In honor of Thanksgiving, I thought it would be fun for everyone to list their top 3 political turkeys of 2009. So in the comments, list 3 people (or groups), and why they made your "political turkey" list. Here's my top three (or 4), in ascending order:
3. Mark Sanford/Sarah Palin
What? 2 Republicans made Devin's list? Yes folks, that's right. Gov. Mark Sanford is a no-brainer. His political star burned out just about as quick as it caught fire. While lying to his staff earlier this summer about going on a supposed hike on the Appalachian trail, Sanford really was meeting up with his Argentine "soul mate." Sanford walked out on his wife, his four sons, and his state. Sadly, it seems like sex scandals are the only bipartisan phenomena in politics these days.
While she has stayed true to her husband and family, Palin makes my list for quitting right in the middle of her term and for her incredibly embarrassing exit press conference. I think this move will come back to haunt her if she decides to throw her hat in the ring for 2012. I like Palin, but she needs to spend less time selling books, magazine covers, doing interviews, and playing the victim, and more time sharpening her political teeth - something a governor of a state does.
2. Nancy Pelosi
Ah yes, Queen Nancy, Speaker of the House. She makes the list for breaking her promise to post huge spending initiatives online like the so-called stimulus package and now the health care reform bill at least 72 hours before voting to give not only the public time to read it, but those who actually vote on it as well! She also makes the list for accusing the CIA of lying to her and actually getting away with that kind of an accusation with no consequences or investigations. I wouldn't be surprised if she made Joe Biden's list for jumping up and down like a jack-in-the-box everytime Obama delivers a "prime time" speech either!
1. Barack Hussein Obama
Mmmm, mmmm, mmmmm. My reasons for putting him #1 on this list are well-documented on this blog. You name it, anything from the endless campaign promises broken (I don't feel that betrayed - I didn't vote for him), to cramming unpopular policies down our throats, to tripling the national deficit, to incessantly hijacking the airwaves and tv channels, to repeatedly bowing to foreign rulers, to nationalizing the auto industry, to leaving out troops and generals hanging on Afghanistan, to arguing with dictionaries about definitions, to perpetuating the "too big to fail" lie, and the list goes on and on. While there have been some decisions he's made that I'm ok with, they have been very few and far between. 2012 can't come soon enough!
Happy Thanksgiving everybody.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
I like yours, but will get mine out so as not to duplicate:
4. John McCain, for calling himself a Reagan conservative, yet tacking left on most important things. We would be headed down the same path, just at an easier gait.
3. Rahm Emmanuel, for changing the tone in Washington - - for the worse.
2. Mike Huckabee, for playing the spoiler instead of playing to win.
1. Harry Reid, for not eliciting a position from the White House on health care reform, and for trying to gag the free press back home in Nevada.
Okay now mine,
3. Governor Herbert, for trying to undo a lot of the good Governor Huntsman did during his term as Utah Governor.
2. Joe Biden, for telling everyone not to travel on public transportation in order to avoid the extremely mild swine flu.
1. Sarah Palin, (sorry for the double), for providing Saturday Night Live with its best comedy in 10 years. The best part was, they quoted her almost to the word. Sarah Palin is a joke (sorry Devin,) I would rather have any Republican at the helm than Sarah Palin. I'd even take California's Governator (governor + terminator) Arnold Schwarzenegger over her any day. The thought of having her in some type of leadership position makes me sick to my stomach. She's the Paris Hilton of politics, minus the permiscuous part.
I just realized I spelled promiscuous wrong, so I got up at 3 AM to make sure everyone knows I know how to spell promiscuous.
Great stuff people, I enjoyed reading your lists. A couple things:
1. Dad, two of yours happened in 2008, but this list is for 2009. I'm curious who you would replace them with - or did the spoiler and the phony conservative just spill over to 2009 in your mind? haha.
2. Creighton, no offense taken with Sarah Palin. I agree with you about the SNL skit - it was just about word for word, which is why I called it an incredibly embarrassing press conference. However, liberals hate to admit this, but she has more executive experience than Obama. Also, she would have only been the VP, not the President. The only thing Obama was in charge of before becoming president was the Harvard Law Review for his last year of law school. This is a big part of why the thought of Obama getting elected as our chief executive made a lot of people (myself included) sick to their stomachs, another being his radical associations (Ayers, Wright et al). I credit Palin for being the only one brave enough to really call him out for those associations.
