And she speaks for me. Using parentheses like a girl, but I can deal with that since it’s within tolerance levels. She certainly isn’t abusing the parens quite as badly as I abuse the commas:

On the nirthers and the press

You’ll notice I haven’t weighed in yet on the subject of Obama’s birth certificate. That’s because I consider it a non-issue at this point, except as it’s being used to discredit perceptions of Republicans and people on the Right as crazies.

I also believe–along with several commenters on this thread, that the consequences of a finding that he’s not a natural born citizen would be chaotic, and his replacement would hardly be better than he is.

But as far as the merits of the case go, I believe that it is highly likely that Obama was born in Hawaii, just as he’s claimed. That said, I also think it is very odd that he has refused so far to release the long form of his birth certificate (if those who say that Obama and only Obama could obtain a copy from the state of Hawaii, and that the long form is different from and more complete than the certificate of live birth that he has already offered of us, are correct).

This furtiveness on Obama’s part ties into his secrecy about other aspects of his life. I’m referring most particularly to his school records, from Occidental and Columbia and Harvard Law. These, we know he could release. This failure of his leads inexorably to the perception that the man is hiding something, although we don’t know exactly what or exactly why. But our guesses fill the void, and it’s not with innocent explanations.

I agree with it all, except for these fears about chaos ensuing if & when it’s discovered our Holy iPresident Replacement Jesus was born outside the U.S. That very well may be true, but as a general rule it is bad to form legal precedent out of fear of consequences. Rules is rules, and if the Constitution says Obama isn’t supposed to be in there then He shouldn’t be in there. And I’d say the same thing about any Republican, Libertarian, Federalist or Whig.

The bee up my butt on this thing, is this — it is physically impossible for Obama to have been born in both places. And let us not engage in any silliness that this “short form” has been used to legally prove anything. This matter is being resolved through social stigma, through the “you’re an idiot if you believe otherwise” method. Now if you’re an overly-zealous Obama supporter, you’ve probably spent your lifetime deciding everything that way and you see nothing wrong with it.

But it is wrong, make no mistake about it.

And a President Freeberg would have presented all forms of the birth certificate a very long time ago. President Freeberg would have been forced to. Not because his skin is white, but because he’s a mere mortal as opposed to some rock star Replacement Jesus guy…which is exactly what all our Presidents are supposed to be. Mere mortals who are held to the same laws as the rest of us, albeit entrusted with some state powers and authorities as part of the office they inhabit for four years at a time.

Eleven percent, give-or-take, of the population believes that Obama was born in Kenya. That seems somewhat odd, but when you think about it for awhile it really isn’t because we’re talking eleven percent. Eleven percent of us probably drink their own urine. What’s really odd is this: One hundred percent of our current President, wants to bellyache about the eleven percent still running around out there, without releasing this long form — choosing to hide behind the “aw, if I did, they won’t believe that either” excuse.

That’s freakin’ bizarre. It defies any rational explanation. Except for the cynical, political motivation NN has identified in her first two sentences, and I think she’s got that sucker nailed.

Me, just last month…on the subject of our Holy President’s approval ratings, which were then still above the waterline but sinking, sinking, sinking…

Sometime, now or in a future not too distant, a point of center-of-gravity is going over a cliff. Once past it, it isn’t coming back again.

The logic has very little to do with American politics, and much more to do with fashion. Muttonchop sideburns can come back in style as a “retro,” but retro fashions need a generation of water to roll over the dam before they can rise from the dead. Once something becomes The Hot Thing From Last Year, it isn’t going to become hot again for those three decades. Certainly not within a four year window.

Ladies and gentlemen, our nation’s chief executive is now officially the hot thing from last year. Our nation’s Rubik’s cube. This would mean, in His case, He has just lost the only effective governing tool He ever had.

For the very first time, Barack Obama’s approval rating has gone upside down! According to Rasmussen, Barack Obama’s approval rating is at 49% and his disapproval rating is at 51%.

Guess that’s what happens when you push big, unpopular liberal policy after liberal policy in an effort to take advantage of a crisis, talk about deficit reduction while you spend so much that you risk the country’s future, keep trying to take over an ever larger share of the U.S. economy, lie repeatedly, insult America abroad and cops at home, all while being unbelievably pompous.

