|
But that's because I actually read his platform before the election.
"Was it not enough of a change that for the first time in history, we have elected a black President. That, in itself, is historic change."
Yes, it was "historic change", but it's not enough. Americans are suckers for making history, in spite of all of the social backwardness that swirls around us. In a sense, some of the Republican strategists knew this, too. That's why they went along with Palin; Black man or white woman -- either way was "historic".
"After eight years of the most criminal and incompetent Administration in our memory, why would anyone think there would be massive changes? The War on Terror? Still going strong. The screwing of the American people by the Big Banks? Making more money than ever. Regulations restored? Nope, everything still the same. Healthcare reform? It changed to health insurance reform after the election."
Greater changes have happened at faster paces in U.S. and world history. I'm sorry, but the Bush regime cannot be used as an excuse when the Democrats control both houses of Congress and the White House. And if the Dems are worried about a filibuster, then amend Rule 22 of the Senate back to pre-1975 language (with one exception: reduce the number needed for cloture to 55) so that if they want to grandstand, they'll have to drag out the cots and spend all their time there reading out of the phonebook or something.
"So why none of the changes people expected? Is it primarily because the economy collapsed and none of these changes are now possible? After all, it is not possible to raise taxes during such a severe recession and downturn. We don't want to make the big banks angry or they will stop lending money altogether. True, but the most important issue is jobs and we have to be very careful not to make it more difficult to find a job."
Oh, heaven forbid we upset the banks! We'll just keep bribing them a trillion dollars at a time until they're fat and happy ... and the rest of us are eating mites. And the banks really aren't "lending money" at all. That's the ongoing problem; the credit system is still more or less frozen, and the banks are using the bribes they received to buy up competitors and create monopolies. Next on the agenda appears to be PNC buying up National City (if it hasn't been done already).
"It is simply not possible to have the change you expected. The President wants to be like Abraham Lincoln. He wants to unite the country. He doesn't believe that the Republicans hate his guts."
By that logic, we'll have to wait to see the big changes until after the Republicans try to secede from the U.S. and begin a shooting war. Personally, I'd prefer a little "pre-emption" in this case, given the alternative.
|