Comments | a_priori: let me take you to your leader

a_priori

let me take you to your leader

Mar 03, 2009 22:51

( Read more... )

Comments 14

flamingjune07 March 4 2009, 04:21:21 UTC

Thank you for posting this -- this is an elegant explanation of something I had been sensing as well...

a_priori March 5 2009, 02:15:08 UTC

It's interesting, if I'm right. It makes me wonder which other apparent rookie mistakes by Obama are really extraordinarily cunning moves.

flamingjune07 March 5 2009, 05:18:10 UTC

I don't think this whole event was orchestrated or anything (that would be obviously a giant stretch of the imagination), but I thought that the mere fact that Obama had an opportunity so early on to say "I screwed up" -- or rather, that he recognized and took that opportunity so boldly and so early on in his presidency -- was pretty brilliant. It had the effect of sending a really strong signal of his departure from the Bush administration's characteristic obfuscation, at the very least.

eve_prime March 4 2009, 08:50:57 UTC

This is a very encouraging perspective. Thank you!

a_priori March 5 2009, 02:16:09 UTC

Well, whether or not it's encouraging depends on what Emanuel and Obama choose to do next, I think!

I trust them... but it's kind of scary to imagine what such sharp people might do if they got it into their heads to do untrustworthy things.

eve_prime March 5 2009, 07:50:39 UTC

Given the options of sharp vs. not sharp, and officially transparent vs. no such pretense, I'll happily go with the combination we've got.

sugar_spun March 4 2009, 09:41:33 UTC

I'm both fascinated and saddened by the Republican party's apparent implosion. Much as I want Obama to do well, I think the two-party system needs significantly more than one party and a set of independents sharing nomenclature.

a_priori March 5 2009, 02:19:07 UTC

The GOP will come back. American political analysts love to declare the death of {whichever party just lost an election} after each election. Then, 2-4 years later, the other party dies. They take turns playing Lazarus, I suppose.

I think it's inevitable that the Republicans will fight among themselves for at least the better part of this year. That's what happens when you lose an election. The question is whether or not they'll come together again next year to present a credible opposition in the mid-term elections. If they're still a mess by then, the Obama administration will be more powerful than anything we've seen in a long time.

pure_doxyk March 4 2009, 14:51:38 UTC

Yaaaayyy I *knew* if I looked long enough, I'd find something on my F-list today to make me happy. ;)

a_priori March 5 2009, 02:20:10 UTC

Which part makes you happy? GOP infighting, or evidence for Rahm Emanuel's genius?

pure_doxyk March 5 2009, 13:52:05 UTC

...Do I have to pick ONE?

flamingjune07 March 27 2009, 19:11:47 UTC

I immediately thought of this post of yours when I read this today...

a_priori March 28 2009, 02:34:37 UTC

This, from the article, was amusing

"President Obama declared war on Rush Limbaugh and his ratings went through the roof," said Media Research Center's Brent Bozell. "If that's not a magnificent backfire, I'm not sure what is."

It's not backfire! The Obama administration surely couldn't be happier. Limbaugh isn't actually any threat to them - the more powerful he gets in the Republican Party, the easier things get for the administration.

Although I don't think this is true, I nevertheless wouldn't be surprised if it were revealed that Rahm Emanuel and Rush Limbaugh planned this whole thing together. They both win.

flamingjune07 March 28 2009, 03:16:59 UTC

I think perhaps whoever wrote that little article might agree with you about it not being a backfire (and I certainly do), since they followed that quote immediately with "Democrats have been eager to paint the divisive Limbaugh as the de facto Republican leader..."