PS: As Obama’s numbers continue to drop, expect plenty cries of “racism” to explain why people aren’t supporting him.

Now, is this cause for celebration? Probably not. This presidency is simply a projection onto the national landscape, of what has been happening on a smaller scale in hundreds of our larger cities for decades now: Hardcore left-leaning tax-the-rich guy leveraged into office with superstar status, during a campaign that offers minimal or nonexistent deliberation about the policies he would put into effect, followed by years and years of economic depression as the hated “rich,” taxed up to and beyond the point they can be made to understand how hated they are…leave. Or stop engaging in what has been artificially made into a less and less profitable, and more and more troublesome, way to earn a livelihood.

Those crooked mayors have approval ratings, too. Those approval ratings drop, too. And they keep on doing the things they do, until the promising supermetropolitan mecca becomes a modern million-acre ghost town.

The nation’s fate is still sealed. We’ll still keep moving toward the same oblivion that has swallowed up Chicago, and Washington DC, and Atlanta, and Sacramento, and Los Angeles and San Francisco and…and…and. But from here on, there will be doubt. It won’t be an unstoppable “mandate.”

And Obama has lost his fashion whores. They aren’t with Him anymore; they’re on to the next hot new thing. And they aren’t coming back for a good thirty years. Oh sure many of them will pick Him over a Republican any day. But His election wasn’t won by people preferring democrats over Republicans, it was won because the democrat voters saw a reason to miss stale television sitcom reruns to go out and vote, and Republicans didn’t see any such reason.

That advantage is now history.

Secretary of State Clinton says we are back…

On her second trip to Asia as U.S. secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton is carrying a no-nonsense message about American intentions.

“The United States is back,” she declared Tuesday upon arrival in the Thai capital.

By that she means the administration of President Barack Obama thinks it’s time to show Asian nations that the United States is not distracted by its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and intends to broaden and deepen its partnerships in this region.

Clinton was trumpeting that line Wednesday in an appearance with a prominent TV personality before flying to a seaside resort at Phuket for two days of international meetings to discuss North Korea, Myanmar and a range of other regional issues.

Don’t you just love it when elected and appointed officials speak in talking-points? Makes it so easy to get ahold of them and relay concerns to them.

Concerns like these…

That was fast. The hope and optimism that washed over the country in the opening months of Barack Obama’s presidency are giving way to harsh realities.

An Associated Press-GfK Poll shows that a majority of Americans are back to thinking that the country is headed in the wrong direction after a fleeting period in which more thought it was on the right track.

Obama still has a solid 55 percent approval rating — better than Bill Clinton and about even with George W. Bush six months into their presidencies — but there are growing doubts about whether he can succeed at some of the biggest items on his to-do list. And there is a growing sense that he is trying to tackle too much too soon.

The number of people who think Obama can improve the economy is down a sobering 19 percentage points from the euphoric days just before his inauguration. Ditto for expectations about creating jobs. Also down significantly: the share of people who think he can reduce the deficit, remove troops from Iraq and improve respect for the U.S. around the world, all slipping 15 points.

She’s right. We’re back. Off of our latest drug craze, crashed to earth.

Some professor who does his professoring by getting his name in all the right rolodexes, weighs in with the obvious:

Independents are “the ones to watch,” according to Professor Robert Shapiro, a Columbia University expert on public opinion. “The Republicans were more pessimistic from the outset. The Democrats are going to be more resistant to negative information.”

The real question isn’t whether Obama can push a boulder to the top of a mountain. I think the independents are wondering whether His hands are even on the boulder.

For someone who’s trying to get a lot done that’s really hard to do, and fixing things that are really hard to fix, this President seems to spend an awful lot of time spending money and giving speeches. The palpable sense of frustration they feel is akin to a homeowner who takes out a steep second-mortgage to retain a contractor, and then as the summer days burn away at a furious pace — just watches the contractor do lots of talking instead of sawing, hammering, painting and paving. Yes, frustration sets in. Work isn’t getting done. Quite natural.