It's true, Sarah Palin is more celebrity than a true leader/executive, but the same exact thing can be said of Barack Obama. His high water mark was election night and the inauguration. It's been all downhill since then for him, as his polls demonstrate. No previous president has fallen from grace faster than Obama. His international celebrity status and lofty rhetoric may be good for getting him the Nobel Peace Prize - a complete joke - but it hasn't gotten him anywhere when it comes to real results, domestic or international.
I don't blame you for not being excited about Obama being the president. He's definitely had to learn a lot on the go. However I personally feel like the radical associations thing was way overblown by conservative talk-radio hosts. Last year I listened to hannity while I was out at work and he would mention that once every half hour at least. I also remember him saying back in march that the stock market being down to 6500 was all obama's fault. Well at 10,500 or so now I wonder what he's saying. He's definitely not perfect, but I really like a lot of the things he's done so far. And while many have criticized him for taking too long on the Afghanistan war troop increase, I'm happy he has taken the time to really make the right decision. I really wish Bush would have done the same thing before we went to Iraq. So while not perfect, I've been happy with pres. Obama. However, I totally respect that you guys don't like what he's doing. It's just funny how it's been a total flipflop with the bush haters. When was the last time we had a president everyone really liked? George Washington?
Great points. I guess everyone is entitled to their opinions, right? I respect you for sticking with your guns even though public support for Obama has dwindled (although he still has a ways to go to match Bush's dismal ratings!). Even the the loud, melodramatic political pundits, conservative and liberal, on the radio and TV have a right to an opinion.
And I think you're right about the last president that everyone really liked. It would have to be George Washington! The South probably hated Abe Lincoln for freeing the slaves, FDR certainly had many haters. It's too bad Obama hasn't been (so far anyway) the "post-partisan" president he campaigned to be. I agree with my dad here regarding Rahm Emanuel. It'd be hard being "post-partisan" when that dude is your chief of staff.
So here are my 3, not really in any particular order.
1) Barbara Boxer for her "address me as Senator" comment. Sure, she earned that title, I suppose. But so did the general. (Of course now I can't remember his name, and I'm feelinf lazy and don't want to look it up.) That was just crap.
2)For obvious reasons...Pelosi. Sorry to bite off of you, Devin. But she needs to stay in the headlines touting her brilliance until her constituents finally learn to NOT re-elect her.
1) This one is still considered political I guess and a little out-dated-Michelle Obama. She's sort of cooled off since the inaguration, so I can't hate on her too much. But what kind of comment is "this is the first time I'm really proud of my country." ??? I'm still a little chapped about that. She went with BHO to church, so she knew what Wright was preaching. She's just as guilty.
I don't see how BHO's radical associations DON'T matter or have been blown way out of proportion. So what if Hannity mentioned it every half hour? If Bush had any questionable associations like BHO's, there's NO WAY he could have gotten away with it. The left would've been calling for his head on a platter. If roles were reversed, the left would feel the same way we do. There's really no room to complain about it.
btw i love how this devolved into an Obama vs. Bush: who's worse discussion, lol.
Here are my nominees, of which I am very proud:
#1 by far...Rob Blagojevic! I know, technically the scandal started in '08, but it really got good in '09 when he faced impeachment and tried to play the victim. Plus there's the hair, or whatever you call that massive thing on top of his head.
#2 ACORN: I know some people still think they were treated unfairly with all those expose' tapes, but you gotta admit they totally set themselves up for it with child prostitution, illegal trafficking and tax-evading brothels. Considering there were multiple tapes instances and the employees didn't even bat an eye, it's hard to buy the argument that these were just a few "rogue employees." Using that excuse here is like saying everyone involved in the Enron scandals were “rogue employees” that didn’t reflect on the company at all…please! Any company that has multiple employees breaking the law as part of their job is either equally culpable or at the very least completely incompetent and negligent. Either way they deserve what they get. And now trying to play the victim, having the gall to sue Congress for redacted funding…why, that’s right out of Blagojevic’s playbook!
#3 Eric Holder: I hardly need to remind everyone about the recent move with KSM and other Gitmo detainees and his gross inability to justify it (i.e. the Lindsay Graham clip) since it was just two posts ago where we had that intense discussion. I am also thinking of his decision earlier this year to release the CIA "torture memos" for basically no reason (other than to stick it to Bush). That was just a shameless political jab in my opinion. Bottom line: the man is just incompetent.
#4 John Edwards: I know there's a lot of sex scandals on the list already, but this one was especially brutal given his wife has cancer. The whole thing with the hotel and the attempted cover-up was just disgraceful.
There were actually a bunch more I thought of but I'm going to save some for dad to replace McCain and Huckabee before I do any more.
