I was certainly not for Obama from the start. I liked Biden initially rolleyes (guy with foot in mouth disease). When I had a chance to vote in the primaries, after wrestling with choices between Obama, Clinton, and McCain (I could vote in either Virginia primary)....I voted for Clinton. I didn't see substance in the "change" commentary from Obama. I think, though an example comes from the 2 most recent governors of Virginia, especially Warner, who recently became the newest Senator from VA. As governor, Warner solved problems and eschewed partisanship. He won the Senate race by a huge amount over another recent VA. governor, Gilmore, a very strong anti tax Repub. At the Dem nominating convention Warner had the Keynote speech. It wasn't strongly covered. It was the least partisan speech of all. It talked of solving problems, not focusing on traditional Dem or Repub partisan solutions. Are we getting a taste of this with Obama? On the Lieberman issue, he expressed an interest in keeping Lieberman in the Dem side. It worked. Lieberman keeps his committee chairmanship and will meet with Dems in the Senate. Very forgiving...very forward thinking. On the bailout issue with the auto dealers....Obama spoke directly on it on 60 minutes. he called for meetings with all stakeholders.....Management, labor, owners, debt holders, suppliers, etc. He might be moving toward a govt. mandated and overseen bankruptcy. Steven Pearlstein, economics writer for the Washington Post writes about it here Just giving money to Detroit doesn't work. Its on a downward curve....and its current cost structure will only continue to move it downward. We will be giving money away. As referenced in other posts here, Detroit labor costs are something like $20-$30/hr higher than labor costs for competing foreign auto manufacturers with plants in the US. Other stats as referenced here have suggested it costs Detroit something like $1500 more to produce a car here than the foreign auto dealers with factories in the US. Unless it changes its cost structure, Detroit simply doesn't compete. Yet the auto business is very large affecting far more than just the manufacturers in Detroit. An article from North Carolina shows the impact for auto suppliers in that state and elsewhere. North Carolina has no auto manufacturing plants. Losing a domestic auto manufacturing business would have far reaching impacts, including losing auto, truck, and vehicle research. Manufacturing research is a vital long term value. In any case, the Obama comments, made on 60 minutes, do not tell us exactly what he is looking for...but it might move to a working solution that is somewhere between failure and a stretched out bankruptcy verus giving Detroit money on an endless basis, without restructuring the industry to be able to compete. We shall see.
Don't talk like that. When you do it sounds like you are hoping things work out instead of actually hoping things fail just so you can say you were right bout Obama..... Same thing they accused the Dems of with the war in Iraq. Seriously though, I thought Lieberman was a goner. There's just no excuse for what he did and had done leading up to that. He is the epitome of a party traitor, and that would be OK if he just came out and said he's now a Republican and moved on. In fairness some could argue that they just kept him in case they get to 60 votes. But when you look at it honestly and not try to paint ulterior motives you realize as I'm sure the Dems do that they couldn't count on him for filibuster breaking vote anyway. So in the end that argument doesn't have any true merit IMO. So it looks to me like they are in fact willing to put the past behind and work with Lieberman and his fellow Republicans across the isle.
Party traitor? I don't care for Lieberman either way, but you want to hang him as a traitor? Who cares what party he is in IF he is for the USA and does things that are right (that is where I don't like him.)
The word traitor has such a strong negative stigma attached to it. However, that doesn't make what I said any less true. Apparently a lot of people..... And what if he's NOT doing what's right while betraying the party you support? Who cares still? If a liberal left person were in the Republican caucus that you couldn't trust to help vote your party's agendas into law, AND campaigned for Obama, by your own statement here you'd feel like it was OK because he's doing what's best for the country right? But then you'd have to admit that Obama was best for the country. No, can't do that..... So that leaves you with what?
George: I have almost no interest in the Lieberman thing. Its easy for me to buy into the Obama perspective on this.....forgive and forget. I'm more interested in how obama phrased an effort to address the auto bailout problem, and how Steve Pearlstein interpreted it. Some type of govt. assisted bankruptcy might have advantages. Detroit simply doesn't compete. It needs to shed costs. It needs to compete on the basis that Asian cars compete. Some steps by govt. might lessen the problems associated with bankruptcy. Outside of Detroit there are a total of about 2 million jobs associated with supporting the auto industry. An assisted bankruptcy might save more of those jobs. I like the Pearlstein idea of putting in an order for GAO to buy cars from Detroit that meet environmental and fuel efficiency guidelines. That creates advance demand for cars more like the Asians make. It could cut fuel demand, something for which we should shoot. Its a middle of the road response between no money...let em fail...we aren't involved....and give money to the ends of time, regardless of the fact that they don't compete. We don't know exactly where Obama is thinking on the issue. I buy into the Pearlstein interpretation. It might not go in that direction, though.