We’re back, alright.

Someday, we should really do something about scheduling our little hallucinogenic trips so they don’t fall on Election Day. Maybe we need to move Election Day to April 16 or something. Save us a lot of grief in the long run.

Credit to Gerard for the image.

Speaking of small men filling offices that are too big for them, which was the subject of my Cronkite send-off…Neo-Neocon has figured out President Obama. She’s had him fingered for some time now.

…Obama has never had to succeed at anything political before except for getting elected, and then ingratiating himself with the leader of the Illinois Senate who allowed him to take credit for the work of other people on legislative bills. After that, all Obama really had to do was give speeches and run a campaign.

Granted, he was very good indeed at that. But a campaign and a presidency are different. I am beginning to think that one of the problems with Obama and his advisers is that they actually believe an administration is merely the continuation of a campaign. After all, Obama has never had to face that hard truth before — each office of his has been useful only as a springboard for the next one. The idea that he is now in office for at least four years, with no higher office in sight, and that people may actually for the first time in his life expect him to produce some actual results in addition to lofty words, is very slow to dawn on Obama and the people around him.

They probably think if he bobs and weaves and spins enough, his chickens will never come home to roost. And perhaps they are correct; perhaps the press will stay in his pocket, partly to avoid admitting its own failure to evaluate and vet Obama properly. But there are signs — and the Politico article is one of them — that even the press cannot deny that this man is not what he appeared (to them) to be.

Most of the promises He’s broken, don’t count because they were never made. Never had to be. He’s always been just so awesome…

The question for the Obama supporters at this point, is simple. Are you admitting your mistake and hopping off now, or are you one of the hardcore types riding this thing straight into the ground?

Hat tip: Rick.

…but have you ever stopped to think…just how many things would normally capture our attention, in a healthy way, that we’re ignoring only because President Obama’s appearance is so polished?

The results of His policies. The policies themselves. Historical evidence, or lack thereof, that these policies might be swell ideas. All the metrics that measure the results of His policies. Who are His friends. Why they are. Who are His enemies, and why that is. In fact, if you’re the type of person who ignores policies & results altogether, and only values people for their speaking ability, wardrobe, mannerisms, gestures, speechifying, et cetera…even you, have been blinded from even your favorite fixation. Go on, which member of the Obama administration apart from Obama Himself, really captures your fancy? Biden. Geithner. Clinton. Holder. Go through the entire cabinet. What one single face, apart from the Big Guy, would you present to a stranger as a symbol of the competence of this administration you helped vote in? They’re all buffoons, and they all come off that way.

But at least the Man On Top really knows how to deliver a speech. At least we, as a country do have that one thing…if nothing else…if no policies that actually work for us. We at least have a likable guy within that cloister of buffoons, who knows how to come off looking sharp. We have that one thing.

Or do we?

Isn’t it interesting how the same people who used George W. Bush’s gaffes as evidence to bolster their claim that he was an idiot think Barack Obama is some sort of saintly intellectual and oratory genius?

Despite the fact that Barack Obama isn’t really so good at the speaking thing.

* He’s shown he can’t function without reading from a teleprompter… repeatedly.
* And the word heard most often in any speech or interview he gives is “uh“.
* He apparently doesn’t know the difference between privacy and piracy.
* He can’t properly pronounce the name of a company he uses as an example to bolster his policies.

There is much, much more beyond that…go have a look.

Take an inventory of the sum total of what our nation has working for it. If you dare.

Doyle McManus, writing in the Los Angeles Times:

Barack Obama has fallen back to Earth.

When he ran for president, Obama said his election would be “the moment the rise of the oceans began to slow.” And when he made his first big foreign trip in April, he was hailed by adoring crowds — and almost-as-adoring politicians — in Britain, Germany, France and the Czech Republic.

But last week, in Russia and Italy, Obamania was little more than a pleasant memory. Yes, his international polling numbers are still high, but the president encountered hardly any adulation in the streets of Moscow or anywhere else. Instead, Russian strongman Vladimir Putin reportedly gave him a tongue-lashing over a two-hour breakfast, and the tent-bound refugees from Italy’s April earthquake mostly wanted to know whether he could rebuild their homes. (“Yes, we camp,” their banner said, pointedly.)