This is actually a follow-up to the previous post in a lot of ways, but I'd like to add my thoughts to the bush-obama discussion because there are some other important differences.
Difference #1: Bush wasn't placed on a demigod-like pedestal when he was elected, and (obviously) Obama totally was. When most politicians screw up it's not really that big of a deal because we EXPECT them to lie and cheat and do/say stupid things we don't like...in other words we already hate them. But with Obama it was the exact opposite: he was supposed to be the "post-partisan," charismatic super politician who was going to fix all of Bush's mistakes and shake-up the corruption in Washington, thereby ushering in a new age of "transparency" and good will, etc. Granted, politicians make lofty promises like this all the time, but people who voted for Obama actually BELIEVED all the hype.
It reminds me of the final scene in the last Star Wars (Episode 3) where Obi-Wan is looking down at his defeated, wayward former apprentice and laments: "You were the chosen one! You were supposed to END the reign of the Sith, not JOIN them!!" Right now America's feeling like Obi-Wan, EXTREMELY bitter for having gotten our hopes up only to be BRUTALLY disappointed, ergo the extreme backlash.
Difference #2: Bush wasn't an arrogant, narcissistic elitist who lashed out at any criticism...and (again, obviously) Obama totally is. So aside from people not liking his actual policies, Obama (and many other Dems, to be fair) adds insult to injury by thumbing his nose at us when we express legitimate disapproval. Despite his shortcomings Bush wasn't like that to my knowledge, or at least not nearly to the extent Obama is.
Well I believe I made my point, but I also have a question for Creighton: you say "the radical associations thing was way overblown by conservative talk-radio hosts." Does that mean you think the fundamental concern--that Obama actually shared their radical views--has been refuted? If you do then I have two words for you: Van Jones. It's one thing to have radical associates out of political necessity, but it's another to apoint them as personal ADVISORS (i.e. "czars"). But also in general, his rhetoric abroad has painted (pre-Obama) America as the problem, deserving of the disdain felt towards us by other countries. I get your point about the high frequency of the concern, but given his record so far it almost seems justified, doesn't it?
No, not important, not justified, way overblown. And not all of us are disappointed with pres. Obama. I happen to be VERY happy with his performance so far. It is a breath of fresh air after 8 long terrible years of an idiotic war-hungry power grabbing bush administration.
And I also want to point out that these two really are not that bad. I know that might make some of you mad, but bill ayers was just a kid who took the war protest a little too far, didn't even hurt anyone. I won't use the T word on him so I can use it on guys like bin laden, ksm, etc. I've only heard a couple snippets of what wright has said but just because he's obama's pastor doesn't mean all that much to me. I've seen YouTube clips of some crazy pastor giving Sarah palin the weirdest blessing I've ever seen but no one brought that up about her (well that's not true I think I saw that on countdown actually.) I'm sticking with my guns here, not very critical and way overblown.
I also don't really know anything about van jones, other than a brief look at wikipedia. However, it was nothing close to even concern me. This reminds me of when Michael Moore made connections between bush, the Saudi family, and cheney's former company profiting huge from the war in Iraq. Accusations by the other side to attempt to destroy credibility and gain more power from their own side. I'm gonna start my own political party called the awesome sports lovers party where all sports fans are exempt from taxes. And I'm gonna make Michael Jordan my chief of staff, Brett favre my vp, and I'm bringing back dikembe mutombo and his wagging finger to be the secretary of defense. What an awesome party that would be.
War-hungry? That's funny because we were pretty safe after 9-11. I don't recall any substantial attacks on our soil. I'd rather have a war-hungry Commander-in-Chief (within reason, mind you) than a wuss that bows to every foreign Tom, Dick and Harry and goes on a global apology tour.
Now, I feel every one of my prized liberties being threatened everyday. I fear for my childrens' freedom in the very near future. I abhore various things being taught to them in school that make it ALMOST enough for me to home school them. (So much for my tax dollars in that respect.) Have you seen any of the books on BHO's approved reading list for children? I have, and there's NOTHING in them that I want to teach my kids. I've thumbed through the library's stock at the kids' school and read a few. WOW is all I can say.
I'm not in love with everything Bush did, but at least he had the guts to stand up for what he thought was right, which is more than I can say for most of the Left. We'll never have another Reagan, so I've given up all hope that this country will ever experience the prosperity it did in the 80's. Now we're all being saddled with an exhorbitant deficit that I'm not at all willing to pay but will as my obligation.
I'll agree that some pastors do some weird things. But blatantly preaching some of the things Wright did was way out of line and borderline blasphemous. Sure, Ayers was a kid, but he's still doing very similar things these days. By saying that it was blown out of proportion is just assinine. It was very relevant and still is.
