Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Key Obama priority: "Getting the Republican Party back in a functioning state"

I'm not making this up! In Dallas, Obama takes the Unity Pony out for a drag:

[OBAMA:] The only way that we can realign our politics so that it matches up with the decency and goodness of the American people is if elections matter, and we're able to both deliver a message and organize ourselves so that folks who aren't acting responsibly pay a consequence, and that we're lifting up and rewarding candidates who are serious about the challenges this country faces and are willing to work together in a spirit that is constructive in order to deliver for the American people.

So that’s what 2012 was about, and that’s what 2014 was about, and I suspect that’s what 2016 is going to be about. And I have to say that I'm a proud Democrat and am committed to the values that the Democratic Party represents, but I'm also interested in getting the Republican Party back in a functioning state. Because this country has two parties, and we need both of them operating in a way that allows us to move forward.

Well, that explains lot, doesn't it?

I'm really not sure exactly how insane that is. Suffice to say, Obama's signature domestic initiative is a Republican plan (ObamaCare = RomneyCare = HeritageCare) and the country's running on a Republican budget (the sequester). Seems to me the Republican Party is "functioning" pretty damn well!

5
Average: 5 (2 votes)

Comments

Blizzard's picture
Submitted by Blizzard on

Easily understood when you apply the more accurate Confederate-Moderate-Progressive model of American politics. As a Moderate, Obama is saying he wants the Moderates to dominate the R party, just as they currently do the D. (Note that "functioning" in neoliberal-speak translates to "agreeing with me" in plain English.)

Submitted by lambert on

... without a difference.

There is actually one metric I've been able to find that separates the Republican leadership from the Democrat leadership: animal abuse.

I find it tactically easier and in fact a better model to say that the two parties are part of a single evil system -- "Did you ever hear the phrase 'two party system'?" -- since to argue that they're "the same" really flies in the face of people's experience... And really isn't true.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

(at least that was my intended inference), and not meant as a "direct comparison" between the Democratic and Republican Party "planks," for instance.

At least on paper, there are some distinctions--mainly on wedge issues.

[In reality, Dems are obviously not united on some of the wedge issues, since the Dem Party has been infiltrated by so many conservatives.]

But again--it was not a Party reference, but an "ideological" one. ;-)

nihil obstet's picture
Submitted by nihil obstet on

In 2008, George W. Bush and company had destroyed the Republican Party. The majority of Americans rejected the futile wars in the Middle East, the increasingly obvious meanness of Cheney and the neocons, the attempt to privatize Social Security, the spying on Americans, the collapse of the stock market and housing bubbles led to the Democratic victories in 2006 and 2008. The Democrats ended up with the largest majrorities in Congress in a generation and Obama (Hope and Change) in the White House. A little decent policy and the Republicans were dead. Obama immediately set to work to rescue the Republican Party.

He not only governed as Bush's third term. He actively talked to delegitimate any policy that didn't have Republican support. Everything had to be "bipartisan", and legislation was made more difficult to pass in the large Democratic majority Congress in efforts to get Republican votes, which he argued were necessary to be legitimate. I would argue that the legislative losses in 2010 came from people's rejecting the continued Republican agenda. However, what Obama did accomplish was to insist that the Republican Party was the appropriate arbiter of government policy and action.

I've said this for years. It's interesting to see Obama publicly admit it.

McDee's picture
Submitted by McDee on

Here's what Democratic Presidents do: They pave the way for Republican successors that are worse than the "more evil" Republicans that they defeated. Johnson made way for Nixon, Carter made way for Reagan and Clinton made way for Bush II.
Since Obama still has plenty of time left to screw things up even more he could well be making way for ....Christie...Cruz...Rubio?
Democrats disappont us when they lose, but disappoint us even more when they win. The "lesser evil" business is a load of crap and it just paves the way for more evil. I don't vote for Democrats any more, even the so called good ones. They are part of a totally corrupt and compromised organization.

Turlock