And the oceans are still rising too. At the Group of 8 summit, the developing countries said no to a timetable to stop global warming, the reason for the waters’ rise.

That’s not to say the trip was a bust; it wasn’t. But it was far from a triumph, and that’s a new experience for Obama’s foreign policy team.

The hard reality of international affairs is that, just as the United States has interests, so do other countries. And when those interests conflict, all the charm and charisma in the world can’t resolve the differences.

At the G-8 summit, the United States, Britain and France had hoped for a tough statement on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The closest they got to a warning was this: “We sincerely hope that Iran will seize this opportunity to give diplomacy a chance.”

“And on the pedestal these words appear: `My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings: Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!’ Nothing beside remains.” — Ozymandias, by Percy Bysshe Shelly.

Is charisma an adequate substitute for keeping your word? That is the operative question. And the answer is, I’m taking it — “yeah, kinda, sorta…for a little while.” We may be nearing the end of that little-while. Many signs in the air, this one being just one of the latest.

Hat tip to blogger friend Duffy:

Just keeping track. First half of ’09 is all over, so it’s important to pin down exactly where we are.

Now that is what I call souvenir value. It’ll be necessary to remember, so we don’t repeat the mistake…like we just did. Welcome back, Carter.

Hat tip: Van Helsing at Moonbattery.

What is it…what is it…what is it.

I’m not sure, seems like there’s some common theme but I can’t quite place it.

Now being passed around through the e-mails with the following…

Now think about this for a second:

Have you ever seen anyone arrested wearing a Bush T-shirt, (or for you older guys), an Eisenhower, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan or even Nixon, or Bob Dole shirt?

…I guess this is just more “change” we can believe in.

I have another question to ask, that’s also been asked by others.

Who, anywhere, of sound mind and body, voted against our current President and is now sorry for having done so?

Back in early April I was inspired by a Saturday Night Live skit which, for a typical busybody hustle-bustle blue-blood downtown Manhattan project, was atypically harsh with our Wunder iPresident happy-liberal God-Man guy. The point to this one was that PrezBO was neglecting His new responsibilities to some extent, charged up with recklessly exuberant nostalgia over His holy inaugural festivities.

This is, of course, the way SNL skits work. They are caricatures of people. They take the things we’ve been noticing about those among us who are famous, the thoughts we have been crystallizing about them — they make the presumption that these impressions are accurate — and then they exaggerate them. Usually, for me, this doesn’t work so well; I’m seldom in the majority on anything. But on this occasion the skit resonated with me because I had long ago formed the inference that Barack Obama is a special, unique person. And as a person, the way He is special and unique, is not quite so flattering as some would like to believe.

He is amazingly confident…not because of what He has experienced…as because of what He has not.

Simply put, over a stretch of nearly half a century, it would appear nobody has ever told His Exaltedness that He is — or just might possibly be — wrong about anything.

An Obvious Connection, but Maybe I’m the First to See It?

Mister Bossy Himself…and that little shit from The Twilight Zone (Original Series): It’s a Good Life. You know, the all-powerful little boy that was wishing people out to the cornfield.

This is not a constitutional separation-of-powers rant. Forget congressional oversight. Think, instead, about subordinates. Or forget about Obama’s subordinates…think about His casual acquaintances. Other than that bigoted asshole preacher of His, I don’t know of anybody who’s given Him any knowledge…or opinions, that’ve managed to sink in…or advice…or anything. Anybody. That means His sainted grandmother, mother, and Michelle.

What He knows, it would seem, is limited to what’s germinated in His cranium.

I don’t know if Basil reads my blog. I would suspect hardly anybody does. But how else do you explain this gem which appeared last night on the front page of one of my favorite hangouts, IMAO?

You’re a bad man. You’re a very bad man! And you keep thinking bad [thoughts] about me. And I’m going to wish you into the cornfield. And if any of you think bad things about me, I’ll do the same thing to you.

I’ve been robbed, but I’m not calling the police. I’m quite flattered.

