So to get its flavor out of my head, I read a great inauguration speech, Ronaldo Maximus’ first. Obama’s compared to Reagan’s, is so insignificant I cannot find words to describe the difference. So I won’t.

gonnjos on January 20, 2009 at 8:47 PM

Good news: you don’t have to.

“From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?”

Quick show of hands — is there anyone in the world who can’t tell from these two sentences exactly what this man stood for?

“It is my intention to curb the size and influence of the Federal establishment and to demand recognition of the distinction between the powers granted to the Federal Government and those reserved to the States or to the people. All of us need to be reminded that the Federal Government did not create the States; the States created the Federal Government.”

Who could possibly be confused as to EXACTLY what direction this man intended to take this nation?

“It is no coincidence that our present troubles parallel and are proportionate to the intervention and intrusion in our lives that result from unnecessary and excessive growth of government.”

Any question in anyone’s mind precisely where the problem lies?

Of course I’m not going to try and pull any meaningful quotations from Barack Obama’s rambling diatribe. I can’t. No one else ever has been able to either. Not one quote; not now, not ever.

Besides, Reagan’s speech says it all. He didn’t need throngs of media sycophants spewing endlessly about how God-damned ARTICULATE whatever the Hell he said must have been. On the contrary; nearly all of them did their level best to shout down and drown out everything he tried to say.

But they failed – utterly. That’s because Ronald Reagan’s words had a power all their own. They resonated. He didn’t need a media cheerleading squad complete with megaphones to get his message across. The words he spoke did all of that. Not because of the media, but despite it.

The time honored change of power in Washington is one of the great successes of our democracy, where winners take hold of the reins of power and the losers go home to write their memoirs. Our new President comes to……

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

Eh?
This from the guy that just rode these things into office, and is promising to promote them above all else.

It’s all abotu what your definition of healthy is. Healthy does not equal gluttinous.

DeathToMediaHacks on January 20, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Another thing is, I hear a lot about “corporate greed”. How is corporate greed worse than government greed? We hear about Enron, but not Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. You won’t find any greedier organism on the face of the planet than the government in the US at all levels.

Here’s a question for you.

DeathToMediaHacks on January 20, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Here’s one for you. What makes you think that Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Dodd and Obama know more about running businesses than the management who are actually running businesses?

Trouble is, Obama probably thinks he said profound things.

Since they are Marines, they, and the rest of the military, will show him respect as the CINC, but that does not equate love or even like. That is professionalism.

BTW, based upon some of your posts today, I wonder if we have an Obama voter in our midst.

The Opinionator on January 20, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Maybe you can see the video of him and the commandant. That can’t be faked. It is more than respect. They like each other. That is clear. See how he smiles at those Marines when he salutes.

Would it make a difference if I voted for Obama? Well of course I did not vote for him. I do respect him however. He seems genuine in trying to bridge the gap between the parties. I think we will find him on the side of the republicans in congress more than most imagine possible. The left is getting worried about him now. That is apparent as Pelosi and Reid try to mark their territory. If Im right he will cross that line and they will tow the mark for him.
We shall see. My feeling is a president is not a democrat or a republican but a representative of the people. Sure they belong to a political party but in office they govern all of us not just some of us. It’s unique in politics. Elected by all the people in all states and territories. No other politician can claim that though some like Biden rode his coattails.

Like it or not he is our President. You can hope for the worst but it’ll only make you feel miserable if he succeeds. If he doesn’t succeed you can feel good in that you gave him a fair chance and he blew it. It’s all in the attitude. Thats the real choice.

Obama tells us to “put away childish things” and to be willing to make great sacrifices and everyone here grabs their pacifiers and commences to having a major toddler-esque temper tantrum.

Thank you for the quotation of scripture, brother MediaHack…and now brother ‘benny shakar’ will lead us in a hymn of great joy and praise and rejoicing…’Obama, we are not worthy of thine light!’

Of course, that may have been by design. Obama said he wanted to take the divisions out of politics, and one way to do that is to offer speeches with no points for later debate.

Yeah, and then he slams Bush on Katrina on his web site on day of launch. Mmmmm, I can smell the unity!

As I said, I do want Obama’s agenda to fail. If that means he is seen as a failure, so be it. I do not want to see him reelected. The country does not necessarily fail or suffer if he does. In fact, if he and everyone stayed the heck out of the way, the economy will fully recover over the next couple of years.

Since they are Marines, they, and the rest of the military, will show him respect as the CINC, but that does not equate love or even like. That is professionalism.

BTW, based upon some of your posts today, I wonder if we have an Obama voter in our midst.

ddrintn on January 20, 2009 at 6:06 PM

Here’s a question for you. Why is 4% growth an unsuccesful year? It wasn’t that way when a single income was enough to feed a family of four? Our corporate culture went from being about healthy sustainable growth the minute wall street investors decided to demand unsustainable profits as the baseline for investing. 8% a year, every year, it’s just ridiculous. Firing people who made 5% profit. Tanking the stock prices of corporations who made 6%. Ridiculous. And what has the result been. A relentless effort to prop up profits lead to Enron. A relentless effort to make money quit on the housing market led to the housing bubble and internet bubble and the thankfully brief oil bubble. It’s all abotu what your definition of healthy is. Healthy does not equal gluttinous.

Its time for the government to serve the longterm economic health of the U.S. not the short gain interest of corporations.

DeathToMediaHacks on January 20, 2009 at 5:42 PM

How do you have a healthy national economy without healthy corporations? What are you using to divide “short gain interest” of corporations from long-term benefit?

…that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works.

There are still conservatives out there who absolutely believe our government is too big. There may not be many in Congress but, we live!

That “stale political argument” is not going away just because so many elected Republicans chose to violate conservative principles.

It’s amazing. All around us are the fruits of running the government by the shorterm thinking of the business cycle. Obama tells us to “put away childish things” and to be willing to make great sacrifices and everyone here grabs their pacifiers and commences to having a major toddler-esque temper tantrum. As Obama said its clearly not a question of big governemtn vs. small government. Even under Reagan the size of the Federal government in 1988 was bigger than it was in 1981. It is the nature of things. Conservatives need to stop pretending like “small government” is possible and its never been what any of your elected officials have ever done. Rather they merely ensured that the government would serve therich. Its time for the government to serve the longterm economic health of the U.S. not the short gain interest of corporations.
DeathToMediaHacks on January 20, 2009 at 5:42 PM

Your post is worth repeating so I copied it above. It is amazing as you say. When one sees the truth it’s as plain as the nose on ones face. It is a subtle change but a necessary one.

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works… Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end.

Yeah, wait until he tries to cut something. That’s when he’ll run into a big, honking wall of pork. Deficit spending, here we come!

It’s not that it was bad; Obama did a good job in delivering it, and it has some commendable passages about America and its people. It’s just rather pedestrian. Commentators are already noting that practically any president or presidential candidate could credibly have delivered this speech, from Nixon to Carter to Reagan to Clinton to McCain. It’s a generic speech, lacking in specific vision from Obama.

Appropriate though for a guy who really, when we come down to it, only wants to play at being president.