The Bader Blog

WTH??? First picked up by Weasel Zippers...He bowed to the Mayor of Tampa. One more time, WTH????

This is a very thoughtful piece by a liberal professor at Marquette University. Like most hardcore libs in President Obama's base, he's deeply dissatisfied with Obama's inability to advance the far left liberal agenda. But rather than whine and howl about it, he makes a very interesting argument that the quest for bipartisanship is an abdication of leadership on the issues:

The crux of Obama's present disconnect with voters lies in this fuzzy concept of change. For Obama, it means finding a pragmatic, bipartisan center to create space for problem-solving to occur. Gone will be the partisan battles of old. For voters weary of a government that consistently fails them, change means bringing an end to broken promises and unrealized obligations.

Despite Obama's entreaties, his political opponents have chosen the path of bitter obstructionism rather than taking the opportunity to solve the problems of the day. As a result, the economic stimulus bill passed with only the most minimal Republican support, which forced Democrats to remove some of the most critical parts of the legislation, such as aid to state and local governments. Now, more intense and extreme opposition has at least temporarily derailed and weakened Congress' health care reform legislation.

But in failing to defend the programs that they support, Obama and his fellow Democrats have abdicated the very leadership that voters sought when they cast their votes more than 14 months ago. In sacrificing the substance of policy change in pursuit of the phantasm of bipartisanship, Democrats have forsworn their authority to govern.

Irrespective of your ideology, I think it's a compelling point. He also makes a very interesting observation as to the driving force that got Obama elected and why it's hurting him now:

For example, many Democratic victories in 2006 and 2008 were fueled by anti-war sentiment. Former vets were winning in tough districts by calling for an end to the American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama's bipartisan solution has been to stay the course in Iraq and escalate the conflict in Afghanistan, while increasing defense spending to more than $600 billion per year. George W. Bush's secretary of defense is still in charge of the Pentagon, and military officials are still covering up suspicious evidence of death by torture at Guantanamo Bay. Perhaps the most incongruous sight of the year was Obama trying to explain his escalation of the war in Afghanistan in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize.

I think this observation is critical because what's been forgotten is what libs most hated about Bush was that they perceived him as a war monger. And high on their agenda was ending both wars we're currently fighting. The left sees this as a betrayal while many on the right see his continued efforts in both countries as half-hearted. And this all goes back to the leadership void that is at the center of the author's thesis.

I would argue that this Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel piece is generally accurate, if incomplete. Take this portion for example:

"It's kind of what-have-you-done-for-me-lately and Democrats have not performed well nationally," said Joe Heim, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.

"What is surprising is how fast the pendulum has swung."

Heim sees Democrat ineffectualism as the reason voters have grown so impatient with them so quickly. That is surely true for the liberal base, but probably not true for the coveted independents that are the focus of this piece. The "pendumlum has swung" so quickly because Independents now clearly see how far to the left liberals want to move the country. And it's also not because of President Obama's contention that they haven't explained things clearly enough. No, conservatives, moderates and independents all too clearly understand the far-leftist agenda at work. That's the problem. It's not "what have you done lately?" that has the libs in trouble. It's what are you going to try to do to me next? And even if they don't trust conservatives to turn around the wagon that's headed for the cliff, it looks like they'll settle for someone who'll slow the horses down a bit.

If Republicans can convince moderates and Indies that they WILL turn around completely and head away from the cliff, it could be a big, big year for conservatives.

The full Q&A between President Obama and House Republicans

From the Wall Street Journal. Contrary to the MNSBC perception, Brown is rather indepndent-minded and not always lockstep with the conservative agenda. By the way, I'm sure John Fund heard "Scott heard 'round the world" somewhere else and not from this blog the day after Brown's election.

As a listener pointed out to me, it's mind-boggling that a few years ago the Green Bay School District wanted to build a 5th high school due to overcrowding and now it's aggressively recruiting new students under open enrollment because it's bleeding students to surrounding districts? Excuse me? On February 20th, 2007, the Green Bay Area Public School District asked voters for 69 million dollars in new debt for a fifth high school, claiming severe overcrowding issues. Now the district has to market to hang on to every student (and aid per student) it can?

The district is now going to ask voters for a much more modest referendum for facilities and technology upgrades on two separate questions. I've seen their rationale and the needs appear real. However, the district's credibility is seriously in doubt afater it asked for a fifth high school because of overcrowding as it tries to stem the bleeding of enrollment to other schools.

To quote the listener who shared this with me..."this says it all."

8:30 am to 11:00 am, 1360 WTAQ, 1330 WHBL, stream live at wtaq.com. Topics subject to change:

Thompson leads Feingold in hypothetical matchup.

Will the Ipad save the "dead tree media?"

Should CCAP be limited?

When I first saw this, I thought the Fox News Website had been hacked by The Onion. Apparently it's real. If air quality is an issue for UBL, perhaps we should finally do something to keep him from breathing it.

It's pretty hard to disagree with any of this. Preisdent Obama contracts his "signature issue" out to Congress and then complains about the results? During the campaign we said Obama's favored strategy is staying on the sideline keeping his jersey clean. That might work in campaigns, but it's not an effective way to govern.

It's notable he did the same thing again Wednesday night, saying for the umpteenth time he was going to get rid of "don't ask, don't tell" for gays in the military and then urged Congress to do it, rather than doing it himself by executive order. He also claimed to support development of new nuclear facilities, but he'll never really get behind this effort. Landrieu's criticism of Obama is spot on. Heck, he's not even holding a clip board on the sidelines, he's an armchair QB. He also reminds me of that one person at a church or school committee who starts almost every sentence with "somebody ought to." But that somebody is never him.

Come on Tommy, RUN!

This board game, banned on eBay, was a popular British TV series in the late 60's/early 70's. I wasn't familiar with it before this, but it sort of feels like a British Hogan's Heroes, of sorts, to me. From what I've read, it was perfectly harmless, very popular, and in NO way promotes the Nazi Party. It's a WWII themed show and game, go figure a swastika might show up. I understand that the general policy in this world when one sees a swastika is to freak out first and ask questions later, and with good reason. But eBay looks silly here.

(h/t) to loyal listener Keith