Seriously, though. Barack Obama’s personality is the key to making Basil’s material the excellent satire that it is. This said personality…it is absolutely amazing. One of a kind. It is deep in its shallowness, complex in its simplicity. As a personality type, it is worthy of including in a novel because readers of the novel would remember the character for decades, after they have forgotten all other elements. We have all met a Barack Obama — and yet, at the same time, you’ll never meet anyone else quite like Him ever again. Common in its bearing, extraordinary and superhuman in its vector.

He is as confident as any strutting peacock, because like the little shit from the Twlight Zone episode, He has never been corrected. On anything. Never, never, not ever. If you’ve never been corrected, in the inferences you’ve drawn, in the decisions you’ve made, in your general conduct, what a liberating effect this has on you. How confident we would all be if we had lives like this one!

But that isn’t a good kind of confidence, necessarily. It is a confidence borne of ignorance. From April 6 to June 17, my thoughts in this regard have only crystallized further. All my thoughts about Barack Obama back then, lightly penciled in on the canvas of my mind, might as well have been chiseled in stone for I haven’t had to modify or re-think any of them. He is, as far as I’m concerned now, exactly what I thought He was back then. This is contrary to my initial expectations; I thought I would have to correct my impressions, refine them, flesh them out a little at least. Isn’t that what an open-minded, intelligent, humble man should be prepared to do? And yet — it’s been like re-thinking the geometric shape of a ball bearing. What’s there to re-think?

Like I said: Complex in His simplicity.

I do not wish to contest the notion that He is exactly the leader we want right now. To do so would be to directly contradict the message of the last election. Elections mean things. Obama won the election, because He should have won it. He is truly a leader for our times.

Right now. Because we are exceptionally bored; we want a dynamic personality, forcefulness, charisma, phony confidence — and absolutely nothing else. I see Barack Obama as the perfect leader for the times in which we live right now; and for that, I should be begging His forgiveness for delivering on Him such a rancid, grievous insult. And I would. If it didn’t apply.

The sixty-third award for Best Sentence I’ve Heard Or Read Lately (BSIHORL) goes out to Mr. Freedom, for his comments nine days ago on Judge Sotomayor and her nomination to the Supreme Court…more precisely, on the pinheads who nominated her:

In the anointed we find a whole class of supposedly ‘thinking people’ who do remarkably little thinking about substance and a great deal of verbal expression. In order that this relatively small group of people can believe themselves wiser and nobler than the common herd, we have adopted policies which impose heavy costs on millions of other human beings, not only in taxes, but also in lost jobs, social disintegration, and a loss of personal safety. [emphasis mine]

There is a danger that is not long in coming, when weighty decisions are made to show off some smarts and the information relevant to those decisions has not been diligently studied. The danger comes in the need to make a decision that is ironic.

See, we mediocre mortals make decisions on a daily basis that make sense immediately. So our superiors are therefore forced to make decisions with a “WTF?” factor. If they make the same decision any one of us ordinary folks would’ve made, then what’s the point? And so, because of their perceived extraordinary-smartness, they have to do nutty things. Pay more attention to I’m-a-nut-job over in Iran, than to Gordon Brown in the UK. Cap-and-trade. Twenty-seven czars. Putting General Motors under government control. Parading down the street without any clothes on.

Those few who demand to see some solid evidence of “thinking” from those superiors who are running things now, are left sucking air. There’s far too much self expression going on for any quality thinking to take place.

And, tragically, we are left with a situation in which decisions are required to not make sense. Because that would imply that the persons making the decisions are a little bit too…mortal.

PresBO has a food taster? I realize this is a whole week old by now…but…WTF? This is in Europe somewhere, a thousand years ago?

A US “taster” tested the food being dished up to President Barack Obama at a dinner in a French restaurant, a waiter said on Sunday.

“They have someone who tastes the dishes,” said waiter Gabriel de Carvalho from the “La Fontaine de Mars” restaurant where Obama and his family turned up for dinner on Saturday night.
:
Asked by AFP to comment, the restaurant confirmed the report.

Such an arrangement is stunningly egotistical — a situation which no longer stuns me. But it also strikes me as impractical in the twenty-first century. A food taster?

