Obama Should Listen to Putin’s Remarks About Politicians
President Obama, as we have repeatedly been assured, is a highly educated and very intelligent intellectual. It is a shame that he has to try so hard to please the masses who simply don’t understand what he means when he reads from his teleprompter.
There sure are a lot of them, and many of them don’t like anybody very much. It is a cross President Obama has to bear if he is to save the country from the tea partiers and other dissatisfied miscreants. In the spirit of Obama-like post-partisanship, and wishing to be as frank as he is, I offer these suggestions.
On February 5, Vladimir Putin, Russia’s premier, scolded party leaders about the discontent seemingly rising in parts of Russia. He did so following the biggest anti-Putin rally since he took power a decade ago. It occurred on January 30 and involved approximately ten thousand demonstrators. The rally took place in Kaliningrad, Russia’s westernmost city, where unemployment is 10.5 percent, 21.9 percent worse than the 8.2 percent national average. Premier Putin told
senior party officials they should avoid raising expectations by promising “everything all at once” only to ignore voters after election day.
“You cannot turn into promisers, who make promises only to … get into power and then spend their time solving their own personal problems … ”
* * *
Unemployment, which has grown by one-third to more than 6 million in since 2007, and big rises in prices charged by state-run monopolies are adding to discontent in many regions.
Putin told the leaders to warn voters of the consequences of voting for untried opposition parties.
United Russia must always explain that “proper and well organized leaders are always capable of solving any problems and that in the absence of such leaders, anarchy prevails,” he said.
President Obama should take lessons from him, except for the part about not promising what he can’t deliver; it’s a bit late for that. Some promises just are not meant to be kept, and some are only partially and reluctantly to be kept after half a century or so. There is no point in reminding the masses of this.
President Obama should focus instead on the bit about not voting for “untried opposition parties” such as the tea party movement. That should be easy. President Obama was at the bottom of the heap as an untried, outside-the-beltway guy when he ran for the presidency. He should know from sad, personal experience what a mess he initially made of things due solely to his inexperience. He has already come a long way. He should emphasize this; it would provide unparalleled opportunities to say again and again but with admirable humility: “Look at me.”
With Putin’s helpful guidance, President Obama could greatly assist his colleagues in the Congress who seem — but only seem — to face disheartening odds in the 2010 elections. Keep Reed, Pelosi, and the whole crew. They are extraordinarily experienced and belong to the only party ever to rise above petty politics and to do what’s best for America. As Premier Putin said, “proper and well organized leaders are always capable of solving any problems.” Obviously, that’s true. Without them, the country would sink into anarchy. The future would be far worse than the present. Just look at the lamentable history of the United States! President Obama must explain these things to the common people, in terms so simple that even they can understand.
It is wrong — simply wrong — that Sarah Palin and her idiotically misguided colleagues should be so brainlessly euphoric. They have no right to be happy! Only thirty-five percent of United States voters think a new party is needed, and forty-seven percent just say no. Not only that, their euphoria highlights the fact that they are rank amateurs. They are all preposterous.
Well there you have it; BHO gets the KGB stamp of approval. May I suggest too Obama in the interest of better relations with Russia the next time he goes, maybe he take along his shoes shine box.
Some of the lesser lights here are liable to believe you are serious, Dan.
O Cry the Beloved Country!
Good God, not something to read before your first cup of coffee kicks in.
With a little less edge on the sarcasm this could be a serious NYT op ed.
I hope that now people will stop saying how “brilliant” Obama is. That’s all you heard about during the election, “That his brilliance will solve all of our problems.” No matter that he had no experience, no matter that he never ran a town, a city, a state, or even a major (or any corporation), no matter that the only experience he did have was running for public office, nope, his brilliance would set us free.
His sheer brilliance would solve all of our financial problems (smart people are good with other people’s money, don’t ya know) and his brilliance would end all of the partisanship and gridlock in Washington. And even though we knew from his associations with radicals (anyone remember Bill Ayers) and known bigots (Reverand Wright), his brilliance would just see through all of this ugliness and he’d be a man of the people, a true “center-of-the-road” old-time democrat.
Well how’s that Hope and Change working out for you? Still got a job? Ever notice that the economy is doing worse, not better? New and existing home prices are still falling, aren’t they? Like those bailouts of car companies, banks, AIG, and soon, at a theater near you, nationalizing healthcare, student loans, and the energy business through “Cap and Trade?” Like where those Consumer Confidence numbers are heading? And how about those pesky jobless claims, which keep going up, not down. And, funny, even though up until last month the democrats controlled Congress and the White House, they still could not pass their own healthcare bills without major pieces of pork being given to, wait for it, fellow democrats. Why is it that every time a Democrat proposes saving us money, it ends up costing us a hell of a lot more?
Funny how a “brilliant” guy like Obama would let a thing like that happen. Wake up, America, you have an ad man in the White House. What do I mean by that? You have a guy who never ran anything in his life but who can sell just about anything, like himself during the election. The only thing Obama has promoted throughout his entire life has been Mr. Obama. And America bought it, hook, line, and sinker. We’ve come to the point where politicians can be packaged like batteries or feminine hygine products and people will buy it. Trouble is, when you get elected president you actually have to DO stuff, like govern.
Obama said yesterday that if the Republicans don’t accept his healthcare plan, he will push for reconciliation and then the voters can decide what to do in November. Well, pal, just wait and see what we’ll do in November. We’ll vote your sorry, sorry, asses out of government and make sure that some grownups, some people who actually know the value of a dollar, take your place. Bank on it.
At this point the control of the House and Senate is not enough. If a reconciliation can pass on 51 members, then , perhaps we can arrange an impeachment by the same margin…! If the Constitution does not apply, then ignore the Constitution. Who needs the damn Constitution if it can be bent by only one political party?
Listening to Putin is like listening to any power grabbing tyrant. Words are meaningless. Actions speak much louder. You should have sailed into the sunset but you created a BS position to satisfy your need to rule, Tsar Putin. Politcially It’s the same old Russia of 50 years ago. A handful of policy makers and an opposition that keeps being quieted, often by death.
6. The problem is that reconciliation and the filibuster are parliamentary rules, not constitutional laws. The Constitution empowers each chamber of Congress to enact its own procedural rules, but it requires that impeachment charges be voted in favor of by a simple majority of the House and 2/3 of the Senate in order to remove a sitting President, Judge or other officer of the Federal government (a member of either chamber of Congress can be removed by a 2/3 supermajority of that chamber, without the involvement of the other chamber).
Why do I get the feeling that ‘Harry’ is just one in a long line of sock puppets for the La Russo-troll swarm? Anyway, I can’t make much sense out of this PJM article, except that it’s a slightly new take on the Russia + Putin = pure evil theme prominent here.
Anytime there’s a huge rally about some issue in Russia, like import duties on cars or cops shooting people, and a few people hold up anti-Putin signs, voila, that means they were all there against Putin rather than the tax on imported cars or bad cops. PMSNBC does the same thing always running video of LaRouchies at Tea Party rallies to denounce the ‘tea baggers’, and so on and so forth…this crap is getting old.