In Defense of Obama

[AggregateDemand]

He's trying so hard to put on a brave face, but Krugman is an economist, and he knows damn well how little Obama has accomplished. The credit he gives Obama is actually genuine surprise that Obama's policies didn't thwart market corrections, particularly to healthcare costs. Krugman excuses another decade of liberal mediocrity by blaming the Great Irrelevant Satan of the American right-wing.

Everything you need to know about political economics in the US can be gleaned from this article. Democrats understand that society has evolving needs, but they can't evolve because they've anchored their party to the handouts of the past. Democrats crumble. Republicans take over, and since Republicans have virtually no social capital, and they are incapable of manufacturing any social capital, reform gets put on the back burner for another decade.

To be fair, Obama did suffer one intolerable slight from the Sean Hannity wing of the Republican Party, who whined when Obama tried to cut $500B from Medicare over 10 years and install oversight panels. However, Democrats didn't need/want Republicans to get the original ACA bills through. In the end, it was Democrats who went weak in the knees when AARP and the health insurance companies showed up with clinched fists. But the Great Irrelevant Satan is always scapegoated in the end.

[AggregateDemand]

In 20-30 years, Obama will be widely regarded by most Americans (especially once the teabaggers die of old age) as one of the great presidents, certainly by historians.

The president who borrowed $10T to make America suck less. Quite a legacy.

[AggregateDemand]

Two of our most beloved Presidents FDR and Reagan were also Great Borrowers.

They were the first of their kind. I guess you could say the same about Obama, if you want to play the race card.

The only way he will be recognized as great is if Democrats continue to polarize the population on issues of race, and anyone who disagrees about Obama's merit is publicly shamed as a racist.

[AggregateDemand]

So yes, then.

I'm trying to be optimistic about the future of race relations.

[AggregateDemand]

You say that, but you and others on the Right have repeatedly claimed that black people and other minority groups are "brainwashed" into "government dependency" by Democrats. Not only is that not true, but it's really insulting to non-white voters.

It is clearly true, and your denial of the patently obvious preserves lingering racial tensions in the United States. Apparently, you believe that minorities are a single-minded demographic who all adhere to the same political philosophy? That's not racist at all.

Next you'll be telling us that Republicans do not exploit evangelicals.

[AggregateDemand]

There's nothing racist about saying blacks and Latinos vote Democrat. The way you say it is 100% racist, but that's because you're a racist who sees everything through a racist lens.

White urban voters vote the same as black and Hispanic urban voters. The only difference is most whites are suburban/rural while most blacks and hispanics are urban.

Urbanites see the benefits of the government first hand with public transportation, public schools, public libraries, etc. Urban culture is generally aligned with Democratic Party policy.

The thriving progressive urban metropolises of South Texas, West Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Southern Colorado, and the Inland Empire. The progressive cosmopolitan powerhouses in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina.

How can you be from New Mexico, and know so little about minority demography?

[AggregateDemand]

The thriving progressive urban metropolises of San Jose, Los Angeles, San Diego and Denver. The progressive cosmopolitan powerhouses in Chicago, New Orleans, New York and Philadelphia.

Whether the white elite live in McMansions in far-lung suburbs or in expensive condominiums in the inner-city, they are dependent on the labor of Latino, Asian or Caribbean immigrants and would have no cultural materials without the tremendous influence of African-Americans on the heart and soul of America. Blacks, Latinos and Asians almost uniformly vote for Democrats because they see the injustice of a system that is dependent on them but uses and abuses them in every aspect of life. Their voting patterns are not an indication of anti-white racism but rather an indication that people of color wish to eradicate racism.

No, that's what silly white people tell themselves. Russel Simmons explained it once upon a time, when he was talking about the difference in rebel subcultures within white and minority demographics. He said white people fight to get out, and minorities fight to get in.

Capitalist conservative WASPs are viewed as the cultural hegemons. Liberals are fighting to get out from under (what they believe to be) oppressive economic policy and extraneous social decorum. Minorities, on the other hand, are not fighting to have a different flavor of middle-class or upper-middle class existence. According to Simmons, they are fighting to get a piece of the existing, established American Dream. Why do you think "spread the wealth around" was so intoxicating, and Obamacare was so lukewarm?