It’s a no brainer. You figure out how much time it takes our Gloriously Anointed iPresident to wait and gobble down His chow after His taster has done the tasting — then you double that. Use our modern miracle science to find a poison that works that long, and then presto. Not that I mean to give anyone any ideas of course. Just sayin’, this makes very little sense…and by very little, I mean none.

Like, the bloating-up of the ego, is the whole point. Which I wouldn’t doubt.

Hat tip to American Princess.

Can ya blame it all on the guy who was in there before? Really?

Hat tip to Gerard. And here’s a quick question: In all the nations in the civilized world, in all of documented human history — what are the most successful and effective government stimulus programs? Name five.

Aw heck. Name one. And no, I don’t count tax cuts. Know why? Because that would make it too easy.

Republicans are now more trusted on economic matters, and it’s by a large differential. Six points, 45% to 39%.

But I find it to be even more of an indicator that FARK just closed a photoshop contest with a theme of “Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time.” With some snort-worthy results, like this one:

By my count, The Holy One made it in three times. Three. (Update: Maybe only twice.) As in, gosh, it seemed like such a swell idea at the time. On FARK. It would’ve been against the rules for anyone to pop up with the customary OMG How dare you not support His Holiness!!! But applying rules to the FARK community is somewhat like herding cats, so it’s worthy of note that nobody bothered.

Sometime, now or in a future not too distant, a point of center-of-gravity is going over a cliff. Once past it, it isn’t coming back again.

“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” — Winston Churchill

Wow, that’s pretty brutal treatment. I heard of others expressing surprise this came from MSNBC, but I didn’t realize how they were bitch-slapping our President until I watched it.

Changing times…changing attitudes…perhaps this is one of the early signs that the honeymoon, while certainly not over quite yet, isn’t destined to last forever.

The light that burns twice as bright burns for half as long – and you have burned so very, very brightly, Roy. Look at you, you’re the prodigal son; you’re quite a prize. — Tyrell, Blade Runner.

This isn’t some hardcore tighty-righty Republican choosing that headline. It’s a middle-of-the-road, waitin’-to-be-run-over, moderate liberal sissy. I see him as a Meghan McCain without the cuteness factor, which is to say I see him as a MoveOnDotOrgster. With great reason, I think…

For Republicans, the big immediate problem of the past few years has been how to distance themselves from George W. Bush and all the disasters for which he stands. How do you put some daylight between yourself and this guy?

Unfortunately, they have been able to come up with only one way: Impostor theory. The movement’s instinct, developed during better times, is to dismiss all failings as authenticity problems. The true faith wasn’t discredited, they say, Dubya simply failed to live up to it. We didn’t change Washington, they moan, Washington changed us.

Sorry, chaps. Conservatives did change government, and their long experiment with that institution discredited central elements of their faith. That is obvious today, even if it remains a forbidden thought for the movement itself.

Instead of moderating their message, though, conservatives have resolved to be done with moderation forever, to throw down primary challenges to the GOP’s remaining centrists, to dig the hole ever deeper in a frantic search for purity.

Recognize the talking points? Everything George W. Bush did was a disaster — NO EXCEPTIONS — and everything he did was emblematic of what the conservative movement stands for — NO EXCEPTIONS. That’s the kind of thing you can only spew out in pen-and-ink form, since there is difficulty involved in accessing any rebuttal in that forum, and therefore there is difficulty involved in posting a rebuttal where someone will see it. You can’t go on talk radio and say stuff like that. Someone will call in and say “Now let me get this straight…part of the conservative movement is to let Congress spend just as much money as it wants to spend, on anything at all?” And there you are. High and dry. “Er, ah, um, time for a commercial break…”

So this isn’t the party faithful begging people to come back. It’s a liberal twit, with his liberal twit half-truths, trying to sell the pig-in-a-poke that the bailout mess was caused by “greed.” People got greedy because they weren’t being taxed heavily enough. It’s so cute how he pretends the stuff he’s saying is simple logic and common sense, when what he’s really arguing is that people tend to become more ethically pure if & when they live under more restrictive rules. If you stop believing that, engage in the antithetical belief even for an instant that people determine as individuals how morally upstanding they’ll be regardless of the rules that apply to them…his argument melts down. Completely.

