General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Tired of Malignant Amnesia Anti-Obama Syndrome [View all]TheKentuckian
(24,943 posts)but that flat out wasn't what I observed over several years. He backed off because he had failed over and over and over again, because he had to politically because had to run again.
I've got the facts and the opposing rationalization is spin that seeks to supercede history in a semi Orwellian fashion.
You cannot in good faith say your spin makes me a liar because I'm not inclined to buy it and stick with what are actual and undisputed facts.
I'm not even saying the creative speculation can't be true, but calling people LIARS for stating undisputable history is taking your faith at least one toke over the line.
If you guys can't back off to the point where you accept that reasonable minds might interpret the austerity efforts differently and admit (as you seem to be) that the shit actually happened even if we differ on the why then I have to say you folks aren't actually even interested in an honest debate.
Further, even if I grant the creative speculation, it doesn't mean the tactic wasn't at best woefully ineffective and pointless at best and I say harmful because it muddied the waters badly on the issue and put a dent in the party's chances in 2010.
You do realize we went underwater on "which party do you trust on Social Security", right?
You admit the gambit didn't move the hardcore austerity heads so I don't know why it is necessary to pretend that this multi year effort beginning when we controlled both houses was some stroke of brilliance or that the simplest explanation (and surely wasn't a display of delusional thinking) for it was that it was what it was?
Best case scenario is a too clever by half event.