spending.
So I am really baffled about why you think what you think. I simply don't understand. I have enough respect for you that I don't think that you'd be proclaiming him brilliant based simply on his cadences or tone, but I am not seeing any correlation between the things that you support, and the things that Obama supports. Can you help me out with that?
I also have to say that I am utterly appalled by his divisiveness. He is *astoundingly* offensive on quite a lot of occasions, and in my view, amazingly thin-skinned.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-06-12 08:38 pm (UTC)I agree that he wants to extend the safety net, but disagree that the things being done will have that net effect. In fact, there's a great deal of evidence building that they will have relatively near-term and extremely severe negative consequences.
Obama *does* get a lot of flack for things that legitimately are not his fault. There's no meaningful doubt that regardless of who the president was, we'd still be running major deficits at this time. Nor is there any particular way that a president right now could have prevented the continued loss of jobs. So I agree with you that a lot of the pundit and republican bashing is bogus.
What I am not understanding, still, is why, specifically, you think that he's got any interest in reducing corporate power, moving to a more sustainable consumer regime, or doing basically any of the things that you've described here as being important?
Specifically, the healthcare legislation was a *huge* boon to the health insurance and healthcare providers industries, while safeguarding the legal industry's ambulance-chasing, and is unlikely to improve any of the conditions that it was purportedly intended to alleviate. In fact, according to the medicare actuary, not a pundit, but the actual operator of medicare, the PPACA will *tripple* the growth rate of medical spending.
www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/08/09/medicare-actuary-obamacare-will-triple-the-growth-rate-of-net-insurance-costs/
So I am really baffled about why you think what you think. I simply don't understand. I have enough respect for you that I don't think that you'd be proclaiming him brilliant based simply on his cadences or tone, but I am not seeing any correlation between the things that you support, and the things that Obama supports. Can you help me out with that?
I also have to say that I am utterly appalled by his divisiveness. He is *astoundingly* offensive on quite a lot of occasions, and in my view, amazingly thin-skinned.