By the way, if BHO was really concerned with Afghanistan while he dithered away more than 2 months, the very least he could've done was see that our troops had everything they needed in order to keep them safe. I'm not saying he should've dropped what he was doing and sent more guys. He wasn't seriously contemplating what needed to be done because he was too busy pushing his healthcare reform and playing golf. At least Bush made sure our guys were safe. Do you have any idea what it's like to have a deployed spouse with this guy running things? My husband wasn't supposed to go back to Iraq until JAN/FEB 2011. Now it's this summer to Afghanistan. He spent more than 2 months NOT doing anything about the troops over there, and now my husband is slotted to join them? That's great. Way to keep everyone safe, BHO.
Did anyone see the incredibly cheesy, super slow motion, happy music commercial with Obama frolicking in the Rose Garden, catching a football pass from Drew Brees? It was on MNF last night. So I guess Obama is the new spokesman for NFL's "Play 60" kids initiative? All I can say is "wow," that guy can't get enough of himself.
Creighton are you serious: "bill ayers was just a kid who took the war protest a little too far, didn't even hurt anyone"...?? Are...you...SERIOUS???! I guess, TECHNICALLY, if you kill someone you didn't just hurt them...? What? Not unless they die instantly.
Seriously, though, people DIED from those apparently "non-terrorist" (?) bombings, and then he had the gall to publicly say he he wished he would have "done" (i.e. KILLED) more...THE DAY AFTER 9/11!!! Sorry dude, but this guy's 100% terrorist, a fact of which he is PROUD. In a way this guy is worse than Al Qaeda (in terms of substance, not degree) because he was an American who intentionally killed fellow citizens.
Strange though that Sarah Palin blessing may have been, it had NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICS OR AMERICA. Jeremiah Wright's comments, on the other hand, were TOTALLY POLITICAL and basically anti-American. People didn't bring it up about Palin because it was absolutely irrelevant towards the campaign...the same can't be said about Wright and Obama.
The most important thing to know about Van Jones is that he's literally a self-avowed COMMUNIST as of 2003 who never publicly recanted. But also he had a penchant for saying stupid and controversial/inflammatory things and he signed the "9/11 Truther" petition and then tried to deny it.
That reflects negatively on Pres. Obama because either he didn't vet him AT ALL, or he appointed him as a "special advisor" BECAUSE of his crazy beliefs. That may be oversimplifying it a tad, but that's the general impression.
I don't know if you're still following this thread, but you didn't answer the first part of my original question about whether the fundamental concern was actually refuted. I know you think it was "overblown," but I also wonder if you think there even is one? In other words--aside from what you think about the two men--do you think President Obama agrees with their...let's say controversial views?
I'm curious I feel like your answer minimized it and made excuses for it, but does that mean that you agree with me that President Obama does in fact AGREE with Wright and Ayers (whatever your feelings about them)? And perhaps more importantly, do YOU agree with them? Did our "chickens come home to roost" on 9/11? Is this the "US-KKK of A"? Was Ayer's involvement in the Weather Underground justified? If not, why doesn't it bother you that Obama probably does agree or at least sympathize with those things?
When you say "I happen to be VERY happy with his performance so far" does that include his apology tours, bowing to other leaders, sympathizing with our enemies more than with our own troops, etc.?
My point is it's not Ayers and Wright THEMSELVES that are really the issue, it's Obama's beliefs which happen to be revealed THROUGH those associations. In other words OBAMA is the real issue because he's our President, not those two whackos.
Disclaimer on the last comment: I don't mean to get personal by questioning your patriotism or anything like that. All I really wanted to was ask whether you felt the concern was really there, not how you felt about it.
Heck, I probably wouldn't care about it either if I agreed with Obama's foreign policy. But you see for those who don't agree with his foreign policy, they see a connection between the aforementioned anti-American beliefs (suggested by those associations) and Obama's glaring weakness as a leader on the world stage.
Put in a more direct way I guess that makes it a hypothetical scenario for you: IF (in an alternate universe--in this case Bizarro World) you didn't like Obama's attitude and foreign policy now, wouldn't talk radio's obsession with Wright and Ayers seem important looking back?
Remember, when pressed during the campaign Obama CLAIMED that those associations didn't have an affect on his personal views...but why even bother IF there were no legitimate or at least important concern at issue? I hope that explains where I'm coming from: you can admit that the concern itself had merit without agreeing with it or renouncing your allegiance to the Chosen One, lol.
Post a Comment