Obama: Unfairly attacked, or business as usual?

I was sent this link, which also links to another article. Here they are:

From The Spectator, in the UK:

America -- what have you done?

From The Washington Post, in the USA:

The Fierce Urgency of Pork

From reading those two articles, it sounds like everything is business as usual. The same pork, the same crooked "people of power" being appointed to various positions (and subsequently being caught having not paid taxes, or basically taking bribes when they were in office), etc.

Now, to what extent is this Obama's political enemies firing up the attack machines right away, and to what extent is this business as usual in politics?

I am inclined to believe the latter, since I basically think our entire political system is broken and virtually nobody involved is even slightly worthwhile. But putting my cynicism aside for a moment, I'd be interested to hear what other people think.

I'm not sure Melanie Phillips is all that helpful, if you were trying to get a view representative of the UK. She has far more in common with conservative evangelicals in the US than she does with any other British person I've ever met or heard of.

Quote:

---

From reading those two articles, it sounds like everything is business as usual. The same pork, the same crooked "people of power" being appointed to various positions (and subsequently being caught having not paid taxes, or basically taking bribes when they were in office), etc.

---

I was surprised with the seemingly weak vetting of Tom Daschle and others. And this early on too. It's not a good sign, considering how hard the Dems grilled the McCain team over vetting Palin.

I don't even understand why they'd bother with Tom Daschle . I mean talk about an old guard symbol of the weak as hell Democratic party of the 90s and early 2000s. The guy was minority leader and got beat in a straight up election. That's pathetic. What does a washed up chump like Daschle have to offer anyway?

I met Daschle a few times when I was in college. My rowing coach was his chief legislative aid. The guy was a total asshole... actually, both of them were: my coach AND the senator. But Daschle also came off as a total sleaze.

An attack is only unfair if the charges are innaccurate. If the people in power are doing things the public wouldn't approve of, it's the duty of the media to bring it to the public's attention.

That being said, the articles linked don't hold much credibility for me. I suspect they are at best cherry picking their facts to make Obama look as bad as possible. Additionally, there are too many insults and opinions in those articles for me to take them seriously. There is an agenda in play, and that agenda is most certainly not to present the public with unbiased fact.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leira

That being said, the articles linked don't hold much credibility for me. I suspect they are at best cherry picking their facts to make Obama look as bad as possible.

---

Well, Charles Krauthammer is a reputable journalist and the Washington Post is a left-leaning newspaper. I don't know anything about the Spectator article.

The stuff about the appointees who didn't pay their taxes and engaged in various types of payola are pretty concerning. But worse than that is simply the fact that he is appointing so many of the "old guard." If he is about change, then be about change. Bring in some fresh faces, not the same old bags that have been a negative force in the democratic part from the 70s, 80s, 90s, and early 2000s.

I think the they are very accurate. I think Obama and Democrats have over reached. Furthermore, when you start trimming through the layers of pork. You will see the root of the "DOOMSDAY SCENARIO" that Obama is pushing socialized healthcare, amongst other social policy. Quite frankly, I'm for the first time in my life scared about the direction this country is heading with Obama, Pelozi, and Dingy Harry at the Helm. This also includes info on why Dastchel was key.


Overview:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aLzfDxfbwhzs


The Pdf file of the Porkulis Bill. Please pay close attention to some of the points referenced.


http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...f:h1eh.txt.pdf

Quote:

---

Charles Krauthammer is a reputable journalist and the Washington Post is a left-leaning newspaper.

---

Left leaning (used lightly in this case) papers often have right wing commentators, and Krauthammer is a a right wing op-eder who is generally used to back GOP talking points on FOXNEWS etc. He even caused Fukuyama to leave the Necons because of Krathammer's over the top support for Bush. He's acclaimed, and well awarded, but that doesn't stop him being biased to the right.

That aside, I don't think there are many dem's I've read of who are happy with Obama's picks. Many are just plain horrified.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle
Well, Charles Krauthammer is a reputable journalist and the Washington Post is a left-leaning newspaper.

---

I don't really consider opinion based articles that tell you what to think to be journalism. I consider unbiased reporting of fact to be journalism. Perhaps my definition is too narrow, but I believe the unbiased reporting of fact to be FAR more important than some "journalist"'s rubbish opinion, and I really don't think they should be lumped together under the label of news or journalism.

Ultimately I just can't take an article that uses the term "magical mystery tour" seriously. Was Obama caught casting Charm Person on sombeody? Is Obama the mystery, or is Obama the one trying to solve the mystery? When does this tour come to Saskatchewan, if at all? The rubbish that is the second last paragraph of that article discredits the rest of the article, as far as I'm concerned.

It only maybe seems unfair because he's mostly gotten a free pass so far. We have now established an Obama baseline, things it takes to get criticized:

nominate people who owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes

put together a $800 billion spending bill that just throws money at politician's pet projects

Next 2 years should be fun.

Getting back on-topic I've heard a lot of bluster along the lines of "I'll show Obama the same respect Democrats showed Bush" which pushes me towards it being just business as usual for polititions to be verbally tearing strips of eachother. Bush does fuck all to help the victims of Katrina, yet bails out his old friends & his dad's cronies to the tune of millions of tax-dollars and there's an outcry. Obama pledges to spend tons of tax money on helping the poor, but then some of his appointees turn out to be tax cheats and there's an outcry. All that's really different is which horribly corrupt party is under the spotlight for the current term.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Khortez
Getting back on-topic I've heard a lot of bluster along the lines of "I'll show Obama the same respect Democrats showed Bush" which pushes me towards it being just business as usual for polititions to be verbally tearing strips of eachother. Bush does fuck all to help the victims of Katrina, yet bails out his old friends & his dad's cronies to the tune of millions of tax-dollars and there's an outcry. Obama pledges to spend tons of tax money on helping the poor, but then some of his appointees turn out to be tax cheats and there's an outcry. All that's really different is which horribly corrupt party is under the spotlight for the current term.

---

Yeah, that's pretty much what I think is going on. :(

But saying Bush did "fuck all" for Katrina is one of the worst examples of left media fact manipulation of the last few years. The tremendous amount of money spent on those victims (many of whom were victims thanks to their own stupidity and stubbornness) was beyond excessive.

Bush was a bad president - there is no need for people to invent wrongs.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Khortez
Obama pledges to spend tons of tax money on helping the poor, but then some of his appointees turn out to be tax cheats and there's an outcry. All that's really different is which horribly corrupt party is under the spotlight for the current term.

---

A couple of points about this, Obama's stimulus bill is suppose to stimulate the economy. If anyone has taken a chance to just flip through the pages, and read some of the language it does that, and back doors a few other policies. If Obama is truly about helping the American Citizens, then push the money into the hands of the AMERICAN PEOPLE, and not repay the bums who got ya in office. Send the pork, and all of his socialist plans to the appropriations committee for later bickering.

Please do not downplay the tax cheats. Had this happen to you or I. The IRS would garnish our wages, froze our accounts, added interest on the money owed, and even filed federal charges. I remember one year. I owed the IRS $400 dollars, and rest assured they had a bill statement to my house IMMEDIATELY after the tax deadline.

Obama is making a mockery out of himself, his grand opportunity, and the people who have put so much hope into him.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle

Bush was a bad president - there is no need for people to invent wrongs.

---

I agree 100%. There are SOME glimmers of hope that he has done. There hasn't been an foreign attack on our soil since 911. I think that's a pretty big accomplishment out of many of his screw ups.

Here's an interesting link:

Barack Obama is tired of your motherfucking shit