-
I take it you didn’t realize that he’s mocking people complaining about politicians/politics. It’s “The Protest Song.”
Obama’s campaign was never about trying to fill in the blanks for such people — it was about working realistically toward things they protest about. In fact — he angered these same people when he said we had stop fighting those some old battles — meaning using the tactics that some folks oddly keep demanding from him.
I’d like to buy the world a coke — too — but it’s hard enough to keep myself supplied with coke. I could go on TV singing about how much I’d like to buy the world a coke — and maybe the world would feel just as refreshed as if I actually knew how to buy them all a coke — but I don’t know. When I want a coke — somebody telling me they want me to have one doesn’t satisfy my thirst for a coke at all.
So that would be you. We need to strengthen the unions! All we gotta do is…mumble, hum, blah, blah, blah…sing a Bob Dylan song!
So — keep singing! If you sing loud enough — surely that change is gonna come!
That song is the equivalent of RRB’s favorite one worder mocking liberals — kumbaya.
We’re trying to be realistic — not make you feel good.
-
“We’re trying to be realistic — not make you feel good. ”
Funny thing. It seems to me, and many others, that Obama ran on mostly empty rhetoric. HE sold “feel good”, change “we can believe in”, etc.
And he’s failing. By trying to be everything to everybody, he’s fast becoming nothing to everybody – except to the unquestioning faithful.
You think that change can be achieved with the “usual suspects”, and that the current potus is a “special one”. I don’t think that the “usual suspects” are going to change anything because they’re hunky dory where we are right now. And the “special one” is increasingly being shown to be someone particularly adept at reading the speeches of a Starbucks geek on his dual teleprompters.
Sorry, I don’t have faith.
And the song was right on – lots of nice feeling, no content – the ideal tune for our new dem potus.
-
Of course, I don’t have that special insight that you claim to have, to differentiate between when he says what he means and when he’s being pragmatic. And I don’t have the seed within me that lets me know what he’s really all about, even when he says the opposite and does something totally other.
For you he seems to be incapable of doing wrong. He’s for something, you agree, and when he changes his mind, you automatically forgive him and understand his “deeper motives”.
I thought we’d elected a potus, not a pope or a messiah.
-
What you call the “unquestioning faithful” are more likely people who heard and actually UNDERSTOOD what he was saying.
And no — he was never trying to be everything to everybody — that’s ridiculous. At best — you can be something to everybody and only nothing to people who insist you be everything they want you to be or nothing at tall.
Haven’t I always said I wanted to see “answers” that were inclusive of as many concerns as possible? If you thought that meant inclusive of only your concerns — then that was your mistake because I certainly never said anything to suggest that I was only including your concerns and leaving out those of other folks. The same thing goes for Obama. Did he tell you he intended to address anything exactly the way you think it should be addressed? No — he sure didn’t. So — him not doing so is hardly a failure to follow through on ideas that were figments of you and your BFFs’ imaginations.
How could I be disappointed in not getting specific answers when I wasn’t looking for any? I was looking for a “specific” approach — an inclusive and realistic approach — and that’s what I got. For anybody who didn’t know that what they were voting for was an inclusive and realistic approach — that’s their bad because I didn’t have access to any information that wasn’t available to them. It was there for them to see just as it was for me.
There was a message for you in all the many times you asked people to comment on what the left’s “ideology” should be and you got few responses. There was something telling in the fact that in all these years — you never really offered any details on this desired ideology yourself.
So — yeah — the song is about you. We want politicians to do X and we want everybody to eat and we want the rich to stop getting so fat off the backs of the poor and we want world peace and we could do all that if people just listen to you and me and all we gotta do is…mumble, hum, blah, blah, blah…sing a Bob Dylan song!
-
“If you thought that meant inclusive of only your concerns — then that was your mistake…”
Exactly. If Obama’s not Alvy’s puppet, then he’s wrong (even when he’s right).
Frankly, I’m getting sick of it.
Post ANY accomplishment over the past year and Alvy will find fault with it.
He’s not “pro” anything, he’s “anti-Obama”.
He wants the Democrats to be a regional rump party of the “liberal” Northeast and California. IOW, he wants the GOP back in power. He misses Bush. That astounds me.
-
“He wants the Democrats to be a regional rump party of the “liberal” Northeast and California. IOW, he wants the GOP back in power. He misses Bush. That astounds me. ”
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,699677,00.html
Why not, when we’re in Dubya’s 3rd term?
-
Wow!
You’ve officially jumped the shark, fallen over the edge, lost it.
It’s possible that this blog has jumped the shark. The old titty board was a place where the truth mattered. Here, it’s just “who can we bash? the party in power?”
I’m not an anarchist, and I don’t expect perfection. If politics is the art of the possible, then voting is an act of optimism. I don’t like associating with pessimists.
Are you familiar with the concept of a “hostile witness” in court proceedings? It’s when a lawyer (for either side) calls a witness they expect to benefit their case, and realizes that witness is wholly in the other side’s camp. We may have “broken bread”, as you like to say, but you are now a “hostile witness”. You remind me more of “he who must not be named” than an ally. Your constant attacks are more reminiscent of Oily Titz or a teabagger than a “progressive”. You don’t want to do the hard work of Democracy, you want to tear everything down.
We’re not in “Dubya’s 3rd term”, regardless of what Daniel Ellsberg says in a der Spiegel interview. Leaking the Pentagon Papers in the 70s does not equate to “all knowing, all seeing God-like knowledge of current politics”. If Dubya (or McCain, or Pawlenty, or…) were in office we wouldn’t even be talking about health care or finance reform, no one in government would think there’s a chance that we’ll ever pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan.
As a Senator, Obama voted well “to the left” of any position Dubya ever took and well “to the left” of our current congress. These distractions, often accompanied by over-the-top rhetoric like “Dubya’s 3rd term”, are taking everyone’s eye off the brass ring, and I intend to stop it.
You can live in your utopic dream world, but I’m going to stay right here, in reality.
-
-
-
-
Alvy, you remind me more of a teabagger every day.
For one thing, Obama’s not “failing”. Only in your sick “I’m right that he’s bad and by God I’m gonna prove it” mind.
For another, you need to stop ascribing motives and thoughts to other people. If you’re typing “you think” you’re typing a straw man. I’m not going to waste my time with those, any more. I don’t blame peen for not doing so, either.
Finally, you’re going to have to link me up with anyone who posts here proclaiming Obama is the messiah, or that they know they’re going to agree with him 100% of the time now and forever, or your shitty “special one” comments are going to be treated with the same respect I’d treat any other teabagger idiot statement; none whatsoever.
-
Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://www.timbuk3.com/discuss/wp-trackback.php?p=3424