So he’s actually being a pessimist when he says Republicans have a decent shot in 2012.

Consider the various bailouts of the financial system, which are deeply unpopular and which many of the Republicans in Congress can truthfully say they opposed from the get-go. Right now, it would be difficult to blame the bailouts on either party, since they started in the Bush days. But three years down the road from now, they will be Mr. Obama’s to defend.

In that situation, Republicans may well decide to press their offensive against the elite by depicting the Democrats as the party of Wall Street. I know this sounds counterintuitive, possibly even hypocritical. And yet, if they choose to take that route, Republicans will have a lot to go on. Mr. Obama’s great success in reaping campaign money from Wall Street, to begin with. Or his mystifying tendency to give important economic oversight jobs to former hedge fund managers and investment bankers — rather than, say, regulators or experts in corporate crime.

The episode of the AIG bonuses, when the administration showed such solicitude for the sanctity of contract, will make a fine companion piece to the administration’s failure to lift a finger for the mortgage cramdown bill, hated as it was by the financial industry. The administration’s watered-down stress tests will come up, as will its perplexing failure to deal firmly with the so-called zombie banks. Useful comparison will be made with Republican administrations of the past, which put insolvent institutions into receivership.

True, taking this tack would mean overcoming a number of fairly large contradictions, but the potential rewards are great and resourceful conservatives will no doubt find a way. Indeed, some are doing it already, describing Democrats as the bought-and-paid-for puppets of Wall Street. For example, during the AIG outrage, Ann Coulter wrote a column titled “Gordon Gekko is a Democrat,” in which she tallied up the enormous contributions that Mr. Obama collected from investment bankers over the years and concluded: “Wall Street gets what it pays for.”

As for Obama administration officials, I suspect they will find it difficult to get back to “Yes We Can” after having spent so much time chanting, “Because We Say So.”

But suppose we get through the current economic slump with no further great disasters, what happens then? For one thing, the culture wars, which have thankfully been doused by the economic crisis, will come roaring back in some yet-to-be-determined but certain-to-be-awful form.

For another, the administration itself will probably move back to the Clintonian sweet spot that Washington Democrats find so comfortable and correct and desirable. The jitters will be over, the killjoy liberals will be marginalized, the warm old consensus will envelop our leaders once more, and they will resume their old habits, adored by the press for their post-partisan high mindedness, celebrating free trade and the magic of the market, triangulating just like in the merry days of old.

Then the Republicans will eat them for lunch.

If you haven’t already, you should read all the way through Ann Coulter’s column. She does a very decent job of supporting her thesis that the democrat party is the party of the “greedy” Wall Street types. Certainly, she does a far better job than taking the Thomas Frank route of saying “I know this sounds counterintuitive, possibly even hypocritical” and just leaving it at that. Ann Coulter did something that is decidedly out of style now: She inspected the facts, and used those facts to form reasoned, independent opinions. Conclusion: Yup. The democrat party has a decided advantage in luring in the Wall Street bucks. Do your homework.

But the central problem on which this moderate-lib is sounding the alarm, is a genuine one. The bailouts. President Obama is rapidly becoming Mister Bailout. Yes, they did start under George W. Bush’s watch…that much is true. And this is why, when conservatives claim George Bush wasn’t really a conservative, there’s a great deal of truth to that. Did you notice how Frank blithely sidestepped that one as he dismissed the claim?

Herein lies the biggest problem in any attempt to get Barack Obama re-elected to a second term: To defend Obama’s less effective, and arguably harmful, policies — you have to claim that what George Bush was doing, was no different. There is some truth in that. But then you defeat your other argument, that Obama was and is an effective paladin in a revolution of C-H-A-N-G-E. You’re defending this supposed Agent of Change, by saying what He is doing isn’t that much different from what came before. You’re counting on people being easily distracted as they digest these arguments, and possessing no medium-or-long-term memory whatsoever, or not applying it. For if they do apply a long-term memory to all these vital talking points, what you get back is —

George Bush was a conservative. What Obama is doing is no different from what George Bush was doing. Obama, therefore, is a conservative. Obama is bringing about change.