Liberals and minorities have virtually nothing in common beyond mutual distrust of conservative WASPs. Democrats are aware of the situation, and they never let a good race crisis go to waste.

[AggregateDemand]

I am Mexican-American, guero.

I'm not responding to your post because it is gibberish.

I didn't say "you" specifically in my post because assumed you were probably Mexican-American. What Russell Simmons said is reflected in polling data about social issues, and some economic issues. It seems empirically correct to me, as well.

[AggregateDemand]

What the hell are you even talking about? Do you think all minorities should be painted with the brush of being dependent on the government? If you answered yes to that question, then you should also be able to answer why most minorities, regardless of income, throw up a middle finger to the Republican party.

What are you talking about? I don't think you have a clue what's going on, besides your admission that people perceive Republicans as racist, which is a longstanding political narrative of the Democratic Party since they lost the South.

Emancipation, Civil Rights, Amnesty, and Bush's guest worker program. Which of those strikes you as most racist?

[AggregateDemand]

And what exactly is your point? Be very specific because it is important.

As a minority whose parents make a lot of money and who will start making a lot of money soon, your points are extremely insulting to me. If you don't understand that, maybe you will start to understand why you are a Republican. If the Republican party wants to get the vote of minorities who aren't dependent on the government, they need to grow beyond racists like you.

Republicans already know they are perceived as racists, which is a longstanding political narrative manufactured by the Democratic Party since realignment.

Emancipation, Civil Rights, Amnesty, and Bush's guest worker program. Which of those strikes you as most racist? Maybe it was the African American employment rate during Bush's term that made him so awful. Maybe it's the inherent nativism of socialist entitlements and unions that make Democrats so charming.

Democrats openly mock political propriety because they believe in the notion of single-minded minority voters who give blanket endorsements to Democratic candidates. I reject this slight of minority voters, and I go searching for real answers. Russel Simmons said something about outsider culture that is reflected in the polling data, which makes his observations far more substantial than the inane political regurgitation I find on Atlas.

I'm not arguing that minority voters should support Republican candidates. I'm arguing that Democrats have no merit-based claim to the minority vote, despite insistence to the contrary.

[AggregateDemand]

The current Republican party can't claim emancipation or civil rights.

As for amnesty, what is the current Republican party's view on that? Hell, how do they view immigrants who fought for this damn country? Republicans don't want to let them stay in this country either. The current Republican party is a racist joke. Hispanics looked up to Reagan and Reagan helped them assimilate into this country. The current Republican party is full of a bunch of nativist assholes.

This is the kind of thoughtless, inane yammering that undermines whatever point you are trying to make. In your mind, Republicans tack from progressive race policy to indecency, only to accidentally stumble upon progressive policy, while drafting a neo-segregation bill.

You're too far gone to be helped.

[AggregateDemand]

nice whitesplaining, broseph

I actually blacksplained it, brotha.

Don't give me credit for an insight made by Simmons.

[AggregateDemand]

Am I too far gone to be helped? Guess what then, so are most minorities who make more than 100k. What is your plan to get around that? Nazi Germany? A final solution must sound nice to you, huh?

I get it now. This is a cry for acceptance and recognition. Simmons was definitely on the right track.

[AggregateDemand]

Is Simmons right or are you right? You have rightfully solved all the problems of this universe with your superior white brain, haven't you?

My brain is the same color as your brain, which merely underlines the stupidity of race politics.

At the best of times, a party might make its tent big enough to capture 60-65% of a particular race or gender. I understand the historical importance of Obama, but capturing 75%-80% of non-white voters in the long run is not a labor of competence or affection. I blanch at the potential abuses necessary to exert that kind of control.

[AggregateDemand]

We're easing the money supply faster and accumulating deficits faster than the economy can grow, but you're convinced Obama is not interested in the economic veneer of Republican presidents, who managed to grow the economy faster than they eased and borrowed.

You know this about Obama because the S&P 500 finally broke through the 1600 barrier on record investor leveraging?