Hooray for me! I got two, count 'em, two posts on the Greatest page!

[Bucky]

I rock, not once, but twice!

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. My dear Bucky!

Well, good for you!

I only have one...

:cry:

I'll fetch the link...BRB!

Edit to add link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x140842

[Bucky]

2. Oh my goodness, it's like you're transcribing my thoughts somedays, Peg

Anyway, here's my take on the man. The problem with Obama is, as Sarah Palin pointed out last year, he's a Chicago politician. Of course by that she meant he's a big city liberal who is corrupt and fails the lighter-than-Tony-Orlando test. But the real handicap an Illinois legislator has is not so much political corruption as it is the lack of moral corruption.

Obama came out of an environment, 10 years in the state senate plus several years as a courthouse deal maker, in which wheeling and dealing, trade offs and handshakes, ruled the day. I may trash you out on the campaign trail, but once we're all inaugurated then it's time to split our differences and run the government as best we can. He's got that quaint pre-Fallwellian notion that there's a difference between politics and governance. He values compromise and probably truly thought the Republicans meant it when they said they wanted Washington to be a more civil place.

Clinton (with Newt's help) showed the world in 1998 that Republicans would literally rather shut down the government than come to an honest compromise. They only behaved when Clinton won the PR wars and they were at risk of being held accountable for their anti-government policies. It really is dysfunctional. Democrats need to work on bipartisanship the way John Wayne Bobbit needed couples counseling. I think the poor man truly sincerely believed the Republicans would respect the outcomes of an election.

[barb162]

3. Congratulations! n/t