Doesn’t compute. Sorry, it just doesn’t.

But there are going to be quite a few challenges ahead, in 2012, for Mister Bailout to run for re-election. Obama is as popular as all get-out. His policies aren’t. The dichotomy can survive for a little while…two years…three years maybe…at the end of which, it’ll be in sad, sad shape. You can’t have some popular guy doing unpopular things, and then staying popular that long.

Or maybe you can. We’ll see. But the depression one encounters when one sees a new problem crop up, and knows immediately that The One is just going to use the usual two-step process on whatever it is — give a great speech and then spend a shitload of borrowed money — is a soul-sucking, palpable sense of futility. You don’t stay all hopey and hopeful while experiencing this depression. And those who are opposed to President Obama, do not have a monopoly on it. Something costs too much…He’ll give a wonderful speech and spend lots of money. Something doesn’t cost enough…He’ll give a wonderful speech and spend lots of money. People are sad, angry, fighting, suicidal, depressed, restless, they forgot to bring home milk, their butts itch — He’ll give a wonderful speech and spend lots of money. After awhile, it’s more trouble than it’s worth, to just pretend He’s doing something that is likely to fix whatever the problem is. Dangle a politician in front of people for all those years, and it isn’t too long before they can see Him for what He truly is.

I saw a tee shirt design a few weeks ago that had a picture of an outhouse on it. The caption was “Be back in five, I have to go take an Obama.” This, to my thinking, is disrespectful and unacceptable. But it does raise an interesting point about that name. It is so unique, that in a few years it is bound to possess an abundance of meanings it does not have now.

So seriously — what will it mean throughout the years?

I decided to scribble down some ideas. Ideas, upon which, I would presumably be willing to bet some real money. The timeframe of each usage, as is the case with all slang words, will have a morphing effect on it. Over and over and over again, I’m thinking.

So here are my ideas. Obama (n.)…means…

2009. The name of the One True Savior who will rescue us from our economic malaise. He’d better, anyway. Or oh boy, are we ever screwed!
2010. Some guy who keeps apologizing for America’s historical misdeeds, even when they are grossly off-topic.
2012. Synonym for “Carter.”
2016. Anyone in possession of a sales ability that is so remarkable and overpowering, they easily can sell pure crap to the most skeptical buyer.
2024. A product that is so incredibly substandard and pure in its crappiness, that only an “Obama” can sell it.
A generation from now: A social phenomenon in which people get so wrapped up in the “charisma” or whatever of a movement’s leader, that they forget all about policies.
Two generations from now: Extreme danger that rises up to confront a nation or culture as a direct result of electing such a charismatic leader.
Three generations from now: Journalists’ term: The childlike euphoria which captures the media’s attention as such a charismatic leader becomes more widely known.
A century from now: Financial professionals’ term: A nosedive on the stock market caused by the reckless and ignorant remarks of a nation’s leaders.
In the next cultural eon:
 • Pilots’ term for the panic that results from aircraft flying low over crowded metropolitan areas.
 • The apology issued by a nation or its leaders in order to get foreign countries to like it better, or to stop hating it.
 • The extreme futility associated with such an apology.
 • The point in time when an advanced civilization “jumps the shark” and begins an irreversible descent of perpetual apology-for-self.
 • Any effort which is presented as creative, which is, in reality, a process of destruction.

As a verb:
 • To select a candidate with dark skin, as a representative of some historically ineffectual, damaging or undefined policy ideas. The strategy is that if & when anyone points out the inherent weaknesses of what is about to be done, you just call ’em a racist and be done with it. Everyone knows this is a stupid idea. They’ll never go for it unless we Obama it. It’s the only way.
 • To bullshit people with careful delivery, cheerful tone and a calm, steady demeanor. You’ve got the most gullible professor on the entire campus. If you’re late with your work just Obama your way through, he’ll fall for it every time. Or… My grandson swears he doesn’t know anything about the money missing from my purse, but I could swear that little bastard is Obama-ing me.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News.